Donald Trump, the then-President, imposed a ban on travel for non-citizens visiting China recently, January 31, 2020. The approach of Trump to this nascent pandemic was criticized by Joe Biden, Democrat presidential candidate.
“We have right now a crisis with the coronavirus, emanating from China,” Biden said. In moments such as these, a president’s credibility is crucial, as he clarifies what should be done and shouldn’t do. It is not the time to allow Donald Trump’s history of fearmongering and hystericalxenophobia to dictate science.
Biden did not mention China in his speech. Biden’s speech was not about China policy. Six weeks later though, the Democratic frontrunner for the nomination, Biden decried Trump’s expanded travel restrictions. His tweet stated that a wall would not prevent the coronavirus. “Banning all travel from Europe—or any other part of the world—will not stop it.” He stated that travel restrictions which are based more on politics and favoritism than on risk would be counterproductive.
In the 20 months that followed, many things changed about politics and coronavirus science. Biden had supplanted Trump as White House Counsel and was now working with an even larger toolbox of scientific information and mitigations. Is his current position regarding COVID travel bans? As it turned out, the exact same position as Trump.
Biden stated that he had ordered additional travel restrictions for South Africa as a precautionary measure while we gather more information. At the time of this announcement, six of eight African countries had not reported any cases involving the micron variant. The president said that as we go forward, “we’ll continue to follow the advice of my medical team and the science.”
The news media reacted to Trump’s China bans with alarmism. “The travel disruption sent shocks through the stock market and rattled industries that depend on the flow of goods and people between the world’s two largest economies,” The New York Times reported. The report states that planning was disrupted by companies in a large global supply chain.
Biden made the same decision, but it was met with empathy when he did the exact same thing. “The unexpected arrival of Omicron marked a shocking, here-we go-again moment in a politically divided country having fought the pandemic for nearly two years,” said the spokesperson. Times reported. It also highlighted the President’s difficult situation as he tries to aggressively respond to another threat to public health. The paper later stated that the Republicans had seized upon the existence of a second variant in order to attack President Obama.
Journalism can play a crucial role in mediating informational conflicts if political polarization or tribalism contribute to the bifurcation between how large clumps of Americans see reality. It’s particularly true when news media cover the emotional, personal, and potentially fatal issues of immigration and illness, as these tend to create some of most extreme and consequential perception differences.
Journalism sees this as an anachronistic trap by conservatives of bad faith who seek to bring asymmetrically extreme ideas into an “both sides” context. “To the extent…that journalists and pundits focus critically on President Biden and Democrats and give short shrift to Republicans’ obstructions—as if the cancer of Trumpism was in remission, if not cured—that indeed distorts reality and disserves readers, listeners and viewers,” former New York Times White House correspondent Jackie Calmes wrote in an October 15 Los Angeles Times piece. Calmes stated that democracy was literally in danger.
Trump was both a candidate and president. He told countless policy-shaping lies about topics such as voter fraud and sanctuary cities. James Schwab was the Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesperson. His reason for resigning in 2018 was that he didn’t want to fabricate truths. News organizations are ridiculed when they report on Biden’s immigration moves that seem indistinguishable to his predecessors, because their alert system targets Republicans.
To illustrate, 45 continued to use the 1944 Public Health Service Act (Title 42) to swiftly remove undocumented visitors who tried to enter the U.S. during pandemic. News outlets like the Investigative Nonprofit were able to report on Trump’s actions when it was Trump. ProPublica were filled with headlines like “ICE Is Making Sure Migrant Kids Don’t Have COVID-19—Then Expelling Them to ‘Prevent the Spread’ of COVID-19” and “Democratic Senators Demand Answers on Trump’s Secretive Border Expulsions.” Biden had Trump’s Title 42 expulsions rate doubled each month. ProPublica and Democrats was considerably more muted.
Biden accepted a court order in December requiring Trump to reinstate his controversial “Remain in Mexico” policy that rebuffs asylum seekers at its southern border. He reemphasized the Obama-era policy of denying Cuban and Haitian asylum seekers who arrive by sea. The 2018 Board of Immigration Appeals’ ruling that individuals who had been held by terrorist organizations as slave laborers cannot be eligible for asylum, stating that they “materially supported terrorism” has been thrown out. He has been a vocal opponent of the wall and his government continues to take private property from across the border between Mexico and America.
These examples, like many others in immigration policy, show a lot more continuity between Democratic administrations and Republican administrations that mainstream media outlets tend to overlook. Both sides recognize the commonality. However, journalists are more inclined to play a simplified morality game than activists.
Trump declared the China travel ban. The New York Times highlighted criticism from University of Minnesota epidemiologist Michael Osterholm: “The cow’s already out of the barn, and we’re now talking about shutting the barn door.” Biden’s other attempts to control the omicron version were covered in the Times quoted an epidemiologist voicing a sunnier attitude: “When you go to a crime scene, what do the police do right away? The police lock down everything so that they can find out the truth. However, that does not mean they will keep everything locked down the entire day.
Quelle de cette sentimente? It is the same Michael Osterholm.
George Orwell wrote that “To see what’s in front one’s nose,” “needs constant struggle”. Do not expect media support when it comes to COVID or immigration.