Wednesday, April 29, 2020

“Fake news” can have multiple, tasty layers [Updated below]

Trump (public domain)
As I wrote in my last post, I’ve been reading and watching more news thanks to the shut-down, and I’ve come to appreciate Trump’s complaint that the media produces “fake news.”  A great example is Trump’s recent touting of Hydroxychloroquine as a possible treatment for the Chineese / Wuhan / Covid-19 Virus (“the Virus”).  After allegedly seeing one of the President’s press conferences, a guy in Arizona took cholorquine.   He died, and the media was all over it, giddily reporting that Trump was defying the medical experts, that he was dispensing medical advice, and that the man (an alleged Trump supporter) took Trump’s recommended drug and died.  One of my favorite headlines read as follows: “Arizona man dies after attempting to take Trump coronavirus cure.”  (You can find a montage of similar news headlines in this video clip.)  Now, this was obviously fake news from the get-go.  Here’s the top layer:

First, Trump wasn’t defying the medical experts. As I wrote in my last post, the drug was already FDA approved for other purposes, was being used by doctors around the world to treat the Virus, and there was even a published study demonstrating its effectiveness against the Virus. Second, Trump wasn’t dispensing medical advice. Hydroxychloroquine is a prescription drug and only doctors can prescribe it. And third, the Arizona man, Gary Lenius, did not take Hydroxychloroquine, a prescription drug. Rather, he reportedly drank a fish-tank cleaner that included chloroquine phosphate—something quite different—as an ingredient.  Add it all up, and the above headline is not only literally fake news, but it also shows the media’s desperation to smear Trump by any means possible, no matter how absurd.

But here’s the potential second layer of fake news: the underlying incident itself may not have even happened the way it was reported.  The story didn’t come from the man, of course, as he was dead.  Rather, the story came from his wife, Wanda Lenius, who allegedly took fish-tank cleaner with her husband but survived because she threw it up.  She attributed their ingestion of the substance to Trump’s alleged advice.  But as Alana Goodman of the Washington Free Beacon reports, some disputed that claim:

"What bothers me about this is that Gary was a very intelligent man, a retired [mechanical] engineer who designed systems for John Deere in Waterloo, Iowa, and I really can't see the scenario where Gary would say, ‘Yes, please, I would love to drink some of that Koi fish tank cleaner,’" one of his close friends told the Free Beacon. "It just doesn't make any sense."

And now, the police are skeptical as well, and the homicide division is actually investigating the case. But even aside from that, the media’s early version of the facts, which conveniently fit their anti-Trump “narrative,” is questionable in other respects as well. The evidence actually shows that the couple did not have the Virus and were not even fans of Trump, as some media outlets eagerly assumed. It turns out the woman was not only a Democrat, but a Democratic donor.  Again, the Free Beacon reports:

Campaign finance records show that Wanda Lenius has given thousands of dollars to Democratic groups and candidates over the past two years, most recently to the 314 Action Fund. The group bills itself as the "pro-science resistance" and has criticized the Trump administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic . . .

It could very well turn out that this was not a homicide.  I, for one, certainly presume the wife’s innocence and will continue to do so even if she’s arrested and even if the prosecutor’s office charges her.  But foul play is completely beside the point.  My point is that, even if nothing more develops in this case, this second layer of fake news is even more delicious than the first.  Trump’s complaints are, once again, on point:


Update, 5/2/2020:

The Media strikes back!  NBC recently wrote an article describing the Washington Free Beacon report, which I quoted from, above, as "inaccurate."  In sum, it appears NBC is saying there is no murder investigation.  (NBC does not challenge the woman's political or anti-Trump stance, nor does it challenge the oddity of her husband, a retired engineer, voluntarily drinking fish tank cleaner as a possible treatment for an illness he did not have.)

With regard to the status of the police investigation, in fairness to the Free Beacon its article did include everything the NBC article included, and it was published before NBC published its article.  (Compare the date and time of the Free Beacon "update" with NBC's article.)  It also appears that NBC might be wrong in its rebuke.  Read each newspaper's description of the state of the investigation, and then compare it to the written policy of the Mesa PD's Homicide Division, below.

NBC: "[The spokesman] said the department's homicide unit is involved because it 'investigates all reported deaths within the City of Mesa' — from deaths related to car accidents to the elderly in hospice." (Emphasis added.)

Free Beacon: "[T]he Mesa City Police Department told the Free Beacon that it is 'normal protocol' for the homicide department to investigate 'all death cases (other than obvious natural causes)' and that the death 'has not been ruled a homicide at this time.'"

It seems to me the Free Beacon description is closer to the truth.  Far from investigating "all deaths," including hospice deaths as NBC claims the police spokesman said, look at the homicide department's actual written policy.  I've emphasized the categories into which the man's death could possibly fit:

The Homicide Unit is part of the Criminal Investigations Division (CID) and is responsible for the investigation of the following incidents:
  • Homicide
  • Industrial Accidents involving death
  • Any natural or accidental death involving unusual circumstances
  • Shootings involving department members
  • Drowning
  • Child and Infant death
  • Any investigation deemed necessary by the Patrol Lieutenant and/or the Homicide Sergeant, with the concurrence of the Metro Lieutenant. 
So who is wrong:  NBC?  The police spokesman?  Or the homicide department's written policy?  My money would be on NBC or the spokesman being wrong.  It seems absurd and highly inefficient for a homicide division to investigate "all deaths," particularly those that occur in a "hospice" which is the place where people go to die of natural causes.
Where does this leave the wife?  Well, as NBC even wrote, "[t]he death of Gary Lenius has not been ruled a homicide at this time."  Or, in my words, the wife should be presumed innocent.  As far as NBC, I have some other problems with its article, but those will have to wait for another blog post.
[Hat Tip to Mo Hernandez of Arizona for sending me updates.]

No comments:

Post a Comment