Coronavirus

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in World Politics

      Five Tools We Need to Fight Disinformation

      by

      According to the GLOBSEC Trends 2020 report, across Central and Eastern Europe, 34% believe that COVID-19 is a hoax designed to manipulate populations. With hundreds of deaths around the world occurring as a result of disinformation related to the coronavirus, the pandemic has demonstrated the critical importance of limiting the impact of disinformation on our societies.

      COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories Have Real-World Consequences

      READ MORE

      Only an approach that encompasses all of society can truly improve resilience to disinformation. It needs to consist of five elements, none of which can be neglected if we want to create a healthier information environment. These are: legal instruments on European or national level, disinformation demonetization, responsible digital citizenship, quality journalism and strategic communication. All these elements require cooperation from public officials and state institutions, the research community, civil society actors as well as citizens.

      Basic Rules

      EU member states need to actively contribute to the swift implementation of the proposed Digital Services Act and the European Democracy Action Plan that will establish much-needed boundaries for digital space. Non-members can work to adopt legislation modeled on the European code and collaborate with the EU to set basic rules in line with the principle that what is illegal offline is illegal online. For example, if Holocaust denial is illegal in countries such as Austria or Slovakia, such content should not be acceptable on digital platforms that either have community standards that are not in line with legislation in which these platforms operate or because of a failure to uphold those standards.

      Furthermore, regulation needs to foster transparency and accountability in areas such as content ranking and moderation. These instruments, if implemented properly with all key stakeholders such as digital platforms, the research community, civil society and technology specialists on board, could significantly limit the reach of harmful content.

      Defunding Disinformation

      According to the Global Disinformation Index, the estimated yearly profit generated by disinformation websites come to $235 million, propelling disinformation actors to incredible influence. Legal instruments can help disrupt the economy of disinformation by ensuring that ad agencies will not be able to place ads on sites spreading fake news, hate speech and conspiracy theories. Google already announced that it will defund ads on webpages promoting COVID-19 conspiracy theories. However, implementation of this policy is questionable due to a lack of transparency measures and standardized monitoring. Similarly, social media platforms should not be allowed to place ads next to hate speech and disinformation.

      In this effort, civil society organizations have been paving the way, with projects such as Slovakia’s konspiratori.sk, Czech nelez.cz or, in the US, the Anti-Defamation League’s Stop Hate for Profit. They are based on raising awareness of disinformation outlets while inviting companies to opt out of placing ads on such channels. Freedom of speech does not mean the right to profit from disinformation. Demonetizing disinformation would lead to an immediate improvement in the quality of the information environment as it would limit the reach of disinformation by removing economic incentives that drive it.

      Responsible Digital Citizenship

      Many citizens have been caught unprepared for the radical changes to information consumption and production in the wake of the information revolution. Without the necessary education and skills, users often share content without checking their sources, unaware of the fact that they are unwittingly helping to spread hate and false information. We all need to accept the fact that responsible citizenship extends to online sphere as well.

      It is crucial to include the concept of responsible digital citizenship for all age groups in teaching curricula starting from elementary schools. Similar training could be implemented in employment onboarding schemes. It should cover all aspects of digital footprints such as personal data protection, norms of online conduct and the consequences of sharing malign information among our communities.

      Quality Journalism

      Another factor in the disinformation equation is that quality journalism has suffered globally in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and with the rise of social media. Independent journalism needs to be systematically supported, possibly by taxing tech giants and using a portion of that money to fund media resources. As one of the cornerstones of functioning democracies, the demise of local outlets is highly worrying. Support for local news and the protection of investigative journalists from threats and attacks would work as a strong antidote to the increasing dissemination of toxic content.

      Strategic Communication

      Often, state administrations and European institutions suffer from an inability to communicate their messages in an accessible and engaging way. It is of the utmost importance that all state institutions, from regional to federal, proactively communicate their activities and benefits to citizens because in the absence of such communication, an information void is created that can be easily abused by malign actors.

      Strategic communication is the go-to tool when striving to build trust with constituencies. Such trust will also likely be the determining factor in the relative success of overcoming the pandemic, as people’s willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19 correlates with trust in public institutions.

      Regulation and demonetizing disinformation are reactive steps that address a social wound that has been left untreated for too long. But proactive measures of fostering responsible digital citizenship, supporting quality journalism and conducting efficient strategic messaging will help increase democratic’ resilience to influence operations. Even partial progress in each of these five domains would lead to massive improvements in the quality of our shared information environment.  

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump reverses plan to give White House officials Covid vaccine

      by

      The US recorded another 1,389 deaths from Covid-19 on Sunday, pushing the toll closer to 300,000 as hospitalisations continued to hit new heights. There was a ray of hope on Monday morning, however, as the first vaccinations were carried out using the Food and Drug Administration-approved Pfizer vaccine.
      “I feel hopeful today. Relieved,” said critical case nurse Sandra Lindsay after getting a shot at Long Island Jewish Medical Center in New York.
      Watching via video, New York governor Andrew Cuomo said: “This is the light at the end of the tunnel. But it’s a long tunnel.”
      From Washington, Donald Trump tweeted: “First Vaccine Administered. Congratulations USA! Congratulations WORLD!”
      Earlier, responding to a New York Times report that senior administration staffers would be among those vaccinated first, Trump rowed back, tweeting: “People working in the White House should receive the vaccine somewhat later in the programme, unless specifically necessary. I have asked that this adjustment be made.”
      According to Johns Hopkins University, the US death toll stood at 298,949 out of a caseload of 16,242,953, itself up by 190,920 on Sunday. Deaths were down from a daily peak of more than 3,000 last week but according to the Covid Tracking Project 109,331 people were hospitalised, a record. A record 21,231 people were in intensive care.
      States across the US are under increasing strain, healthcare systems creaking and economies, already battered, close to damaging collapse.
      In California, where large parts of the state are under lockdown until after Christmas, Alan Auerbach, director of the Burch Center for Tax Policy and Public Finance at the University of California, Berkeley, told the Guardian an eventual recovery could look more like a “K” than a “V”, as high earners thrive and the most vulnerable plunge.
      “We have lacked a coherent national strategy for dealing with the pandemic and 2021 is probably going to be a pretty tough year for California,” he said.
      In Washington, a bipartisan group of senators was due to unveil a $908bn stimulus package, though it was reported to have little chance of success. Agreement between House speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell remains elusive.
      Though the vaccination effort just beginning will be the biggest public health push in US history, it will take some time for the vaccine to reach most of the population. On Monday, health secretary Alex Azar told NBC the vaccine will be available to the broader public “by late February going into March”. By that time, he said, vaccine distribution will be “like a flu vaccination campaign” at local pharmacies.
      That timeline is ambitious, especially in light of news that the administration did not expand its order for the Pfizer vaccination, sparking concerns there will be a shortage after initial doses. Vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna, which is expected to be approved by the FDA for emergency use this week, require two doses.
      According to the Times, the Trump administration is “rushing to roll out a $250m public education campaign to encourage Americans to take the coronavirus vaccine”. Former presidents Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and George W Bush are among famous names who have said they are willing to be vaccinated in public and an ABC News poll released on Monday said 80% of respondents said they would take the vaccine.
      Speaking to Fox News Sunday, however, Dr Moncef Slaoui, chief science adviser to the federal effort to speed vaccine development, said he was “very concerned” about skepticism about the vaccine in some circles.
      “Unfortunately … there’s been a confusion between how thorough and scientific and factual the work that has been done is, and the perception that people are thinking that we cut corners,” Slaoui said. “I can guarantee you that no such things have happened, that we follow the science.”
      Graph
      Trump, who recovered from Covid-19 in October, said he would not initially be taking the shot and was reversing an administration directive to vaccinate top officials while public distribution is limited to frontline health workers and people in nursing homes and long-term care.
      Trump made the announcement hours after his administration confirmed that senior officials, including some aides who work in close proximity to Trump and Mike Pence, would be offered vaccines as soon as this week.
      “I am not scheduled to take the vaccine,” Trump tweeted, “but look forward to doing so at the appropriate time.”
      It was not immediately clear what effect Trump’s tweet would have on efforts to protect top leadership, two people briefed on the matter told the Associated Press.
      News that White House staff would receive the vaccine early drew criticism on social media. Trump and his aides have flouted Covid-19 guidelines issued by his own administration, including hosting large holiday parties with maskless attendees this month.
      Officials said earlier on Sunday doses of the Pfizer vaccine would be made available to those who work in close quarters with the nation’s leaders, to prevent Covid-19 spreading in the White House and other critical facilities. The move would be consistent with the rollout of rapid testing machines, which were reserved to protect the White House and other facilities.
      According to guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there is not yet enough information to determine whether those who have had Covid-19 should also get the vaccine.
      Pence has not come down with the virus, and his aides have been discussing when and how he should receive the shot. Aides to the president-elect, Joe Biden, have been discussing how he should receive the vaccine and working to establish plans to boost virus safeguards in the West Wing. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      FDA chief reportedly urged by White House to approve Pfizer vaccine or quit

      by

      The White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, has reportedly told the head of the US Food and Drug Administration to authorize Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine on Friday or prepare to resign.Meadows leaned on Hahn during a phone conversation on Friday, according to the Washington Post. It came after Donald Trump tweeted that the FDA was “a big, old, slow turtle”, and told FDA commissioner Stephen Hahn to “get the dam vaccines out NOW”.The warning from Meadows led the FDA to speed up its timetable for potential emergency approval of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from Saturday morning to later on Friday, according to the Post. The vaccine would be the first to roll out across the US, after also being approved in the UK and Canada.An unnamed official told Reuters that Meadows’ comment about resigning “wasn’t a red line” but was more of a quip with the intention of urging “the FDA to act quickly and get the job done and stop the delays”.The White House declined to comment, although an administration official said Meadows does request regular updates on the progress toward a vaccine.“This is an untrue representation of the phone call with the chief of staff,” Hahn said in a statement. “The FDA was encouraged to continue working expeditiously on Pfizer-BioNTech’s EUA request. FDA is committed to issuing this authorization quickly, as we noted in our statement this morning.”Earlier in the day, the health secretary, Alex Azar, said the FDA was “very close” to granting emergency use authorization for the vaccine and that vaccination of the first Americans outside clinical trials could begin on Monday.“I’ve got some good news for you here,” Azar told ABC’s Good Morning America on Friday. “Just a little bit ago the FDA informed Pfizer that they do intend to proceed towards an authorization for their vaccine.“We will work with Pfizer and get that shipped out so we could be seeing people getting vaccinated Monday, Tuesday of next week.”The step followed a vote on Thursday by an outside panel of experts convened by the FDA to recommend authorization of the vaccine. The recommendation signaled that the first approval of a Covid-19 vaccine for use in the US was imminent.That would mark a major milestone in a pandemic that has killed more than 285,000 Americans and 1.5 million people globally. The US would become the third country in the world to have authorized the use of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in the broader public behind the UK and Canada, and it will be the most populous country to do so.A similar advisory panel will review a second vaccine, developed by Moderna with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, on 17 December.The United States recorded more than 224,000 confirmed cases on Thursday and 2,768 deaths, slightly down from a record high 3,124 deaths a day earlier, according to the coronavirus resource center at Johns Hopkins University.“If we have a smooth vaccination program where everybody steps to the plate quickly, we could get back to some form of normality, reasonably quickly,” Dr Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told CNN. “Into the summer, and certainly into the fall.”But that was a distant promise for many communities with overtaxed healthcare systems struggling to handle the surge of patients. At least 200 US hospitals were at full capacity last week and in one-third of all hospitals, more than 90% of all ICU beds were occupied, according to a CNN review of weekly data released by the health department.A top coronavirus adviser to President-elect Joe Biden warned that Americans should plan “no Christmas parties”, with weeks of continued pressure on healthcare systems anticipated ahead.“The next three to six weeks at minimum … are our Covid weeks,” Dr Michael Osterholm, the director of the center for infectious disease research and policy in Minnesota and a member of Biden’s coronavirus advisory board, told CNN. “It won’t end after that, but that is the period right now where we could have a surge upon a surge upon a surge.”The US Congress failed again on Thursday to strike a deal on a new package for coronavirus relief, after the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, torpedoed $160bn in state and local funds from what had been an emerging $900bn deal.The Senate adjourned until next week when legislators were expected to resume their efforts.The United Kingdom began administering the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine earlier this week. Azar said that the FDA had reviewed a recommendation by UK health officials that people with a medical history of serious allergic reactions should avoid the vaccine, after two healthcare workers who suffer from severe allergies and carry epipens had allergic reactions to the vaccine, and had to be treated. They have since recovered.“There was really good discussion at the advisory committee yesterday, especially around these issues of the allergic reactions that we saw in the United Kingdom,” Azar said.As a last step before issuing the authorization, the regulator needs to finalize guidance for doctors about prescribing the vaccine and advising patients.“It’s very close, it’s really just the last dotting of Is and crossing of Ts,” Azar said.Azar said earlier this week that he had been in contact with members of the Joe Biden transition team to ensure a smooth rollout of the vaccines. Both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines require two does for maximum efficacy. Hundreds of millions of Americans could be vaccinated over the next year.Jessica Glenza contributed to this report More

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in World Politics

      Live Free or Die: America vs. Science

      by

      A few days ago, the testimony of a nurse from South Dakota made international headlines. In a tweet, Jodi Doering recounted the harrowing experience of having to deal with patients dying from COVID-19 complications while denying that the virus is real: “The ones who scream at you for a magic medicine and that Joe Biden is (g)oing to ruin the USA. All while gasping for breath on 100% Vapotherm. They tell you there must be another reason they are sick. They call you names and ask why you have to wear all that ‘stuff’ because they don’t have COViD because it’s not real.”

      Donald Trump’s Treason Against the American People

      READ MORE

      By now, North and South Dakotas have earned the distinction of being among the states hit hardest by the second wave of the pandemic — and least prepared for its impact. As in so many of America’s red states dominated by the Republican Party, the good citizens of the Dakotas largely ignored reality, and this is putting it graciously. As a recent article in The New York Times put it, “Deep into the coronavirus pandemic, when there was no doubt about the damage that Covid-19 could do, the Dakotas scaled their morbid heights, propelled by denial and defiance.” Public officials did their part reinforcing the illusion, adamantly refusing to mandate basic safety measures, such as the wearing of masks and keeping social distancing rules.

      Live Free or Die

      “Live Free or Die” — ironically enough, the motto of the blue state of New Hampshire in New England — assumed an entirely new meaning in the Dakotas. At the end of November, the Bismarck Tribune reported that a quarter of North Dakotans had known somebody who had died of COVID-19. At the start of this month, just three weeks after reporting the highest mortality rate in the world, North Dakota hit a new record: One in 800 residents here has died of COVID-19.

      In South Dakota, where the governor refused to mandate safety measures, things were equally bad. Intensive care units in small towns were quickly getting overwhelmed as the pandemic ravaged the very fabric of civil society, which observers such as Alex de Tocqueville have considered essential to the health of American democracy. And yet,  as Annie Gowan writes in The Washington Post, “anti-maskers” have continued to agitate, “alleging that masks don’t work and that the measure was an overreach that would violate their civil rights.” Given the fact that wearing a mask is above all a means to protect others against infection, this is a rather specious argument.

      Embed from Getty Images

      There has been widespread resistance to following the most basic safety precautions. Clinging on to a false sense of liberty is one reason, but arguably not the most important one. Instead, what infuses the refusal to take COVID-19 seriously among a substantial part of the American public is a profound suspicion toward health care experts, the scientific community and science-based evidence in general.

      This is part of a larger populist syndrome, which has suffused significant parts of the United States over the past several years and which was instrumental in propelling Donald Trump into the White House four years ago. Populism represents above all a revolt against the established elite — economic, political, social, cultural — in the name of ordinary citizens and their allegedly superior “common sense.”  Populists promote the virtue of personal experience and observation — Trump famously asked how global warming could be real if it was so cold outside — and the rule of thumb.

      Add to that the impact of right-wing influencers and opinion leaders like Rush Limbaugh, who in early spring claimed that COVID-19 was nothing more than the flu and who has insisted that masks are a symbol of fear and therefore “un-American.” No wonder that in the land of the free, that vast landmass between the two coasts, disparaged by the “coastal elites” as “flyover country,” they rather believe in the wisdom of Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the Great Man himself than the “disaster” Anthony Fauci and his “idiots” in the scientific community.

      As a result, according to a recent Pew survey, in the United States, public opinion about COVID-19 has been far more divided than in comparable advanced liberal democracies. In October, more than 80% of Biden supporters said that COVID-19 was “very important” for their vote; among Trump supporters, less than a quarter. At the same time, there was a large partisan divide on trust in scientists. In September, more than two-thirds of liberal Democrats expressed trust in scientists; among conservative Republicans, less than 20%.

      Under the circumstances, the health care catastrophe that has invested the Dakotas and other parts of the American Midwest should come as no surprise. It is part of the disastrous legacy four years of President Trump have left, a legacy that has poisoned the political climate to an extent never before seen in the United States.

      Human, All Too Human

      Over the past several months, COVID-19 — what it is, what it means and how to respond to it —has become part of the polarization that has consumed American politics way before the onset of the pandemic. Polarization means that almost everything political is defined in partisan terms. Extended to its most extreme, it means that the other side is no longer seen as legitimate, but as the enemy that needs to be destroyed since it poses a fundamental threat to the common good.

      This, of course, is the fundamental dictum of Carl Schmitt, the brilliant 19th-century German legal and political theorist whose posthumous influence has significantly grown over the past few decades, both on the left and on the right. Schmitt was a great supporter of the Nazis, infamous for his defense of Hitler’s order in 1934 to eliminate his adversaries (the Röhm Purge) in an article with the cynical title, “The Führer Protects the Law.” Central to Schmitt’s thinking was the notion that democracy meant both to treat equals as equals and to treat not-equals as not-equals. For Schmitt, democracy required homogeneity as well as the exclusion, even “destruction of the heterogeneous.” No wonder Carl Schmitt has found enthusiastic acolytes among China’s patriotic intelligentsia.

      It is within this context that the dismissal of the threat posed by COVID-19 as, at best, negligible and, at worst, as a hoax designed to undermine the Trump administration becomes understandable.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Throughout his presidency, Donald Trump has been obsessed with China. Trump’s pet project of making America great again only makes sense in the face of the challenge that the fulminant rise of China has posed to America’s claim to be the greatest country in the world. The way the slogan is phrased already reveals its weakness. Making America great “again” implies a recognition that it no longer is. There are numerous reasons why this might be the case. Most of them — such as decrepit infrastructure or the opioid crisis — have nothing to do with China.

      But, as Friedrich Nietzsche once put it, it is human, all too human to blame others for one’s own shortcomings. This might explain why Trump has insisted on referring to COVID-19 as the “China virus,” most recently in a tweet acknowledging that Rudy Giuliani, his personal lawyer who had “been working tirelessly exposing the most corrupt election (by far!) in the history of the USA” had been tested positive for the “China Virus.” Giuliani has done no such thing, i.e., exposing massive election fraud. Giuliani once was a respectable politician, arguably one of the best mayors New York City has ever had. By now, he is reminiscent of Wormtail, Voldemort’s pathetic factotum.

      Trump’s obsession with China not only explains his nonchalance toward COVID-19 but also his take on climate change and global warming. It deserves remembering that at one time, Trump was adamant about his concern regarding the climate. In 2009, Trump, together with his three oldest children, signed an open letter to the Obama administration that stated, “If we fail to act now, it is scientifically irrefutable that there will be catastrophic and irreversible consequences for humanity and our planet.” Among other things, the letter called for “U.S. climate legislation, investment in the clean energy economy, and leadership to inspire the rest of the world to join the fight against climate change.”

      I Don’t Believe It

      A couple of years later, all was forgotten. By 2012, the focus was on China’s rapid ascent. In this context, global warming assumed a new meaning in Trump’s narrative. As he put it in a tweet at the time, the “concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” Three years later, he referred to climate change as a hoax, and, once in office, he dismissed the warnings of his own government’s scientists with a simple “I don’t believe it.”

      Trump’s denial of climate change had a significant impact among his support base. In 2018, more than two-thirds of Republicans considered concerns about global warming to be exaggerated; among Democrats, less than 5% thought so. Around a third of Republicans thought global warming was caused by human activities; among Democrats, some 90%. And when asked whether they thought global warming would pose a serious threat in their lifetime, a mere 18% of Republicans voiced concern among Democrats, about two-thirds.

      A month before the November election, an article in Nature sounded the alarm bell. As the election approached, the author warned, “Trump’s actions in the face of COVID-19 are just one example of the damage he has inflicted on science and its institutions over the past four years, with repercussions for lives and livelihoods.” In the process, his administration, across many federal agencies, had “undermined scientific integrity by suppressing or distorting evidence to support political decisions.”

      In November, Trump spectacularly lost his bid for a second term. At the end of January, Joe Biden will be inaugurated as the new president. There is great hope that this will be the beginning of a “new dawn for America.” Don’t bet on it. Trump’s legacy is likely to linger on, some of the harm his administration has caused potentially exerting its impact for years to come. One of the most deleterious legacies is that by now, belief in science — at least with respect to certain issues — has become overridden by partisanship.

      Climate change is a prominent example, so is COVID-19, and so is likely to be the question of vaccination as anti-coronavirus jabs become available over the next few months. In late November, among Democrats, 75% said they would get vaccinated; among Republicans, only half. Under the circumstances, it is probably prudent to be wary.

      *[Fair Observer is a media partner of the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Looking back at 2020: a year like no other – podcast

      by

      A look back at how the Guardian covered a year that began with the outbreak of a pandemic, witnessed global anti-racism protests after the killing of George Floyd, and ended with the voting out of President Donald Trump

      How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know

      As we entered a new decade back in January, newspapers were full of stories about Australian bushfires, tensions between the US and Iran, and the British Conservatives were revelling in their 80-seat majority. But the World Health Organization was already dealing with news of a ‘novel coronavirus’ in Wuhan, China, a disease that was going to dramatically change the way we lived our lives. Covid-19 swept through Asia and into Europe and beyond, killing almost 2 million people and bringing the world’s economies to their knees. The Guardian’s editor-in-chief, Katharine Viner, joins Anushka Asthana to look back on a year in which reporters covered some huge breaking stories, including the killing of George Floyd and the global anti-racism movement Black Lives Matter. There was the US election in which the American people voted to remove Donald Trump. And there was the biggest story of all: the continuing climate crisis which, despite a pandemic-induced reduction in travel, only resulted in a 7% drop in global emissions. And all the while Britain hurtled inexorably towards an end-of-year Brexit. More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US records over 3,000 Covid deaths in a day for first time – live updates

      by

      Key events

      Show

      4.43pm EST16:43
      Texas attorney general files 11th-hour election lawsuit against four states to the supreme court

      3.15pm EST15:15
      Biden says ‘Defund the Police’ gave momentum to GOP to ‘beat the living hell out of us’ in election

      1.09pm EST13:09
      Afternoon summary

      10.34am EST10:34
      Biden team announces Domestic Policy Council director and secretary of veteran affairs

      8.36am EST08:36
      853,000 Americans applied for jobless insurance last week

      7.52am EST07:52
      FDA chief on vaccine meeting: ‘An important day for all of America’

      7.41am EST07:41
      DoJ files lawsuit against Alabama over conditions in the state prisons

      Live feed

      Show

      4.43pm EST16:43

      Texas attorney general files 11th-hour election lawsuit against four states to the supreme court

      The supreme court today is deliberating a lawsuit filed by Texas attorney general Ken Paxton against four battleground states – Wisconsin, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Michigan – in an attempt to have million of votes tossed out on claims that the states did not seriously investigate voter fraud, though there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the election.
      Donald Trump and 17 Republican-led states backed the lawsuit, which is a clear 11th-hour attempt at trying to overturn the election in Trump’s favor, though all 50 states have certified their election results. The Trump campaign and local Republican parties have been instigating lawsuits in attempts to change the election since the results were announced over a month ago, but the vast majority have died in court.
      Though Trump has suggested he hopes the three conservative judges he appointed to the court will side with him in an election dispute, the supreme court has so far shown no interest in intervening with the results of the election. The court quickly denied its first chance to give a win to the Trump campaign after it rejected a request from Pennsylvania Republicans to block the state’s certification of votes.
      The four states targeted by the lawsuit have already responded to the filing. The court may wait for Texas’ response to those or it could make a ruling before the state gets a chance to file such a response.
      While the GOP has already run out of time to fight the election, next week will be the last official step to Joe Biden becoming the next president as the electoral college is scheduled to meet 14 December to finalize the results of the election.

      Updated
      at 4.49pm EST

      4.21pm EST16:21

      Jessica Glenza

      Let’s go through some of the details of the vaccine being considered by the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) vaccine advisory committee.
      The FDA advisory panel is considering whether to recommend the vaccine for emergency use authorization, often called EUA. That would allow the vaccine to be distributed to the public, but is a lower bar than full approval and only valid during the public health emergency – in this case the Covid-19 pandemic.
      Supplies will be very limited at first. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has already recommended the first people to receive the vaccine – health workers and long-term care residents.
      The vaccine appears highly effective. According to data published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Thursday, the vaccine appears to be 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 a trial of more than 43,000 people. The study looked at a two-shot regimen.
      The vaccine is a messenger RNA vaccine, which provokes immunity by introducing the immune system to the spike protein on the coronavirus.
      The trial was a randomized, placebo-controlled observer-blinded trial that split participants evenly between people who received two shots of a placebo, and two shots of the vaccine – currently called “BNT162b2”.
      The study looked specifically at people 16 years and older. In future studies, Pfizer intends to look at vaccine safety and efficacy in children as young as 12.
      Side effects included headache, fatigue and fever, which resolved within a couple days. The government intends to use several surveillance programs to collect information on side effects, called “adverse events”, for years after the vaccine is distributed. It will also begin a surveillance study on healthcare workers specifically.
      The FDA recommended continued surveillance for Bell’s palsy, or facial paralysis. There is no current evidence that the vaccine causes facial paralysis, but four cases among vaccine recipients in the trial.
      The FDA found only one possible serious adverse effect related to the vaccine, which was a shoulder injury. Other serious adverse events, such as a case of appendicitis, were found not to be unrelated to the vaccine.
      Trial participants were followed for a median of two months after they received either the vaccine or a placebo. Most adverse vaccine reactions take place within six weeks.
      Scientists are still studying how long immunity lasts, a concept known as “durability”, and the rate of asymptomatic disease in people who receive the vaccine.
      There is very little data on safety and efficacy in pregnant and lactating women, but there is also no evidence it is harmful to pregnant women or the fetus. For that reason, FDA officials suggest pregnant women should discuss the vaccine with their healthcare provider, when it becomes available to them.
      The panel is expected to recommend an emergency use authorization, and the FDA is expected to grant emergency use rights. The New England Journal of Medicine, which published Pfizer’s results today, called the new vaccine a “triumph” of science.

      Updated
      at 4.36pm EST

      4.00pm EST16:00

      Joan E Greve

      More than 100 female leaders in the Native American community and entertainment industry have signed on to a letter calling on Joe Biden to nominate congresswoman Deb Haaland as interior secretary.
      “As women who have worked to protect our democracy and advance the promise of this country, we are hopeful and relieved that you will be leading us into a bright future,” the letter says.
      “It is in this spirit that we, Native American women and Indigenous peoples’ allies, write to urge you to appoint Congresswoman Deb Haaland as Secretary of the Department of the Interior.”
      Among those who have signed on to the letter are singer Cher, actress Kerry Washington and feminist activist Gloria Steinam.
      If nominated and confirmed, Haaland, a progressive congresswoman from New Mexico, would be the first Native American to lead the interior department.
      “We believe it is critical at this time for the first Native American to serve in the President’s Cabinet, so we can begin to shift the focus back to caring for future generations and returning to a value system that honors Mother Earth,” the letter says. “We believe that person is Congresswoman Deb Haaland.”
      Progressive groups have pushed for Haaland’s nomination, but some Democratic leaders have expressed hesitation about pulling another House member into Biden’s cabinet, given the party’s very narrow margin in the chamber after last month’s elections.

      3.37pm EST15:37

      The New Hampshire House Speaker, Dick Hinch, who was sworn into his role just last week, died yesterday from Covid-19.
      News of Hinch’s death yesterday was unexpected. A statement announcing his death did not include a cause of death, but said that Hinch, who was 71, was “a loving husband, father, family man, and veteran who devoted his life to public service”. Hinch’s office said his death was an “unexpected tragedy”.
      A medical examiner today announced that Hinch had died from Covid-19.
      In response, the state’s acting Speaker Sherman Packard and Senate President Chuck Morse said they are “committed to protecting the health and safety of our fellow legislators and staff members who work at the statehouse in Concord”. Their statement said they will be working with the state’s health department to see if there are any additional Covid-19 protocols that can be put in place “to ensure the continued protection of our legislators and staff”. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in World Politics

      Amidst the Pandemic, Central and Eastern Europe Witnesses an Erosion of Democracy

      by

      Nearly a year since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, its effects on people’s lives, countries’ economies and health care around the world are becoming clearer. In some Central and Eastern European countries, however, this pandemic has had repercussions in another crucial area: democracy. This begs the question of whether the COVID-19 pandemic is emboldening the rise of illiberal politics in certain parts of the region. Indeed, the US-based Freedom House concluded earlier this year that Hungary and Serbia are no longer democracies but are “in a ‘grey zone’ between democracies and pure autocracies.”

      One democratic process affected by the COVID-19 pandemic around the world was elections. Indeed, according to the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, elections have been canceled or postponed in at least 67 nations around the globe. Central and Eastern Europe was no exception. Serbia’s parliamentary election, originally set for April 26, was postponed by two months even though it was boycotted by much of the opposition due to the steady decline of democracy and media freedom in the country, resulting in a turnout of less than 50%.

      The controversial election secured another term for President Aleksandar Vucic with over 60% of the vote, granting his Serbian Progressive Party 190 seats in the country’s 250-seat parliament. As a result of the election and in-person voting, while the rest of Europe is now in its second wave of the pandemic, Serbia is now in its third.

      Europe’s Far Right Fails to Capitalize on COVID-19

      READ MORE

      Leading up to the elections in Poland, the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party proposed a change to the constitution to postpone the election for two years due to the pandemic, automatically extending President Andrzej Duda’s term in office. In the end, elections were held in June and July, with Duda narrowly beating the opposition Civic Platform’s candidate.

      Beyond elections, the pandemic has been used to mask legal and constitutional changes in the region. In Hungary, Viktor Orban’s government first passed the Authorization Act during the first wave of the pandemic, effectively giving the prime minister the power to rule by decree. The government’s first action was to pass a law mandating that transgender people only be recognized by their sex at birth. The government also announced that disseminating “fake news” about the pandemic or the government’s response to it was a crime punishable by up to five years in prison.

      As a result, although no one has yet been charged under the new laws, several people were arrested and detained after criticizing the government on social media, which some commentators likened to being picked up by the notorious black cars driven by the secret police during the communist era.

      In November, as the country entered its second wave of the pandemic, the Orban government announced the Second Authorization Act for a period of 90 days. The following day, proposed amendments to the constitution were announced that would make it mandatory for children to be raised amid “Christian cultural values,” defining the mother as female and the father as male, as well as prohibiting changing gender after birth. These amendments bar same-sex couples from adopting, but single parents can request an exemption through special ministerial permission.

      Additionally, one minute before midnight on the day before new curfew measures went into effect, the government proposed a change to the election law, making it impossible for coalitions to contest elections, effectively wiping out the opposition.

      Embed from Getty Images

      At the same time that Hungary adopted its first Authorization Act, Poland adopted the Act on Special Solutions Related to the Prevention, Counteracting and Combating of COVID-19, which was ultimately used by the Polish government and PiS to limit social dialogue. A few weeks later, the “Stop Abortion” bill was enacted by the Polish parliament. Already among the strictest abortion laws in Europe, the high court’s October ruling that it was unconstitutional to abort a fetus with congenital defects effectively baned all abortions, bar in the case of incest, rape or a danger to the mother’s health.

      This new ruling was met with mass protests around the country, even spreading to church services in the devoutly Catholic Poland and seeing as many as 100,000 people on the streets of the capital Warsaw. This attack on women’s health was also met by a push to leave the European treaty on violence against women, known as the Istanbul Convention, citing that it is “harmful” for children to be taught about gender in schools. Hungary refused to ratify the treaty in May, stating that it promotes “destructive gender ideologies” and “illegal migration.”

      It is likely that what the world is seeing in these countries is what Ozan Varol calls “stealth authoritarianism” that “serves as a way to protect and entrench power when direct repression is not a viable option,” with the ultimate goal of creating a one-party state. The pandemic seems to be helping authoritarian leaders to secure their grip on power. In Serbia, Vucic gained popularity during the first wave and, even after criticism from the opposition and supporters alike, Orban maintained his popularity in Hungary, as shown in a recent Závecz Research poll.

      Findings from interviews carried out as part of a project, Illiberal Turn, funded by the Economic & Social Research Council, suggest that while people were predominantly supportive of democracy in the months before the pandemic, some of those interviewed in Hungary, Poland and Serbia during the first wave in the spring seemed to have a change of heart, expressing more sympathies toward authoritarian forms of government. This trend is worrying, as it shows the potential effects that crisis can have on democratic values. These abuses of power in Central and Eastern Europe cannot be ignored. It is crucial to pay attention to how these times of crisis can further exacerbate the already existing illiberal tendencies across the region.

      *[Fair Observer is a media partner of the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More