There’s a viral New York Times article flying around that accuses the Trump administration of meddling with the CDC in regard to opening up schools. . .
Trump and his White House have repeatedly put politics ahead of the health and safety of children, teachers, school staff, and their families.https://t.co/s5aEBK6OyD
— DNC War Room (@DNCWarRoom) September 29, 2020
. . .but what would you say if we told you this narrative and article was filled with complete BS? Here’s University of North Carolina professor Zeynep Tufekci with an absolutely brutal takedown of the Times.
“Meddling is illegitimate but can’t miss the science”:
The widely-shared NYT story Trump admin's meddling with the CDC has really worrying claims unsupported by the science. It should make multiple corrections. No, it is not "normal" or okay to lump everyone under 25 for COVID! Meddling is illegitimate but can't miss the science. pic.twitter.com/N9K06YopaV
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
In other words, the Trump administration was the one following the science:
An example where the a Trump White House came closer to the “science” than the CDC —> https://t.co/ivf8UpA76q
— Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) September 29, 2020
By the way, it’s not just us calling “brutal.” Here’s Politico’s Alex Thompson:
Brutal thread on this storyhttps://t.co/37TFQlnmXC https://t.co/2QVTxB44eU
— Alex Thompson (@AlxThomp) September 29, 2020
We have the rest of the thread below, but here’s more criticism of the NYT:
This is such an important thread by @zeynep. The article on Trump meddling (which ran on today's NYT front page) is utterly bewildering, exactly the sort of flawed but highly consequential coverage that I wrote about in this piece. https://t.co/f6UmBoBLGT https://t.co/NChXY3SXTH
— Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) September 29, 2020
The NYT is stone-cold busted:
Excellent thread here from @zeynep on dodgy reporting in @nytimes' CDC story. The Times says that asking for more granularity in Covid data involving children meant White House was "pressuring" CDC. Somehow it would have been more accurate to lump 5 yr olds with 25 yr olds? https://t.co/oDSiU2Mj62
— Jim Meigs (@jamesbmeigs) September 29, 2020
The rest of the thread here:
I think this paragraph got a small update (it was worse before iirc) but it is still wrong because, as corrected later, and explained by multiple scientists in the field, the South Korea study did not show that at all. It really should not be reported on like this. pic.twitter.com/knfieicwSV
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
Note: Twitchy readers already know the South Korea study was bogus:
Bombshell crumbling? Caution urged over NYT article on that South Korea study and schools reopening https://t.co/CwsowI00gK
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) July 20, 2020
Continuing, “The direct risk to children from is comparable or less to seasonal flu. It’s an important point to keep in mind”:
I do not take COVID lightly at all, and have been on the warning side since January but, well, yes. The direct risk to children from is comparable or less to seasonal flu. It's an important point to keep in mind. The direct risk to young kids is really that little. pic.twitter.com/JuBLlshTEJ
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
The whole article really is this bad:
And what is this sentence doing here? The first day of school has nothing to do with the school risks because nothing has happened by the first day? Who are these people? What are these buildings? Without explanation, this is just misleading and doesn't belong in this article. pic.twitter.com/9XZBalI83I
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
More:
Also neither of these are incorrect. School closure *are* a huge mental health risk to children. There really are few known cases of children being primary sources. We can and should be clear about the unknowns and risks but not deny the preponderance of what we do know. pic.twitter.com/eINSSeGtpw
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
This is how the age groups should be separated, by the way:
If the CDC was refusing to provide age breakdowns on COVID risks in a discussion about *K-12* school openings, pointlessly lumping in the 18-25 *ADULTS* in there and not separating out 1-5, 5-12 & 12-18, it would be CDC who was terribly in the wrong. This is baffling by the NYT. pic.twitter.com/S8AzFFrh6W
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
This is obviously news to the NYT:
This point from a leading researcher on COVID & children is very important. We can't lump 15 and 5 together, let alone everyone under 25. In my opinion, this admin's pandemic response has been catastrophic. But we can report this without being this wrong. https://t.co/vWrPKPuu05
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
Again, “meddling” is bad. But that’s not what happened here:
We can & we should oppose political meddling. But if a health agency was refusing to provide age breakdowns for *children* on a disease that is *incredibly* sensitive to age-gradations on a discussion about school openings… I find that hard to believe but that's on the agency.
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
Even their updates to the story aren’t good enough:
Yep, seems it got a small update, but nowhere enough. Political reporters should work with science reporters. Many people I respect shared this story without comment on how much it got wrong and I want to plead here. We need to keep respecting the science. https://t.co/jTuLJFk7aA
— zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) September 29, 2020
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member