Partisan media fuels divisive Covid-19 coverage
Be honest: as you’ve been reading, viewing, and listening to Covid-19 coverage, have you thrown anything yet at the TV? Used language traditionally attributed to sailors?
While my TV is still intact, I can’t say that my language hasn’t occasionally transcended the merely colorful. My chief irritation, one that threatens my mom washing my mouth out with soap, is the predictable yet lamentable descent of the media into partisanship, even during this crisis.
Partisan Covid-19 coverage reflects not just a long term trend of political polarization in the US, but the reality that, in an election year, almost everything takes on a nasty partisan stench. Jack Healy, Campbell Robertson, and Sabrina Tavernise recently wrote in the New York Times, “(As) Mr. Trump and his allies have defended his actions and accused Democrats and the news media of fanning fears to ‘bring down the president,’ a growing public health crisis has turned into one more arena for bitter political battle, where facts are increasingly filtered through a partisan lens.” (March 1).
Essentially, what we see are media battle lines drawn by Trump’s own words and positions. If Trump comes out in favor of something, his media supporters line up behind him, seeking to buttress the president’s position while simultaneously attacking the liberal media for its unfounded attacks. Trump’s opponents are just as quick to point out the illogic in the positions taken by the president and his media allies.
One example is the battle over hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malaria drug repeatedly touted by Trump as a Covid-19 cure.
There are dozens of examples of Trump promoting hydroxychloroquine. According to Media Matters, a liberal media watchdog group, “Trump effectively turned the (April 4-6) coronavirus press briefings into infomercials for the merits of hydroxychloroquine. (April 6) At his briefing on April 4, Trump said, “What do you have to lose? Take it.” (New Republic, April 8) At an event April 14, Trump asked recovered Covid patients, “So you took the hydroxyl? And, “Why did you take the hydroxy? Why did you do that? You saw it on television?” (Politico, April 20) The Politico article goes on to note that Trump’s hydroxychloroquine mentions have dropped since his April 14 briefing.
Conservative media have been in lockstep with the president’s recommendation.
A simple Google news search of “hydroxychloroquine and foxnews.com” on April 20 picked up 2,680 results, with “headline-says-it-all” titles like “South Dakota implements statewide hydroxychloroquine trial,” “Barr says media on jihad against hydroxychloroquine,” and “Michigan Dem lawmaker describes how Trump’s boosting hydroxychloroquine saved my life.” The search did turn up one Fox outlier: “Hydroxychloroquine does not clear coronavirus, but can alleviate symptoms.”
During a two-week span between March 23 and April 6, Fox hosts and guests promoted hydroxychloroquine nearly 300 times. Of these nearly 300 mentions, the vast majority came from four Fox shows: The Ingraham Angle (84 promotional mentions), Fox & Friends (76), Hannity (53), and Tucker Carlson Tonight (22). Television personality Dr. Mehmet Oz has been one of the most persistent promoters of hydroxychloroquine on Fox... According to Media Matters’ internal database, Oz has made at least 23 appearances on Fox News weekday programming between March 12 and April 7 to discuss hydroxychloroquine. (Media Matters, April 18).
Fox allies like the New York Post also chimed in with stories like, “Those slamming Trump over chloroquine should remember AIDS medication wars” (April 12).
Meanwhile, the liberal media sharpened its claws and went after the president and his conservative media allies on hydroxychloroquine. CNN crowed, “President Trump is wrong in so many ways about hydroxychloroquine studies. Here are the facts” (April 11). The story asked, “Is hydroxychloroquine safe for coronavirus patients? Trump says yes. Doctors say the drug can have serious side effects. Trump makes it sound like hydroxychloroquine is harmless. ‘It doesn't kill you,’ he said at a briefing on April 1, one of just many times he's repeated that sentiment.” (April 10)
A similar Google news search on April 20 showed 106,000 hits for the search, “Trump wrong hydroxychloroquine.” Stories found under this search include sources like the Washington Post (“How false hope spread about hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid-19” and “The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine”), the New York Times (“Ignoring expert opinion, Trump again promotes use of hydroxychloroquine”), and The Guardian (“How an unproven drug, hydroxychloroquine, became Trump’s miracle cure”).
The partisan tussle about hydroxychloroquine reflects similar battles about the speed and efficacy of the administration’s Covid-19 response, the China travel ban, the availability of testing and personal protective equipment, and the advisability of opening up the economy quickly.
This partisan coverage of the pandemic has impacted audiences, according to polling done by both Pew Research and Gallup. Both pollsters show that Republicans were much less likely to take the risks of the coronavirus as seriously as Democrats.
The March Gallup poll “finds that Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to be worried about getting the virus; much less trusting in the federal government to deal with the situation; and more likely to believe that the virus will have a negative effect on the world's economy. Further, workers who identify or lean toward the Democratic Party are more likely to say the virus will have a negative impact on their work.” (Gallup.com, March 20)
The March Pew Research survey found that 83% of Republicans who “consumed only a diet of outlets with right-leaning audiences” believed the news media had exaggerated the risks of the virus. Only 53% of Democrats who consumed only outlets with left-leaning audiences thought the same. Pew found that 79% of people who said they turned to Fox News believed the media had “exaggerated the risks of the virus.” Only 59% of Republicans surveyed said the media has done "very well" or "somewhat well" in their coverage. In contrast, 80% of Democrats believed the media had covered the virus well. (Pew Research, March 18)
What the surveys don’t show is the influence the coverage has had on recent anti-shutdown protests around the country, and on the pressure often misinformed citizens exert on public officials to make factually dubious decisions.
Partisan coverage of the virus might deliver political advantages in the short run, but in no way serves society in the long term. Such reporting further polarizes the public, segregates us into tribes armed with misleading or incomplete information, and makes compromise on issues even like Covid-19 seemingly impossible.
Covid-19 should’ve afforded the U.S. an opportunity to unify, but instead, thanks in large part to partisan media and the politicians they represent, the pandemic instead is just one more symptom of the “us vs. them” disease that infects our society and leaves us swearing at the television.
Be honest: as you’ve been reading, viewing, and listening to Covid-19 coverage, have you thrown anything yet at the TV? Used language traditionally attributed to sailors?
While my TV is still intact, I can’t say that my language hasn’t occasionally transcended the merely colorful. My chief irritation, one that threatens my mom washing my mouth out with soap, is the predictable yet lamentable descent of the media into partisanship, even during this crisis.
Partisan Covid-19 coverage reflects not just a long term trend of political polarization in the US, but the reality that, in an election year, almost everything takes on a nasty partisan stench. Jack Healy, Campbell Robertson, and Sabrina Tavernise recently wrote in the New York Times, “(As) Mr. Trump and his allies have defended his actions and accused Democrats and the news media of fanning fears to ‘bring down the president,’ a growing public health crisis has turned into one more arena for bitter political battle, where facts are increasingly filtered through a partisan lens.” (March 1).
Essentially, what we see are media battle lines drawn by Trump’s own words and positions. If Trump comes out in favor of something, his media supporters line up behind him, seeking to buttress the president’s position while simultaneously attacking the liberal media for its unfounded attacks. Trump’s opponents are just as quick to point out the illogic in the positions taken by the president and his media allies.
One example is the battle over hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malaria drug repeatedly touted by Trump as a Covid-19 cure.
There are dozens of examples of Trump promoting hydroxychloroquine. According to Media Matters, a liberal media watchdog group, “Trump effectively turned the (April 4-6) coronavirus press briefings into infomercials for the merits of hydroxychloroquine. (April 6) At his briefing on April 4, Trump said, “What do you have to lose? Take it.” (New Republic, April 8) At an event April 14, Trump asked recovered Covid patients, “So you took the hydroxyl? And, “Why did you take the hydroxy? Why did you do that? You saw it on television?” (Politico, April 20) The Politico article goes on to note that Trump’s hydroxychloroquine mentions have dropped since his April 14 briefing.
Conservative media have been in lockstep with the president’s recommendation.
A simple Google news search of “hydroxychloroquine and foxnews.com” on April 20 picked up 2,680 results, with “headline-says-it-all” titles like “South Dakota implements statewide hydroxychloroquine trial,” “Barr says media on jihad against hydroxychloroquine,” and “Michigan Dem lawmaker describes how Trump’s boosting hydroxychloroquine saved my life.” The search did turn up one Fox outlier: “Hydroxychloroquine does not clear coronavirus, but can alleviate symptoms.”
During a two-week span between March 23 and April 6, Fox hosts and guests promoted hydroxychloroquine nearly 300 times. Of these nearly 300 mentions, the vast majority came from four Fox shows: The Ingraham Angle (84 promotional mentions), Fox & Friends (76), Hannity (53), and Tucker Carlson Tonight (22). Television personality Dr. Mehmet Oz has been one of the most persistent promoters of hydroxychloroquine on Fox... According to Media Matters’ internal database, Oz has made at least 23 appearances on Fox News weekday programming between March 12 and April 7 to discuss hydroxychloroquine. (Media Matters, April 18).
Fox allies like the New York Post also chimed in with stories like, “Those slamming Trump over chloroquine should remember AIDS medication wars” (April 12).
Meanwhile, the liberal media sharpened its claws and went after the president and his conservative media allies on hydroxychloroquine. CNN crowed, “President Trump is wrong in so many ways about hydroxychloroquine studies. Here are the facts” (April 11). The story asked, “Is hydroxychloroquine safe for coronavirus patients? Trump says yes. Doctors say the drug can have serious side effects. Trump makes it sound like hydroxychloroquine is harmless. ‘It doesn't kill you,’ he said at a briefing on April 1, one of just many times he's repeated that sentiment.” (April 10)
A similar Google news search on April 20 showed 106,000 hits for the search, “Trump wrong hydroxychloroquine.” Stories found under this search include sources like the Washington Post (“How false hope spread about hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid-19” and “The real reason Trump is obsessed with hydroxychloroquine”), the New York Times (“Ignoring expert opinion, Trump again promotes use of hydroxychloroquine”), and The Guardian (“How an unproven drug, hydroxychloroquine, became Trump’s miracle cure”).
The partisan tussle about hydroxychloroquine reflects similar battles about the speed and efficacy of the administration’s Covid-19 response, the China travel ban, the availability of testing and personal protective equipment, and the advisability of opening up the economy quickly.
This partisan coverage of the pandemic has impacted audiences, according to polling done by both Pew Research and Gallup. Both pollsters show that Republicans were much less likely to take the risks of the coronavirus as seriously as Democrats.
The March Gallup poll “finds that Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to be worried about getting the virus; much less trusting in the federal government to deal with the situation; and more likely to believe that the virus will have a negative effect on the world's economy. Further, workers who identify or lean toward the Democratic Party are more likely to say the virus will have a negative impact on their work.” (Gallup.com, March 20)
The March Pew Research survey found that 83% of Republicans who “consumed only a diet of outlets with right-leaning audiences” believed the news media had exaggerated the risks of the virus. Only 53% of Democrats who consumed only outlets with left-leaning audiences thought the same. Pew found that 79% of people who said they turned to Fox News believed the media had “exaggerated the risks of the virus.” Only 59% of Republicans surveyed said the media has done "very well" or "somewhat well" in their coverage. In contrast, 80% of Democrats believed the media had covered the virus well. (Pew Research, March 18)
What the surveys don’t show is the influence the coverage has had on recent anti-shutdown protests around the country, and on the pressure often misinformed citizens exert on public officials to make factually dubious decisions.
Partisan coverage of the virus might deliver political advantages in the short run, but in no way serves society in the long term. Such reporting further polarizes the public, segregates us into tribes armed with misleading or incomplete information, and makes compromise on issues even like Covid-19 seemingly impossible.
Covid-19 should’ve afforded the U.S. an opportunity to unify, but instead, thanks in large part to partisan media and the politicians they represent, the pandemic instead is just one more symptom of the “us vs. them” disease that infects our society and leaves us swearing at the television.
No comments:
Post a Comment