The New American magazine has triggered another “fact-checker.”
USA Today recently “fact-checked” warnings about COVID-19 shots from an expert who literally wrote the book on the virus.
On April 16, TNA published a video interview that award-winning reporter Alex Newman conducted with world-renowned microbiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, who said some very concerning things, including that “COVID ‘vaccines’ are set to cause a global catastrophe and a decimation of the human population.”
USA Today’s “fact-checker” said his focus was on Bhakdi’s assertion that the “vaccine” is killing people, ultimately rating it false, despite acknowledging that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports vaccine-related deaths. How does USA Today land such intellectual acrobatics? Those reported vaccine-related deaths from doctors, nurses, patients, and parents are unverified and “may be” inaccurate, as per the CDC, USA Today obediently informs readers.
This sort of logic is common with “fact-checkers”: Frame the story with confidence and hope no one notices how inane it is to discredit something by discrediting the exact sources that would make it credible. If reports from doctors and nurses cannot be trusted, then whose can? USA Today’s? The exclusive doctors at the CDC who have little to no contact with actual patients?
If anyone deserves a listening ear on the topic, Bhakdi is among them. He is coauthor of the book Coronavirus, False Alarm? — currently the number one bestseller in virology on Amazon.com. He is a well-known medical and biological sciences expert. Bhakdi, according to his bio, was a post-doctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics in Freiburg, Germany. He served on the faculty of the Institute of Medical Microbiology at Giessen University and was later appointed associate professor there. In 1990 he was named chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz. In addition, Bhakdi has published over 300 articles in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, virology, and parasitology, for which he has received numerous awards and the Order of Merit of Rhineland-Palatinate.” Bhakdi’s opinion on matters related to the coronavirus pandemic are rooted in obvious relevant expertise and therefore are extremely newsworthy. TNA interviewed him because his opinions are incredibly important and newsworthy and of interest to a wide audience.
As for Bhakdi’s warnings, they are obviously alarming and any decent human being hopes they prove to be false. But TNA is not a medical or scientific journal — or a fortune teller. It is a news magazine. TNA journalists are not arbiters of ever-elusive scientific truth, especially in the case of a brand-new disease. When highly qualified experts such as Dr. Bhakdi make claims that could affect millions, if not billions, it’s newsworthy. Publishing Bhakdi’s statements is not advocation anymore than it would be were a USA Today newspaper to report on a violent incident. It is simply good news reporting.
The nuances of newsworthiness have been debated among those in the news reporting realm since the inception of the news reporting realm. However, it’s generally agreed by genuine editors and journalists interested in reporting balanced, relevant news stories that citing experts is generally a good rule of thumb.
However, when it comes to anything COVID-related, it seems those in the resonating echo chamber pool of major media journalists have decided the only experts worth citing are those who work for the government and who follow a very strict storyline, which are generally those who work for the government. The script is thus: (1) The virus is very deadly; (2) the virus, despite said unmerciful deadliness, can be thwarted and annihilated with cloth bandanas and tissue dust masks; and (3) A brand new “vaccine” for brand new virus is wholly and indisputably good and should never be questioned.
In USA Today’s “fact-checking” article, the author cited as his main authoritative source the CDC. The CDC most likely has credible experts among its ranks, but with how much the government has already gotten wrong regarding this virus — death toll projection, treatment options, the damage caused by “mitigation” measures — wouldn’t a dose of skepticism be in order?
Today’s major media journalists are, by all appearances, crusaders and propagandists, whether wittingly or unknowingly. Dissenting experts are ignored and when that fails, such as with Bhakdi, they’re discredited. Major media journalists’ current loyalty to everything the government says about all things COVID-19 can be justly described as propaganda. Fact-checkers are the damage control battalion of the propaganda department. They come in when someone breaks through to the masses to reinforce the approved storyline, and attack the brave soul who managed to say something we aren’t supposed to hear.
This is exactly how propaganda works: Parrot the party line, suppress dissent, and if that doesn’t work, discredit the source of dissent.
Today’s media determines “facts” where there is no expert consensus. Journalists aren’t phased by the fact that they’re not experts on viruses, vaccines, or even masks. They have the gall to anoint the experts who walk the story line and exile the ones who, through their expert reasoning, arrived at other conclusions.
The New American magazine adheres to the genuine spirit of journalism, publishing that which is newsworthy. The magazine opposes censorship in all forms and holds firm to the principles that form the foundation of the traditional American understanding of the importance of a free press, and we published the interview with Dr. Bhakdi in accordance with those principles.
