vox--2020-07-13--Google’s former CEO hosts an exclusive retreat in Yellowstone each July. You won’t hear much about i

Google’s former CEO hosts an exclusive retreat in Yellowstone each July. You won’t hear much about it.

Each year , around this time in July , billionaire and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt usually invites a few dozen celebrities , economists , and politicians from around the world to Big Sky country .
On the 5,200-acre grounds of the ultra-exclusive Yellowstone Club retreat , Schmidt brings together the likes of Lady Gaga , Sen. Cory Booker , and about 40 other invitees to hear from leaders who have included some Google executives — and few people know about it .
In the world of billionaires and other elites , these kinds of ritzy Western getaways — often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for “ thought leadership ” — are not uncommon .
But they are usually quasi-public , like the paparazzi-littered Sun Valley deals conference , or at least more broadly known , such as the annual retreat hosted until recently by now-disgraced television host Charlie Rose or Mitt Romney ’ s summit in Utah .
But this particular conclave — in its eighth year since launching in 2012 , though it ’ s taking a break due to the coronavirus pandemic — has remained highly secretive by design , only vaguely acknowledged in media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a new report from a tech watchdog group , the Tech Transparency Project , which combed through social media posts and flight records connected to Schmidt ’ s retreat to offer the most detail yet on the weekend .
The report argues that this retreat gives Schmidt , until recently one of Google ’ s highest-profile executives , a way to charm his critics and curry favor for Google — covertly .
“ The picture that emerges is Schmidt using the celebrity-studded retreat as a form of soft power , helping Google @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intimate concerts rather than the traditional tools of corporate influence , ” the group writes in the report .
Schmidt and Google declined to comment on the event and on the report .
Retreats for the elite are drawing more scrutiny as populist pushback builds to both tech wealth and to the broader notion of how elites shape public opinion .
Google is one of the world ’ s most powerful companies , and Schmidt has long served as its political fixer , the tip of the spear of a tech lobbying operation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last decade .
( Schmidt reportedly cut his last lingering tie to the company earlier this year . )
And the event , at least theoretically , is a possible way for Schmidt to more gingerly build out this sphere of influence .
The event seems to have adopted a veil of secrecy .
More than a dozen attendees identified by the Tech Transparency Project — which itself doesn ’ t fully disclose its backers but says it has no corporate donors — didn ’ t return requests for comment .
Part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undercover may be that it ’ s held at a heavy-security club among the most exclusive locations in the country — “ the world ’ s only private ski , golf and adventure community ” that is limited to just about 860 memberships to preserve its exclusivity .
Mentions of the Schmidt event are almost entirely nonexistent in the press , save a few in mostly foreign media .
In one of those few apparent public utterances about the event , a fellow Yellowstone Club member and billionaire , Ron Burkle , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the retreat each year .
The event ’ s agenda seems to resemble other conferences : Attendees sit in on sessions and interviews , spend time outdoors , attend private concerts from musicians like Leon Bridges , or even jaunt over to the Yellowstone Club ’ s annual rodeo invitational , which sometimes coincides with the Schmidt event , the report says .
But crucially , Schmidt ’ s event offers an opportunity for him to not just entertain some of the world ’ s most influential thinkers , but to occasionally promote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event , according to the authors , such as one of the inventors of Google Glass and a Google employee who worked on its self-driving cars .
Some of the event ’ s past attendees have the power to scrutinize and investigate Google in their roles as lawmakers or journalists .
Still , there ’ s no hard evidence that Schmidt ’ s weekends have directly won him or Google any favors .
The group merely raises the possibility that it could soften attitudes toward the tech giant .
In a way , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — it ’ s usually hard to know if retreats sway attendees ’ views or relationships with the host .
It ’ s the under-the-wraps nature of Schmidt ’ s retreat that appears to be unusual .
The report points to Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz and Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter Ronan Farrow as examples of past attendees whose relationships with Google may have been influenced by Schmidt ’ s events .
The report speculates that there is a possible connection between changes in Kurz ’ s stance on taxing tech companies and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kurz declined to comment .
And though Farrow has published critical pieces about Google since he attended the event , the report calls out one particular story Farrow ran on NBC about ISIS that the Tech Transparency Project felt was soft on Google .
“ I view it as part of my job to meet sources in government and business , along with academics , scientists , and fellow journalists , ” Farrow told Recode .
“ That has not and would not influence my reporting .
And I welcome any investigative leads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company.
” Other senior reporters have also attended the Schmidt weekend in the past , a group that once included Vox ’ s editor-at-large , Ezra Klein .
Klein said the event “ seemed to be a pretty standard ideas-style conference , but in Yellowstone.
” “ The guest list and tone definitely reflected an older era when Silicon Valley thought it had a lot to teach Washington , and Washington was more interested in learning , ” he told Recode .
The Tech Transparency Project doesn ’ t have ironclad proof of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the conference .
But Katie Paul , the project ’ s director , argues that the existence of this retreat should at least be publicly known since , she says , it is effectively a form of lobbying .
“ Its secrecy is also something that should be concerning to the American public — in terms of what kinds of influence these companies are trying to wield — if it ’ s something they feel they need to keep quiet , ” she said .
Every day at Vox , we aim to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Each year, around this time in July, billionaire and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt usually invites a few dozen celebrities, economists, and politicians from around the world to Big Sky country.
On the 5,200-acre grounds of the ultra-exclusive Yellowstone Club retreat, Schmidt brings together the likes of Lady Gaga, Sen. Cory Booker, and about 40 other invitees to hear from leaders who have included some Google executives — and few people know about it.
In the world of billionaires and other elites, these kinds of ritzy Western getaways — often christened “ideas summits” or weekends for “thought leadership”— are not uncommon. But they are usually quasi-public, like the paparazzi-littered Sun Valley deals conference, or at least more broadly known, such as the annual retreat hosted until recently by now-disgraced television host Charlie Rose or Mitt Romney’s summit in Utah.
But this particular conclave — in its eighth year since launching in 2012, though it’s taking a break due to the coronavirus pandemic — has remained highly secretive by design, only vaguely acknowledged in media. But it is coming into focus in a new report from a tech watchdog group, the Tech Transparency Project, which combed through social media posts and flight records connected to Schmidt’s retreat to offer the most detail yet on the weekend. The report argues that this retreat gives Schmidt, until recently one of Google’s highest-profile executives, a way to charm his critics and curry favor for Google — covertly.
“The picture that emerges is Schmidt using the celebrity-studded retreat as a form of soft power, helping Google advance its interests with cowboy hats and intimate concerts rather than the traditional tools of corporate influence,” the group writes in the report.
Schmidt and Google declined to comment on the event and on the report.
Retreats for the elite are drawing more scrutiny as populist pushback builds to both tech wealth and to the broader notion of how elites shape public opinion. Google is one of the world’s most powerful companies, and Schmidt has long served as its political fixer, the tip of the spear of a tech lobbying operation that spent $150 million over the last decade. (Schmidt reportedly cut his last lingering tie to the company earlier this year.) And the event, at least theoretically, is a possible way for Schmidt to more gingerly build out this sphere of influence.
The event seems to have adopted a veil of secrecy. More than a dozen attendees identified by the Tech Transparency Project — which itself doesn’t fully disclose its backers but says it has no corporate donors — didn’t return requests for comment. Part of the reason the event has effectively remained undercover may be that it’s held at a heavy-security club among the most exclusive locations in the country — “the world’s only private ski, golf and adventure community” that is limited to just about 860 memberships to preserve its exclusivity. Mentions of the Schmidt event are almost entirely nonexistent in the press, save a few in mostly foreign media.
In one of those few apparent public utterances about the event, a fellow Yellowstone Club member and billionaire, Ron Burkle, said Schmidt hand-picks the people who appear at the retreat each year.
The event’s agenda seems to resemble other conferences: Attendees sit in on sessions and interviews, spend time outdoors, attend private concerts from musicians like Leon Bridges, or even jaunt over to the Yellowstone Club’s annual rodeo invitational, which sometimes coincides with the Schmidt event, the report says.
But crucially, Schmidt’s event offers an opportunity for him to not just entertain some of the world’s most influential thinkers, but to occasionally promote Google by bringing Google leaders to the event, according to the authors, such as one of the inventors of Google Glass and a Google employee who worked on its self-driving cars. Some of the event’s past attendees have the power to scrutinize and investigate Google in their roles as lawmakers or journalists.
Still, there’s no hard evidence that Schmidt’s weekends have directly won him or Google any favors. The group merely raises the possibility that it could soften attitudes toward the tech giant. In a way, that’s part of the point — it’s usually hard to know if retreats sway attendees’ views or relationships with the host. It’s the under-the-wraps nature of Schmidt’s retreat that appears to be unusual.
The report points to Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz and Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter Ronan Farrow as examples of past attendees whose relationships with Google may have been influenced by Schmidt’s events. The report speculates that there is a possible connection between changes in Kurz’s stance on taxing tech companies and his attendance in 2018. A spokesperson for Kurz declined to comment. And though Farrow has published critical pieces about Google since he attended the event, the report calls out one particular story Farrow ran on NBC about ISIS that the Tech Transparency Project felt was soft on Google.
“I view it as part of my job to meet sources in government and business, along with academics, scientists, and fellow journalists,” Farrow told Recode. “That has not and would not influence my reporting. And I welcome any investigative leads on Google or any other major tech company.”
Other senior reporters have also attended the Schmidt weekend in the past, a group that once included Vox’s editor-at-large, Ezra Klein. Klein said the event “seemed to be a pretty standard ideas-style conference, but in Yellowstone.”
“The guest list and tone definitely reflected an older era when Silicon Valley thought it had a lot to teach Washington, and Washington was more interested in learning,” he told Recode.
The Tech Transparency Project doesn’t have ironclad proof of any policy or opinion change tied to the conference. But Katie Paul, the project’s director, argues that the existence of this retreat should at least be publicly known since, she says, it is effectively a form of lobbying.
“Its secrecy is also something that should be concerning to the American public — in terms of what kinds of influence these companies are trying to wield — if it’s something they feel they need to keep quiet,” she said.


vox--2020-07-13--Breonna Taylor was killed by police in March. The officers involved have not been arrested.

It has been more than 100 days since Breonna Taylor was killed by police in her own home in Louisville , Kentucky .
Thousands of protesters have chanted her name across the country , demanding justice for the EMT , who would have turned 27 on June 5 .
As the country is reckoning with its history of racist police violence , many advocates want to know why charges still haven ’ t been filed against the officers who shot her dead .
Meanwhile , those who want to abolish the carceral state are rethinking what justice in the Taylor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advocates agree that another Black woman is dead because of a lack of police accountability — and something needs to change .
On March 13 , three officers with a no-knock warrant entered Taylor ’ s apartment looking for two people suspected of selling drugs , neither of whom was Taylor .
The officers fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment , hitting Taylor at least eight times .
After months of investigation , the Louisville Police Department ( LMPD ) fired officer Brett Hankison on June 23 ; the other two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special Kentucky prosecutor is leading an investigation into both the shooting and the department ’ s handling of the shooting to determine whether to charge the three officers who fired their weapons ; the FBI is leading its own investigation .
On June 29 , the Louisville Metro Council also announced a resolution to investigate the actions of Mayor Greg Fischer and his administration surrounding Taylor ’ s death .
The council hopes to create greater transparency around who made what decisions in the Taylor case , according to a news release .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a slate of high-profile killings of unarmed Black people — it was just three weeks after Ahmaud Arbery was killed by white vigilantes while jogging and about 10 weeks before the fatal arrest of George Floyd .
The suspects involved in Arbery ’ s case were arrested and charged two weeks after video of the incident went viral .
The four officers involved in the killing of George Floyd were fired four days after Floyd ’ s death , with the officer who knelt on Floyd ’ s neck charged with murder .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Taylor ’ s case .
In the meantime , Taylor ’ s family , alleging excessive force and gross negligence in her death , filed a lawsuit on April 27 against the officers involved in the shooting .
In a court filing submitted on July 5 , the family alleges that Taylor received no emergency medical aid as she lay dying .
The document also claims that the raid on Taylor ’ s apartment was part of the mayor ’ s scheme to clear out a block in the neighborhood for redevelopment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Tamika Palmer , Taylor ’ s mother , told the 19th in May .
“ I want them to say her name .
There ’ s no reason Breonna should be dead at all.
” Police came looking for a drug suspect .
Breonna Taylor ended up dead instead .
On the night of March 13 , Louisville police had a warrant to enter Taylor ’ s apartment because they believed that a suspect in a narcotics investigation was storing drugs or money or receiving packages at her home , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the suit filed by Taylor ’ s family , the man police were searching for , Jamarcus Glover , did not live in her apartment complex and had already been detained by the time officers showed up .
Taylor had dated Glover two years ago , according to a family attorney , and did not maintain an active friendship with him .
Police said that the three officers knocked on the door to announce themselves .
But multiple neighbors say the officers neither knocked nor identified themselves , according to the family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uncovered that the police had been granted a no-knock warrant by a judge , which allowed them to enter Taylor ’ s apartment without announcing themselves .
They also weren ’ t wearing body cams .
When police arrived , Taylor ’ s boyfriend , Kenneth Walker , 27 , says he woke up and believed someone was trying to break into the apartment .
There was banging on the door , he says , but police never announced themselves .
He reached for his licensed handgun after he and Taylor asked who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NBC reported .
He fired one shot , hitting an officer in the leg .
Police then fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment .
Taylor died at the scene .
Walker was arrested and charged with attempted murder of a police officer and aggravated assault .
Police found no drugs in the apartment , and both Taylor and Walker have no criminal history .
On May 22 , Kentucky prosecutors announced that they had dismissed all charges against Walker , who said he fired a shot in self-defense when he believed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On June 11 , police released an incident report for the night Taylor was killed , but it was largely blank .
Though Taylor was fatally shot , the four-page report listed her injuries as “ none.
” The report also stated there was no forced entry , though witnesses say the police used a battering ram to enter the apartment , according to CBS News .
The Taylor family ’ s 31-page July 5 court filing adds two new ( and since contested ) allegations to the narrative : that Taylor received @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that the nighttime raid was part of Mayor Fischer ’ s plan to redevelop a city block in western Louisville .
Taylor ’ s family said there is no evidence that suggests that Taylor was given medical attention in the six minutes between when she was shot and when she died .
However , the coroner who performed Taylor ’ s autopsy said that her injuries from the shooting were so extreme that she would ’ ve died in “ less than a minute ” and that the recorded time of death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The family ’ s filing also alleges that police went after Glover because of political pressure from the mayor ’ s office due to a redevelopment project valued at more than $ 30 million , according to the New York Times .
Glover was reportedly using a row of abandoned houses to sell drugs in the area that needed to be cleared for development .
“ People needed to be removed and homes needed to be vacated so that a high-dollar , legacy-creating real estate development could move forward , ” attorneys @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filing .
The city has called the allegations “ outrageous.
” Meanwhile , it came to light that the officer who shot Taylor , Hankison , had a history of misconduct allegations .
He was already facing an ongoing federal lawsuit at the time of Taylor ’ s death in which Kendrick Wilson accused Hankison of “ harassing suspects with unnecessary arrests and planting drugs on them , ” according to USA Today .
Wilson alleges that Hankison targeted him and arrested him three times in a two-year period .
After Taylor ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surfaced , too , with at least two women coming forward in early June to allege that Hankison assaulted them .
In both allegations , which are similar to one another , Hankison offered the women rides home after they had been drinking at local bars .
In one case , Hankison allegedly followed the woman into her home and assaulted her while she was unconscious .
In the other case , Hankison reportedly made sexual advances toward the woman while she sat in his unmarked car , including rubbing her thighs and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he was fired .
LMPD posted Hankison ’ s termination letter on Twitter , which stated Hankison “ displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life when you wantonly and blindly fired ten ( 10 ) rounds into the apartment of Breonna Taylor… ” The letter also stated Hankison violated the department ’ s protocol on use of deadly force when he shot through a patio door and window that was covered .
This prevented him from determining whether there was an immediate threat or innocent people present ; some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neighbor ’ s apartment where three people were endangered , according to the letter .
Hankison has appealed his termination .
The other two officers who fired rounds that night , John Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove , remain on the force and have been placed on administrative reassignment .
The case is still under independent investigation with Kentucky ’ s Attorney General , Daniel Cameron , who has said he will not provide additional details or a timeline for the investigation .
Protests are ongoing , and calls for justice in the investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Taylor family ’ s attorney , argued that the killings of Black women have tended to receive less media attention than the deaths of Black men .
“ They ’ re killing our sisters just like they ’ re killing our brothers , but for whatever reason , we have not given our sisters the same attention that we have given to Trayvon Martin , Michael Brown , Stephon Clark , Terence Crutcher , Alton Sterling , Philando Castile , Eric Garner , Laquan McDonald , ” he told the 19th .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ known by everybody in America who said those other names , because she was in her own home , doing absolutely nothing wrong.
” Protests where the crowds chant , “ Say her name , Breonna Taylor , ” have attempted to reverse the lack of attention .
In 2015 , activists around the country demonstrated and used the hashtag # SayHerName to draw attention to women who had lost their lives , including Gabriella Nevarez , Michelle Cusseaux , and Alexia Christian , as Jenée Desmond-Harris reported for Vox at the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jail after she was arrested during a traffic stop also drew national attention to the impact of police brutality and racism on Black women ’ s lives .
Around the country , activists organized marches and signed petitions on Taylor ’ s June 5 birthday , saying she should ’ ve been alive to see the day .
In Louisville , protesters have gathered in Breonna Taylor ’ s name to protest police brutality in a number of demonstrations since May .
After a protest-imposed curfew on May 31 , law enforcement shot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a local restaurant owner .
Following his death , Louisville Police Chief Steve Conrad was fired , though it is still unclear exactly who shot McAtee , Vox ’ s Anna North reported .
While there have been other changes in the police department since Taylor ’ s death — on June 11 the Louisville Metro Council voted unanimously to ban no-knock warrants — advocates , activists , and celebrities are asking why the three officers involved in Taylor ’ s killing haven ’ t been arrested .
On June 14 , Beyoncé @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s attorney general , demanding that criminal charges be brought against the three officers to “ show the value of a Black woman ’ s life.
” She also asked that the office bring greater transparency to the investigation .
At a June 18 press conference , Cameron — the first Black attorney general in Kentucky and a former legal counsel for Sen. Mitch McConnell — emphasized that the investigation is ongoing , without giving any specific details .
“ To all those involved in this case , you have my commitment that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fair investigation , ” he said .
“ This is also a commitment that I ’ m making to the Louisville community , which has suffered tremendously in the days since March 13.
” Cameron was also the first Republican attorney general elected in the state , according to the New York Times , on a platform that backed Trump and some of the president ’ s signature efforts , like building a border wall .
He has criticized some of protesters ’ demands , including the call to defund the police .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ defund the police ’ threaten public safety and only serve to divide us further , rather than bringing us together , ” he said in a press release on June 24 .
Wake Forest Law professor Ronald Wright , who specializes in the work of criminal prosecutors , told Vox that Cameron ’ s comments regarding defunding the police are worth watching because they are relevant to how Cameron handles the case .
“ If he starts to sound like an advocate for law enforcement , voicing broad support for police officers and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would make me wonder if he can evaluate charges fairly in this case , ” Wright said .
“ It is tough to convince the public that you will hold the police accountable for their wrongdoing if you never find anything to criticize in their work.
” Why there haven ’ t been arrests in the case so far Wright told Vox in May that in officer-involved shooting cases like Taylor ’ s , the length of time the prosecutor takes to bring forth charges should not necessarily be the issue .
Rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the prosecutor does during their investigation .
“ I don ’ t really fault prosecutors for taking their time , gathering the facts , being thorough .
The timing doesn ’ t really bother me as much as the amount of effort .
If what you ’ re doing is you ’ re not doing anything and you ’ re stalling , and you don ’ t really intend to press the case as hard as you would press any shooting in your district , then that ’ s a problem , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are especially difficult to win at trial , Wright pointed out , prosecutors must take the time to build a really strong case .
“ The delay could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on whether they are putting in the effort into building a great case , ” he said .
In the high-profile Baltimore police custody death of Freddie Gray , State ’ s Attorney Marilyn Mosby arrested the three officers involved just days after Gray ’ s death and charged them with offenses including second-degree “ depraved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three officers in the case were acquitted .
“ It may have been that it would have been better to go a little slower and get more evidence for charges after some delay , ” Wright told Vox .
Many advocates , however , point to the speed at which arrests came in the Arbery and Floyd cases — and the fact that years-long delays in Eric Garner ’ s case still didn ’ t lead to justice .
Garner died in July 2014 after NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo placed him in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ five-year anniversary of Garner ’ s death in July 2019 , federal prosecutors announced they would not bring charges against Pantaleo .
The NYPD fired Pantaleo in August 2019 , more than five years after Garner ’ s death .
And in the three cases above there were videos of the incidents .
Wright said that even with footage , cases against police officers are difficult to prosecute .
Videos do represent extra proof — a form of evidence Taylor ’ s case lacks .
The influence of police unions , which have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the unrest , may also contribute to delays .
As Vox ’ s Dylan Matthews reported , police unions have become engrossed in preventing the discipline of officers who kill unarmed Black people : In May , the Louisville police union also demanded an apology from Louisville council member Jessica Green , who called Taylor ’ s boyfriend a hero after he was charged with shooting Mattingly the night Taylor was killed .
“ Calling someone that shot an on-duty police officer , in the performance of official duties , a hero @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Ryan Nichols , president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 614 .
Green said she would not apologize .
But Wright said that Hankison ’ s firing does offer a clue to how a criminal case could swing .
That the LMPD found that he showed “ extreme indifference to the value of human life ” when he “ wantonly and blindly ” fired 10 rounds into the apartment means there ’ s a chance for a conviction if a jury were to find the same conclusion .
“ If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reach the same conclusions after hearing the facts , they could properly convict him of a lesser version of homicide , ” Wright told Vox .
At the recent press conference , Cameron refused to discuss any potential roadblocks , stating that “ an investigation of this magnitude , when done correctly , requires time and patience.
” He added , “ To those across the country we have heard from with cards , emails , and letters , and calls , who are asking us to complete the investigation as soon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we are working around the clock to follow the law to the truth.
” Defunding the Louisville police and its ties to justice for Taylor Amid a growing call to “ defund ” or “ abolish the police , ” there are others advocating for justice who view the calls to arrest officers as taking away from the larger goal of dismantling the system .
According to anti-criminalization organizer Mariame Kaba , director of the anti youth incarceration grassroots organization Project NIA , celebrating charges for officers signals our dependence on a criminal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white supremacy .
“ To transform a death-making system , our expectations have to be much higher , ” she wrote last month in the New York Times .
“ Celebrating charges is like celebrating bread crumbs .
...
I understand why people do it , but I think according great significance to charges misses the point and it also freezes people in place .
It has the effect of demobilizing collective action.
” Kaba explained that justice is not just closing down police departments but making them obsolete .
“ The surest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduce the power of the police , by cutting budgets and the number of officers , ” she wrote .
But on June 25 , the Louisville Metro Council approved a budget that wouldn ’ t even begin to defund LMPD .
The new spending plan will merely “ require police to put the money toward recruiting a more diverse force , additional training and exploring co-responder models that could send behavioral health professionals on calls with officers , ” according to the Louisville Courier-Journal .
Funding will also be directed to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , following the 24-1 vote .
Black Lives Matter demanded that more money be shifted to community services .
On the same day the budget was approved , a crowd of more than 500 demonstrators , including activists , community members , and celebrities , gathered on the steps of the Kentucky State Capitol in Frankfort for a # JusticeForBreonnaTaylor rally , according to the Louisville Courier-Journal .
Activist Tamika Mallory emphasized the need to keep calling for justice and accountability in Taylor ’ s case .
“ I ’ m sure we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” she said .
“ The issue of Black women being killed and our voices being too low is a problem.
” Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Editor’s note: On September 23, a Jefferson County grand jury announced that it would indict former Louisville police officer Brett Hankison on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment in the shooting death of Breonna Taylor. The two other officers who fired shots that night — Jonathan Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove — were not indicted. The piece below was last updated on July 13.
It has been more than 100 days since Breonna Taylor was killed by police in her own home in Louisville, Kentucky. Thousands of protesters have chanted her name across the country, demanding justice for the EMT, who would have turned 27 on June 5.
As the country is reckoning with its history of racist police violence, many advocates want to know why charges still haven’t been filed against the officers who shot her dead. Meanwhile, those who want to abolish the carceral state are rethinking what justice in the Taylor case should actually look like.
Most advocates agree that another Black woman is dead because of a lack of police accountability — and something needs to change.
On March 13, three officers with a no-knock warrant entered Taylor’s apartment looking for two people suspected of selling drugs, neither of whom was Taylor. The officers fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment, hitting Taylor at least eight times.
After months of investigation, the Louisville Police Department (LMPD) fired officer Brett Hankison on June 23; the other two officers remain on administrative assignment. A special Kentucky prosecutor is leading an investigation into both the shooting and the department’s handling of the shooting to determine whether to charge the three officers who fired their weapons; the FBI is leading its own investigation. On June 29, the Louisville Metro Council also announced a resolution to investigate the actions of Mayor Greg Fischer and his administration surrounding Taylor’s death. The council hopes to create greater transparency around who made what decisions in the Taylor case, according to a news release.
Taylor’s death took place amid a slate of high-profile killings of unarmed Black people — it was just three weeks after Ahmaud Arbery was killed by white vigilantes while jogging and about 10 weeks before the fatal arrest of George Floyd. The suspects involved in Arbery’s case were arrested and charged two weeks after video of the incident went viral. The four officers involved in the killing of George Floyd were fired four days after Floyd’s death, with the officer who knelt on Floyd’s neck charged with murder.
By contrast, not much has happened in Taylor’s case.
In the meantime, Taylor’s family, alleging excessive force and gross negligence in her death, filed a lawsuit on April 27 against the officers involved in the shooting. In a court filing submitted on July 5, the family alleges that Taylor received no emergency medical aid as she lay dying. The document also claims that the raid on Taylor’s apartment was part of the mayor’s scheme to clear out a block in the neighborhood for redevelopment.
“I want justice for her,” Tamika Palmer, Taylor’s mother, told the 19th in May. “I want them to say her name. There’s no reason Breonna should be dead at all.”
Police came looking for a drug suspect. Breonna Taylor ended up dead instead.
On the night of March 13, Louisville police had a warrant to enter Taylor’s apartment because they believed that a suspect in a narcotics investigation was storing drugs or money or receiving packages at her home, according to USA Today.
However, according to the suit filed by Taylor’s family, the man police were searching for, Jamarcus Glover, did not live in her apartment complex and had already been detained by the time officers showed up. Taylor had dated Glover two years ago, according to a family attorney, and did not maintain an active friendship with him.
Police said that the three officers knocked on the door to announce themselves. But multiple neighbors say the officers neither knocked nor identified themselves, according to the family’s lawsuit. It was later uncovered that the police had been granted a no-knock warrant by a judge, which allowed them to enter Taylor’s apartment without announcing themselves. They also weren’t wearing body cams.
When police arrived, Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, 27, says he woke up and believed someone was trying to break into the apartment. There was banging on the door, he says, but police never announced themselves. He reached for his licensed handgun after he and Taylor asked who it was and got no response, NBC reported. He fired one shot, hitting an officer in the leg.
Police then fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment. Taylor died at the scene. Walker was arrested and charged with attempted murder of a police officer and aggravated assault.
Police found no drugs in the apartment, and both Taylor and Walker have no criminal history.
On May 22, Kentucky prosecutors announced that they had dismissed all charges against Walker, who said he fired a shot in self-defense when he believed he and Taylor were under attack.
On June 11, police released an incident report for the night Taylor was killed, but it was largely blank. Though Taylor was fatally shot, the four-page report listed her injuries as “none.” The report also stated there was no forced entry, though witnesses say the police used a battering ram to enter the apartment, according to CBS News.
The Taylor family’s 31-page July 5 court filing adds two new (and since contested) allegations to the narrative: that Taylor received no medical aid as she lay dying and that the nighttime raid was part of Mayor Fischer’s plan to redevelop a city block in western Louisville.
Taylor’s family said there is no evidence that suggests that Taylor was given medical attention in the six minutes between when she was shot and when she died. However, the coroner who performed Taylor’s autopsy said that her injuries from the shooting were so extreme that she would’ve died in “less than a minute” and that the recorded time of death on the report is “an estimate.”
The family’s filing also alleges that police went after Glover because of political pressure from the mayor’s office due to a redevelopment project valued at more than $30 million, according to the New York Times. Glover was reportedly using a row of abandoned houses to sell drugs in the area that needed to be cleared for development.
“People needed to be removed and homes needed to be vacated so that a high-dollar, legacy-creating real estate development could move forward,” attorneys for the family wrote in the court filing. The city has called the allegations “outrageous.”
Meanwhile, it came to light that the officer who shot Taylor, Hankison, had a history of misconduct allegations. He was already facing an ongoing federal lawsuit at the time of Taylor’s death in which Kendrick Wilson accused Hankison of “harassing suspects with unnecessary arrests and planting drugs on them,” according to USA Today. Wilson alleges that Hankison targeted him and arrested him three times in a two-year period.
After Taylor’s death, claims of sexual assault surfaced, too, with at least two women coming forward in early June to allege that Hankison assaulted them. In both allegations, which are similar to one another, Hankison offered the women rides home after they had been drinking at local bars. In one case, Hankison allegedly followed the woman into her home and assaulted her while she was unconscious. In the other case, Hankison reportedly made sexual advances toward the woman while she sat in his unmarked car, including rubbing her thighs and kissing her face.
On June 23, he was fired. LMPD posted Hankison’s termination letter on Twitter, which stated Hankison “displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life when you wantonly and blindly fired ten (10) rounds into the apartment of Breonna Taylor…” The letter also stated Hankison violated the department’s protocol on use of deadly force when he shot through a patio door and window that was covered. This prevented him from determining whether there was an immediate threat or innocent people present; some of the bullets even traveled to a neighbor’s apartment where three people were endangered, according to the letter. Hankison has appealed his termination.
The other two officers who fired rounds that night, John Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove, remain on the force and have been placed on administrative reassignment. The case is still under independent investigation with Kentucky’s Attorney General, Daniel Cameron, who has said he will not provide additional details or a timeline for the investigation.
Protests are ongoing, and calls for justice in the investigation continue
In May, Benjamin Crump, the Taylor family’s attorney, argued that the killings of Black women have tended to receive less media attention than the deaths of Black men.
“They’re killing our sisters just like they’re killing our brothers, but for whatever reason, we have not given our sisters the same attention that we have given to Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Stephon Clark, Terence Crutcher, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Eric Garner, Laquan McDonald,” he told the 19th. “Breonna’s name should be known by everybody in America who said those other names, because she was in her own home, doing absolutely nothing wrong.”
Protests where the crowds chant, “Say her name, Breonna Taylor,” have attempted to reverse the lack of attention. In 2015, activists around the country demonstrated and used the hashtag #SayHerName to draw attention to women who had lost their lives, including Gabriella Nevarez, Michelle Cusseaux, and Alexia Christian, as Jenée Desmond-Harris reported for Vox at the time. The death of Sandra Bland in jail after she was arrested during a traffic stop also drew national attention to the impact of police brutality and racism on Black women’s lives.
Around the country, activists organized marches and signed petitions on Taylor’s June 5 birthday, saying she should’ve been alive to see the day. In Louisville, protesters have gathered in Breonna Taylor’s name to protest police brutality in a number of demonstrations since May. After a protest-imposed curfew on May 31, law enforcement shot and killed David McAtee, 53, a local restaurant owner. Following his death, Louisville Police Chief Steve Conrad was fired, though it is still unclear exactly who shot McAtee, Vox’s Anna North reported.
While there have been other changes in the police department since Taylor’s death — on June 11 the Louisville Metro Council voted unanimously to ban no-knock warrants — advocates, activists, and celebrities are asking why the three officers involved in Taylor’s killing haven’t been arrested. On June 14, Beyoncé wrote an open letter to Kentucky’s attorney general, demanding that criminal charges be brought against the three officers to “show the value of a Black woman’s life.” She also asked that the office bring greater transparency to the investigation.
At a June 18 press conference, Cameron — the first Black attorney general in Kentucky and a former legal counsel for Sen. Mitch McConnell — emphasized that the investigation is ongoing, without giving any specific details.
“To all those involved in this case, you have my commitment that our office is undertaking a thorough and fair investigation,” he said. “This is also a commitment that I’m making to the Louisville community, which has suffered tremendously in the days since March 13.”
Cameron was also the first Republican attorney general elected in the state, according to the New York Times, on a platform that backed Trump and some of the president’s signature efforts, like building a border wall. He has criticized some of protesters’ demands, including the call to defund the police.
“Radical rhetoric and calls to ‘defund the police’ threaten public safety and only serve to divide us further, rather than bringing us together,” he said in a press release on June 24.
Wake Forest Law professor Ronald Wright, who specializes in the work of criminal prosecutors, told Vox that Cameron’s comments regarding defunding the police are worth watching because they are relevant to how Cameron handles the case. “If he starts to sound like an advocate for law enforcement, voicing broad support for police officers and defending them in general terms, that would make me wonder if he can evaluate charges fairly in this case,” Wright said. “It is tough to convince the public that you will hold the police accountable for their wrongdoing if you never find anything to criticize in their work.”
Why there haven’t been arrests in the case so far
Wright told Vox in May that in officer-involved shooting cases like Taylor’s, the length of time the prosecutor takes to bring forth charges should not necessarily be the issue. Rather, people should question and examine what the prosecutor does during their investigation.
“I don’t really fault prosecutors for taking their time, gathering the facts, being thorough. The timing doesn’t really bother me as much as the amount of effort. If what you’re doing is you’re not doing anything and you’re stalling, and you don’t really intend to press the case as hard as you would press any shooting in your district, then that’s a problem,” Wright told Vox.
Since these cases are especially difficult to win at trial, Wright pointed out, prosecutors must take the time to build a really strong case. “The delay could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on whether they are putting in the effort into building a great case,” he said.
In the high-profile Baltimore police custody death of Freddie Gray, State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby arrested the three officers involved just days after Gray’s death and charged them with offenses including second-degree “depraved heart” murder and manslaughter. All three officers in the case were acquitted. “It may have been that it would have been better to go a little slower and get more evidence for charges after some delay,” Wright told Vox.
Many advocates, however, point to the speed at which arrests came in the Arbery and Floyd cases — and the fact that years-long delays in Eric Garner’s case still didn’t lead to justice. Garner died in July 2014 after NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo placed him in a banned chokehold. One day before the five-year anniversary of Garner’s death in July 2019, federal prosecutors announced they would not bring charges against Pantaleo. The NYPD fired Pantaleo in August 2019, more than five years after Garner’s death.
And in the three cases above there were videos of the incidents. Wright said that even with footage, cases against police officers are difficult to prosecute. Videos do represent extra proof — a form of evidence Taylor’s case lacks.
The influence of police unions, which have come under criticism from activists and protesters during the unrest, may also contribute to delays. As Vox’s Dylan Matthews reported, police unions have become engrossed in preventing the discipline of officers who kill unarmed Black people:
In local cases, this attitude has translated to a defense of officers who kill or wound innocent civilians. The Louisville Metro Police Department [had first] been limited to just announcing its “intention” to fire Brett Hankison, a detective who shot his gun 10 times during the raid that killed Breonna Taylor, rather than actually firing him outright. This limitation is largely because of the city’s contract with the police union, which gives Hankison multiple opportunities to appeal. He is first allowed a “pretermination hearing” with counsel, and then, once terminated, an appeal to the police merit board, of which Hankison himself is a member.
In May, the Louisville police union also demanded an apology from Louisville council member Jessica Green, who called Taylor’s boyfriend a hero after he was charged with shooting Mattingly the night Taylor was killed. “Calling someone that shot an on-duty police officer, in the performance of official duties, a hero is a slap in the face,” said Ryan Nichols, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 614. Green said she would not apologize.
But Wright said that Hankison’s firing does offer a clue to how a criminal case could swing. That the LMPD found that he showed “extreme indifference to the value of human life” when he “wantonly and blindly” fired 10 rounds into the apartment means there’s a chance for a conviction if a jury were to find the same conclusion. “If a jury in a criminal trial were to reach the same conclusions after hearing the facts, they could properly convict him of a lesser version of homicide,” Wright told Vox.
At the recent press conference, Cameron refused to discuss any potential roadblocks, stating that “an investigation of this magnitude, when done correctly, requires time and patience.” He added, “To those across the country we have heard from with cards, emails, and letters, and calls, who are asking us to complete the investigation as soon as possible — we hear you and we are working around the clock to follow the law to the truth.”
Defunding the Louisville police and its ties to justice for Taylor
Amid a growing call to “defund” or “abolish the police,” there are others advocating for justice who view the calls to arrest officers as taking away from the larger goal of dismantling the system.
According to anti-criminalization organizer Mariame Kaba, director of the anti youth incarceration grassroots organization Project NIA, celebrating charges for officers signals our dependence on a criminal justice system that was created to uphold white supremacy. “To transform a death-making system, our expectations have to be much higher,” she wrote last month in the New York Times. “Celebrating charges is like celebrating bread crumbs. ... I understand why people do it, but I think according great significance to charges misses the point and it also freezes people in place. It has the effect of demobilizing collective action.”
Kaba explained that justice is not just closing down police departments but making them obsolete. “The surest way of reducing police violence is to reduce the power of the police, by cutting budgets and the number of officers,” she wrote.
But on June 25, the Louisville Metro Council approved a budget that wouldn’t even begin to defund LMPD. The new spending plan will merely “require police to put the money toward recruiting a more diverse force, additional training and exploring co-responder models that could send behavioral health professionals on calls with officers,” according to the Louisville Courier-Journal. Funding will also be directed to a civilian review board that will oversee LMPD, following the 24-1 vote. Black Lives Matter demanded that more money be shifted to community services.
Today Metro Council votes on the 20-21 Budget. 49% is allocated to @lmpd and corrections. Demand better for our communities! When we say #defundpolice there is a clear vision of what is possible. give money directly to community https://t.co/WXPhjFxHYU #DefendBlackLife pic.twitter.com/RlWwVb2b4W — BLM Louisville (@BLMLouisville) June 25, 2020
On the same day the budget was approved, a crowd of more than 500 demonstrators, including activists, community members, and celebrities, gathered on the steps of the Kentucky State Capitol in Frankfort for a #JusticeForBreonnaTaylor rally, according to the Louisville Courier-Journal. Activist Tamika Mallory emphasized the need to keep calling for justice and accountability in Taylor’s case. “I’m sure we all understand that Breonna Taylor is everywhere,” she said. “The issue of Black women being killed and our voices being too low is a problem.”


vox--2020-07-13--The debate over “airborne” coronavirus spread, explained

Since the beginning of the pandemic , the World Health Organization has stressed that , primarily , Covid-19 spreads through very close personal contact .
The virus-laden droplets exhaled from a sick person ’ s mouth and nose , the thinking goes , are heavy , and fall to the ground before they can get much farther than 6 feet .
But as the pandemic has unfolded , contact tracing studies have shown this isn ’ t always the case .
In China , an air conditioner pushed virus-laden air across three tables in a restaurant , infecting people seated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the restaurant and saw many of these patrons were more than 6 feet apart from one another , suggesting that the virus traveled through the air .
In Washington state , one person at a choir practice infected 52 of the other participants ; it ’ s thought the singing could have led more virus to linger in the air .
Carefully controlled laboratory studies are also suggesting that under the right indoor conditions , SARS-CoV-2 , the virus that causes Covid-19 , can float in the air and , to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Last Thursday , the WHO changed its language to recognize that fact .
“ Short-range aerosol transmission , particularly in specific indoor locations , such as crowded and inadequately ventilated spaces over a prolonged period of time with infected persons can not be ruled out , ” the WHO now states .
Previously , the organization maintained that airborne transmission was unlikely to occur outside the hospital setting , where some procedures can generate super-small particles that linger in the air longer than large respiratory drops .
This change comes after a letter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , co-signed by 239 scientists and engineers , which implored WHO and other public health agencies that “ it ’ s time to address airborne transmission of Covid-19.
” With the WHO ’ s recognition of this mode of transmission , the authors hope , communities can think more about the ventilation of indoor spaces and perhaps engineer solutions to make these spaces safer .
It turns out scientists have been debating whether respiratory diseases like the flu and coronavirus should be labeled “ airborne ” for a century .
More commonly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applicable to extremely contagious diseases , like measles .
A lot of these terms are confusing ( even to the scientists ) , and they don ’ t answer the question laypeople care about : Which air is safe to breathe in during the Covid-19 pandemic , and which air is not safe ?
To answer that question , it ’ s helpful to understand two different scientific perspectives on the matter .
One is : What physically happens when a sick person breathes , sneezes , or coughs into a room ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ epidemiologists observed in the way people are exposed to the virus and get sick ?
Let ’ s start with the first .
There ’ s a relatively simple , if outdated , way of thinking about how respiratory diseases can spread .
It starts like this : When you exhale , sneeze , or cough , you release a cloud of gas and liquid droplets .
If those droplets are relatively big , they ’ re heavy and fall to the ground before evaporating , like raindrops do .
Others are smaller @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
These smaller droplets can linger in the air longer , drifting on air currents for perhaps hours .
If a droplet is small enough , the moisture in it evaporates before it has the chance to reach the ground ( provided the humidity in the room is average ) .
If there ’ s stuff like germs in that droplet , they become light enough to float on air currents , like the dust you can see suspended in the air .
These particles are often called aerosols .
This framework is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wells , a scientist who studied tuberculosis transmission in the 1930s .
In a 1934 paper , Wells concluded : “ It appears , therefore , that transmission of infection through air may take one of two forms depending upon the size of the infected droplet.
” When it comes to Covid-19 , one of the first questions epidemiologists tried to answer was : Is the virus spread in the dust that floats or the big drops that fall ?
If it ’ s the small dust , alarm bells go off .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ They include measles , chickenpox , and tuberculosis , and they are extremely contagious .
On average , one person infected with measles will infect 12 to 18 others .
If it ’ s the big drops , it ’ s still concerning .
Diseases like the flu , whooping cough , the common cold , and coronaviruses are primarily large droplet-borne .
With these diseases , only the closest contacts to an infected person get infected because large droplets quickly fall to the ground ( within 6 feet or so ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ big drops to fall on surfaces , and those surfaces can become contaminated too .
Luckily , in the case of Covid-19 , there ’ s a growing consensus that getting sick from touching contaminated surfaces is rare .
But keep washing your hands !
A part of why the terminology here is so confusing , and there ’ s so much debate about it , is that the words “ aerosol ” and “ droplet ” mean different things to different scientific disciplines .
“ An aerosol is a particle in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an engineer and the director of the International Laboratory for Air Quality and Health at Queensland University of Technology .
“ A droplet is a liquid aerosol.
” To her , the distinction between droplets and aerosols doesn ’ t make any sense .
To her , they are all aerosols .
Wells ’ s droplet versus airborne distinction is still used today .
It ’ s outdated .
Wells outlined a clear distinction between droplets and aerosols according to their size .
Big drops fall , and little aerosolized drops float .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ actual picture is a lot more complicated .
“ We ’ re always exhaling , in fact , a gas cloud that contains within it a continuum spectrum of droplet sizes , ” says Lydia Bourouiba , an MIT researcher who studies the fluid dynamics of infections .
And , as she explained in a March paper in JAMA , the conditions of the cloud itself can affect the range of some of the droplets .
If propelled by a cough or sneeze , Bourouiba finds , droplets can travel upward of 20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not the drop sizes , determines the initial range of the drops and their fate in indoor environments.
” The speed of the cloud , the temperature and humidity of the environment , and the individual droplet makeup of each cloud determines how long the droplets persist in the air , Bourouiba explained in JAMA .
Which is to say : There are conditions ( coughing and sneezing ) under which large drops don ’ t immediately fall to the floor and can spread more than 6 feet away from a person , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for longer .
There ’ s growing theoretical evidence for the airborne spread of the coronavirus .
Lab studies , in idealized conditions , also show that the virus can live in an aerosolized form for up to 16 hours ( the scientists in this case intentionally created aerosolized droplets with a machine ) .
Another study tracked with lasers the various droplets expelled from a human mouth during speech .
It found “ normal speech generates airborne droplets that can remain suspended for tens of minutes or longer and are eminently capable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some studies , the WHO reports , have found evidence of the virus ’ s RNA in the air of hospital rooms , but notes “ no studies have found viable virus in air samples , ” meaning the virus was either incapable of infecting others or was in very small quantities unlikely to infect others .
“ What we are trying to say is , well , let ’ s not worry about whether you call it aerosol or whether you call it a droplet , ” Morawska , the co-author of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others to address airborne transmission of Covid-19 , says .
“ It is in the air , ” she says , “ and you inhale it .
It ’ s coming from our nose from our mouths .
It ’ s lingering in the air and others can inhale it.
” That the WHO updated its language is a sign that it ’ s starting to appreciate this perspective .
But this perspective is limited .
These lab studies can ’ t perfectly generalize to the real-world conditions in which the virus spreads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus travels far in a drop doesn ’ t mean it can infect people across great distances .
Viruses can degrade quickly outside the body .
Also , dose matters .
Small exposures to the virus may not be enough to get a person sick .
So to find out how people actually get sick with Covid-19 , we need contact tracing studies .
Contact tracing studies show airborne transmission may be possible in confined indoor spaces Lab studies note the theoretical possibility of airborne transmission .
But that ’ s only one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ which air is safe to breathe ?
” Epidemiologists come at this question from another angle , looking at patterns of virus spread observed in the real world and working backward to determine if airborne spread factors in .
Contact tracing studies show us that while droplets being inhaled by people within 6 feet of an infected person explains most of the transmission of Covid-19 , there are limited times and environments in which SARS-CoV-2 can behave a bit like an airborne virus .
“ So we need to define which types @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , lead to that type of transmission , ” Muge Cevik , a physician and virology expert at the University of St. Andrews , says .
In households , she says , an infected person can be isolated in one room and not spread the virus to others in the home ( if they remain isolated ) .
A systematic review of studies in The Lancet of both SARS-CoV-2 and similar viruses found large reductions in risk if people just stay 1 meter ( 3 feet ) away from one another .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ catching Covid-19 is from the large drops that fall quickly to the ground .
But then there are cases where people are packed together in an enclosed space — like a church , with singing or shouting — where the transmission looks a little more like airborne transmission .
The infamous choir practice in Washington state is an example of where airborne transmission might have happened .
But what made this event so risky was the convergence of many risk factors : the singing activity ( during which the infected person released viral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time spent together ( the practice was 2.5 hours ) , and the interaction between the choir members in an enclosed space ( not only did they all practice together , they also split up into smaller groups and shared cookies and tea ) .
Another study from China investigated an outbreak that started at a Buddhist temple event , tracing much of the spread to the confines of one of the buses transporting people to the function .
The bus had one sick person aboard , and 24 out of 67 people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indicating airborne transmission .
Those who sat by the windows fared better , indicating the importance of ventilation .
“ I think we just need to get away from this terminology and give much more clear definitions , ” Cevik says .
For her , it ’ s about getting people to think critically about which situations are riskier than others .
“ Risk is a spectrum .
It ’ s not only the distance , but it ’ s about timing , what type of activities you ’ re involved in .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ complex , but that ’ s the reality.
” “ Airborne ” transmission means something very specific for doctors and health care workers Perhaps part of the reason the WHO has been slow to address the airborne transmission of Covid-19 is because in a health care setting , “ airborne ” means a very specific thing .
Though infection prevention experts know there ’ s a fuzzy boundary between drops that fall and specks that float , the dichotomy between airborne and droplet-borne is baked into how health care workers are trained to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve trained [ health care workers ] for decades to say , airborne is tuberculosis , measles , chickenpox , droplet is flu and pertussis and meningitis , ” Saskia Popescu , a hospital epidemiologist in Arizona , says .
“ And that ’ s , unfortunately , kind of antiquated .
But that ’ s how we ’ ve always done it.
” They do it because there are very specific sets of guidelines in place to deal with extremely contagious airborne diseases in a hospital setting .
For instance , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to be put in a room with an air pressure lower than the rest of the rooms in the building .
That way , no virus in the air of that room can escape it ( since air flows from high pressure to low pressure ) .
For droplet transmission , health care workers can be a little more lax ; they can wear simple surgical masks during routine care and can save high-filtration ( and sometimes scarce ) respirators for the most dangerous procedures and cases .
In this light , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been hesitant to label Covid-19 an “ airborne ” infection .
It ’ s not an airborne infection like measles is .
It is not as contagious .
Contact tracing studies consistently find that Covid-19 is spread most readily among people in the closest physical contact to one another .
“ Airborne ” means something very specific , very resource-intensive , and very scary for hospitals and the people who work in them .
And Covid-19 doesn ’ t match that definition .
“ The debate often isn ’ t very nuanced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daniel Diekema , an infectious diseases physician and epidemiologist at the University of Iowa , says .
“ As soon as you say ‘ airborne ’ in the hospital infection prevention world , it brings to mind pathogens like tuberculosis , measles , chickenpox .
It ’ s clear the respiratory viruses , influenza , coronaviruses , are not airborne in the same way that the measles , varicella [ chickenpox ] become airborne.
” But at the same time , with Covid-19 and other respiratory viruses , “ there definitely are small-particle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ And in the right setting , where there ’ s poor ventilation , indoors , and a crowded environment , there is a risk for transmission among individuals , even if they may be more than 6 feet apart.
” So what do we do with this information ?
Neither contact tracing studies nor lab studies can perfectly answer the question of “ which air is safe ?
” But that ’ s science for you .
Scientists use imperfect methods , attacking from many angles , to try to arrive at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while to nail down precisely .
Overall , the recognition that Covid-19 can spread through the air shouldn ’ t really change how we , individually , protect ourselves and others against it .
Six feet of distance between people is still a good barrier to prevent spread via large drops .
Mask-wearing could help prevent both large drops and small drops from being released in the first place .
Time matters too : the longer we spend in an enclosed , poorly ventilated space with others , the greater the chances of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus .
The bottom line , as a trio of engineers from Clarkson University writes in the Conversation , is that “ while staying six feet from other people reduces exposure , it might not be sufficient in all situations , such as in enclosed , poorly ventilated rooms.
” We still need to think about the environments we ’ re in : Indoors is much riskier than outdoors ( where greater airflow can disperse drops and aerosols more quickly , and where the environment is less conducive to SARS-CoV-2 survival ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a big difference .
An indoor space where the air is constantly refreshed with air from the outdoors is better than one where the air is stagnant .
We also still need to think about the activity we ’ re engaging in .
Shouting , singing , and other such activities produce more droplets ( of any size ) than just sitting quietly .
Morawska hopes that in bringing attention to airborne spread of Covid-19 , there can be more attention paid to engineering solutions for indoor spaces to mitigate the spread of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continually stressed social distancing , mask-wearing , and hand-washing as ways to stop the spread of Covid-19 .
“ But have you ever heard a restaurant reopening announce they ’ ve improved ventilation or increased ventilation ?
No .
This is really the point , ” Morawska says .
If Covid-19 is in indoor air , we should also be doing something about the air .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox @ @

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the World Health Organization has stressed that Covid-19 primarily spreads through very close personal contact. The virus-laden droplets exhaled from a sick person’s mouth and nose, the thinking goes, are heavy, and fall to the ground before they can get much farther than 6 feet.
But as the pandemic has unfolded, contact tracing studies have shown this isn’t always the case. In China, an air conditioner pushed virus-laden air across three tables in a restaurant, infecting people seated at each one. Researchers reviewed video from the restaurant and saw many of these patrons were more than 6 feet apart from one another, suggesting that the virus traveled through the air.
In Washington state, another study showed one person at a choir practice infected 52 of the other participants; it’s thought the singing could have led more virus to linger in the air. Carefully controlled laboratory studies are also suggesting that under the right indoor conditions, SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, can float in the air and, to a certain degree, spread that way.
In July, the WHO changed its language to recognize that fact. “Short-range aerosol transmission, particularly in specific indoor locations, such as crowded and inadequately ventilated spaces over a prolonged period of time with infected persons cannot be ruled out,” the WHO now states. Previously, the organization maintained that airborne transmission was unlikely to occur outside the hospital setting, where some procedures can generate super-small particles that linger in the air longer than large respiratory drops.
Then, on October 5, the CDC updated its guidance to say that “Covid-19 can sometimes be spread by airborne transmission,” explaining that “there is evidence that under certain conditions, people with COVID-19 seem to have infected others who were more than 6 feet away.” With recognition of this mode of transmission, scientists hope, communities can think more about the ventilation of indoor spaces and perhaps engineer solutions to make these spaces safer.
The CDC had posted a similar update on September 20, which it quickly took down (the agency claimed the update had been posted in error). Overall, it’s been clear for quite some time that the 6 feet guidance was insufficient to explain all the facets of the risk in catching Covid-19.
Overall, the public communications on the aerosol issue have been something of a mess. It turns out scientists have been debating whether respiratory diseases like the flu and coronavirus should be labeled “airborne” for a century. The “airborne” designation is more commonly applied to extremely contagious diseases, like measles.
A lot of these terms are confusing (even to the scientists), and they don’t answer the question laypeople care about: Which air is safe to breathe during the Covid-19 pandemic, and which air is not safe?
To answer that question, it’s helpful to understand two different scientific perspectives on the matter. One is: What physically happens when a sick person breathes, sneezes, or coughs in a room? The other is: What patterns have epidemiologists observed in the way people are exposed to the virus and get sick?
Let’s start with the first.
Big drops versus little drops
There’s a relatively simple, if outdated, way of thinking about how respiratory diseases can spread.
It starts like this: When you exhale, sneeze, or cough, you release a cloud of gas and liquid droplets.
If those droplets are relatively big, they’re heavy and fall to the ground before evaporating, like raindrops do. Others are smaller, and made smaller still by evaporation. These smaller droplets can linger in the air longer, drifting on air currents for perhaps hours. If a droplet is small enough, the moisture in it evaporates before it has the chance to reach the ground (provided the humidity in the room is average). If there’s stuff like germs in that droplet, they become light enough to float on air currents, like the dust you can see suspended in the air. These particles are often called aerosols.
This framework is old, and it comes from William Wells, a scientist who studied tuberculosis transmission in the 1930s. In a 1934 paper, Wells concluded: “It appears, therefore, that transmission of infection through air may take one of two forms depending upon the size of the infected droplet.”
When it comes to Covid-19, one of the first questions epidemiologists tried to answer was: Is the virus spread in the dust that floats or the big drops that fall?
If it’s the small dust, alarm bells go off. These are the prototypical airborne diseases. They include measles, chickenpox, and tuberculosis, and they are extremely contagious. On average, one person infected with measles will infect 12 to 18 others.
If it’s the big drops, it’s still concerning. Diseases like the flu, whooping cough, the common cold, and coronaviruses are primarily large droplet-borne. With these diseases, only the closest contacts to an infected person get infected because large droplets quickly fall to the ground (within 6 feet or so). It’s also possible for these big drops to fall on surfaces, and those surfaces can become contaminated too. Luckily, in the case of Covid-19, there’s a growing consensus that getting sick from touching contaminated surfaces is rare. But keep washing your hands!
(Interestingly, there’s no one reason a new virus, like SARS-CoV-2, would go one route or the other. It’s possible, says University of Leicester virologist Julian Tang, that there may be a difference in the immune response with these airborne diseases that makes saliva and mucous less viscous, leading to more virus in small drops. Also, Tang writes in an email, “it is possible (though no one has studied this yet) that exhaled breath from measles/chickenpox cases may just be shedding much more virus (maybe millions of virus per minute) compared to respiratory viruses, which only exhale 100s to 1000s of viruses per minute.”)
A part of why the terminology here is so confusing, and there’s so much debate about it, is that the words “aerosol” and “droplet” mean different things to different scientific disciplines.
“An aerosol is a particle in the air,” said Lidia Morawska, an engineer and the director of the International Laboratory for Air Quality and Health at Queensland University of Technology. “A droplet is a liquid aerosol.” To her, the distinction between droplets and aerosols doesn’t make any sense. To her, they are all aerosols.
Wells’s droplet versus airborne distinction is still used today. It’s outdated.
Wells outlined a clear distinction between droplets and aerosols according to their size. Big drops fall, and little aerosolized drops float. It’s now appreciated that the actual picture is a lot more complicated.
“We’re always exhaling, in fact, a gas cloud that contains within it a continuum spectrum of droplet sizes,” Lydia Bourouiba, an MIT researcher who studies the fluid dynamics of infections, said in a July interview. And, as she explained in a March paper in JAMA, the conditions of the cloud itself can affect the range of some of the droplets. If propelled by a cough or sneeze, Bourouiba finds, droplets can travel upward of 20 feet. “The cloud mixture, not the drop sizes, determines the initial range of the drops and their fate in indoor environments.”
The speed of the cloud, the temperature and humidity of the environment, and the individual droplet makeup of each cloud determine how long the droplets persist in the air, Bourouiba explained in JAMA.
Which is to say: There are conditions (coughing and sneezing) under which large drops don’t immediately fall to the floor and can spread more than 6 feet away from a person, and they can linger in the air for longer. (It’s also possible SARS-CoV-2 may be in some of the smaller, floatier drops expelled by our breath too.)
There’s growing theoretical evidence for the airborne spread of the coronavirus. Lab studies, in idealized conditions, also show that the virus can live in an aerosolized form for up to 16 hours (the scientists in this case intentionally created aerosolized droplets with a machine).
Another study tracked with lasers the various droplets expelled from a human mouth during speech. It found “normal speech generates airborne droplets that can remain suspended for tens of minutes or longer and are eminently capable of transmitting disease in confined spaces.”
Multiple studies have found evidence of the virus’s RNA in the air of hospital rooms. But the WHO notes “no studies have found viable virus in air samples,” meaning the virus was either incapable of infecting others or was in very small quantities unlikely to infect others.
“What we are trying to say is, well, let’s not worry about whether you call it aerosol or whether you call it a droplet,” Morawska, the co-author of a July commentary imploring the WHO and others to address airborne transmission of Covid-19, said that month. “It is in the air,” she says, “and you inhale it. It’s coming from our nose from our mouths. It’s lingering in the air and others can inhale it.”
That the WHO updated its language is a sign that it’s starting to appreciate this perspective. (That said: The WHO still defines a droplet as a particle larger than 5 to 10 microns and an aerosol as something smaller, despite many scientists arguing the cutoff is meaningless.)
But this perspective is limited. These lab studies can’t perfectly generalize to the real-world conditions in which the virus spreads and infects others. Just because a virus travels far in a drop doesn’t mean it can infect people across great distances. Viruses can degrade quickly outside the body. Also, dose matters. Small exposures to the virus may not be enough to get a person sick.
So to find out how people actually get sick with Covid-19, we need contact tracing studies.
Contact tracing studies show airborne transmission may be possible in confined indoor spaces
Lab studies note the theoretical possibility of airborne transmission. But that’s only one part of the answer to the question of which air is safe to breathe. Epidemiologists come at this question from another angle, looking at patterns of virus spread observed in the real world and working backward to determine if airborne spread factors in.
Contact tracing studies show us that while droplets being inhaled by people within 6 feet of an infected person explain most of the transmission of Covid-19, there are limited times and environments in which SARS-CoV-2 can behave a bit like an airborne virus.
“So we need to define which types of contact, which type of environments, lead to that type of transmission,” Muge Cevik, a physician and virology expert at the University of St. Andrews, said in a July interview. In households, she says, an infected person can be isolated in one room and not spread the virus to others in the home (if they remain isolated). A systematic review of studies in The Lancet of both SARS-CoV-2 and similar viruses found large reductions in risk if people just stay 1 meter (3 feet) away from one another. This suggests a lot of the risk of catching Covid-19 is from the large drops that fall quickly to the ground.
But then there are cases where people are packed together in an enclosed space — like a church, with singing or shouting — where the transmission looks a little more like airborne transmission.
The infamous choir practice in Washington state is an example of where airborne transmission might have happened. But what made this event so risky was the convergence of many risk factors: the singing activity (during which the infected person released viral particles into the air), the time spent together (the practice was 2.5 hours), and the interaction between the choir members in an enclosed space (not only did they all practice together, they also split up into smaller groups and shared cookies and tea).
Another study from China investigated an outbreak that started at a Buddhist temple event, tracing much of the spread to the confines of one of the buses transporting people to the function. The bus had one sick person aboard, and 24 out of 67 people on that bus got sick, possibly indicating airborne transmission. Those who sat by the windows fared better, indicating the importance of ventilation.
“I think we just need to get away from this terminology and give much more clear definitions,” Cevik says. For her, it’s about getting people to think critically about which situations are riskier than others. “Risk is a spectrum. It’s not only the distance, but it’s about timing, what type of activities you’re involved in. I know it’s a bit complex, but that’s the reality.”
“Airborne” transmission means something very specific for doctors and health care workers
One possible reason the CDC and the WHO have been slow to address the airborne transmission of Covid-19: In a health care setting, “airborne” means a very specific thing.
Though infection prevention experts know there’s a fuzzy boundary between drops that fall and specks that float, the dichotomy between airborne and droplet-borne is baked into how health care workers are trained to respond to outbreaks. “We’ve trained [health care workers] for decades to say, airborne is tuberculosis, measles, chickenpox, droplet is flu and pertussis and meningitis,” Saskia Popescu, a hospital epidemiologist in Arizona, said over the summer. “And that’s, unfortunately, kind of antiquated. But that’s how we’ve always done it.”
They do it because there are very specific sets of guidelines in place to deal with extremely contagious airborne diseases in a hospital setting. For instance, a patient with a dangerous airborne disease often needs to be put in a room with an air pressure lower than the rest of the rooms in the building. That way, no virus in the air of that room can escape it (since air flows from high pressure to low pressure).
For droplet transmission, health care workers can be a little more lax; they can wear simple surgical masks during routine care and can save high-filtration (and sometimes scarce) respirators for the most dangerous procedures and cases.
In this light, it makes some sense that the WHO has been hesitant to label Covid-19 an “airborne” infection. It’s not an airborne infection like measles is. It is not as contagious. Contact tracing studies consistently find that Covid-19 is spread most readily among people in the closest physical contact to one another. “Airborne” means something very specific, very resource-intensive, and very scary for hospitals and the people who work in them. And Covid-19 doesn’t match that definition.
“The debate often isn’t very nuanced because of these rigid categories,” Daniel Diekema, an infectious diseases physician and epidemiologist at the University of Iowa, says. “As soon as you say ‘airborne’ in the hospital infection prevention world, it brings to mind pathogens like tuberculosis, measles, chickenpox. It’s clear the respiratory viruses, influenza, coronaviruses, are not airborne in the same way that the measles, varicella [chickenpox] become airborne.”
But at the same time, with Covid-19 and other respiratory viruses, “there definitely are small-particle aerosols produced,” he says. “And in the right setting, where there’s poor ventilation, indoors, and a crowded environment, there is a risk for transmission among individuals, even if they may be more than 6 feet apart.”
So what do we do with this information?
Neither contact tracing studies nor lab studies can perfectly answer the question of “which air is safe?” But that’s science for you. Scientists use imperfect methods, attacking from many angles, to try to arrive at the truth, which can take a while to nail down precisely.
Overall, the recognition that Covid-19 can spread through the air shouldn’t really change how we, individually, protect ourselves and others against it. Six feet of distance between people is still a good barrier to prevent spread via large drops. Mask-wearing could help prevent both large drops and small drops from being released in the first place. Time matters too: The longer we spend in an enclosed, poorly ventilated space with others, the greater the chances of being exposed to an infectious dose of the virus.
The bottom line, as a trio of engineers from Clarkson University writes in the Conversation, is that “while staying six feet from other people reduces exposure, it might not be sufficient in all situations, such as in enclosed, poorly ventilated rooms.”
We still need to think about the environments we’re in: Indoors is much riskier than outdoors (where greater airflow can disperse drops and aerosols more quickly, and where the environment is less conducive to SARS-CoV-2 survival). And indoors, ventilation can make a big difference. An indoor space where the air is constantly refreshed with air from the outdoors is better than one where the air is stagnant. (The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers has published extensive guidelines on how to reopen buildings with increased ventilation during the pandemic.)
We also still need to think about the activity we’re engaging in. Shouting, singing, and other such activities produce more droplets (of any size) than just sitting quietly.
Morawska hopes that in bringing attention to airborne spread of Covid-19, there can be more attention paid to engineering solutions for indoor spaces to mitigate the spread of the pandemic.
Public health officials have continually stressed social distancing, mask-wearing, and hand-washing as ways to stop the spread of Covid-19. “But have you ever heard a restaurant reopening announce they’ve improved ventilation or increased ventilation? No. This is really the point,” Morawska says. If Covid-19 is in indoor air, we should also be doing something about the air.