March 22 // March 2
AKA: Another day of How could he? outrage
March 2: This was the day of the German vaccine company story; or as social media likes to think of it: yet another excellent reason to call into question the ethics of our President. CureVac's then-CEO Daniel Menichella attended a meeting at the White House to discuss coronavirus vaccine development with Trump and members of his coronavirus taskforce.
What wasn’t made clear in the coverage (and outrage) we read about this story is that the White House meeting also included the leadership of at least ten pharmaceutical companies, among them executives from Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, Regeneron and Pfizer, all trying to share information and devise a strategy for next steps. So this wasn't a closed door conference between Donald and Danny.
March 2 (again): Click the link for one of the most candid accounts of the White House meetings with pharmaceutical representatives we've read. And we read a lot of them. (Our source, Stat, is owned by Boston Globe Media.) In our view, there are a few ways to interpret this article, not one more accurate than the other:
For another interesting take on this entire bribe narrative, check out this story. It’s an opinion, not a report, but it raises some interesting ideas, particularly noting how things can be lost in translation and that the phrase “only for the US” appears in the Welt am Sonntag story and no where else. The coverage in The New York Times quoted a German government source who was more circumspect: apparently, it wasn’t clear whether the US administration wanted the research and resulting production done on US soil. (CureVac has offices in Boston.) But the Times didn't leave it at that. Here is their follow up story. And no, you don’t have to scroll down for more. It really is that brief.
Even Reuters would not include the “only for the US” caveat because it could not be verified.
Shall we move on?
March 2: U.S. Government announces commitment of the first $37 million in financing (out of $100 million committed) from the Emergency Reserve Fund for Contagious Infectious Diseases at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for 25 countries affected by novel coronavirus COVID-19 or at high risk of its spread.
Nope, we can't. We’re back to the CureVac bribe story.
March 11: CureVac company founder Ingmar Hoerr replaces CEO Daniel Menichella. No reason was given. After nine days as CEO, Hoerr announced he was taking a medical leave from the company.
Mach 15: So did we make an offer or not? according to NBC News, a spokesperson for CureVac denied the report. "To make it clear again on coronavirus: CureVac has not received from the U.S. government or related entities an offer before, during and since the Task Force meeting in the White House on March 2. CureVac rejects all allegations from press," the spokesperson said.
Of note: at the end of the article from NBC News, there is this disclaimer: CLARIFICATION (March 16, 2020, 8 a.m. ET): An earlier version of this story included information that did not meet NBC News' editorial standards. (TWAN Translation: It was wrong.) This information has been removed.
March 16: Looks like USA Today thinks we didn’t make an offer, either.
March 16: ABC News says we didn’t make an offer.
For consideration:
Is it possible that the recently departed CoreVac CEO, American Daniel Menichella, was open to a bribe, a bribe that was subsequently revealed to the German press and ONLY to the German press by German government officials? Yes. And as a result, he was summarily and swiftly dismissed by CureVac? Yes. Is it possible that’s why the COMPANY could truthfully report that CureVac didn’t receive “an offer” from the U.S. government or related entities? Yes.
Why it’s probably unlikely that this bribe took place in two words. Benjamin Franklin. “Three can keep a secret if two are dead.” There were at least nine other pharmaceutical companies represented in the room. Some of them were US based companies. WHY bribe a German company for help? It's not like the President has a warm and collaborative relationship with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. And even if the President did so, it certainly seems conceivable that one of the other executives (or their associates) knew about it, heard about it, or sensed it from the post meeting de-briefing. And no one came forward? No one went off the record as anonymous sources with The New York Times or Washington Post to report this repulsive and vile offer? No one was horrified at the prospect of withholding the vaccine from the world and said, “Wait. This is wrong. We need to be working on a solution for everyone and this kind of selfish approach is not only dangerous, it is not what this industry is about.” No one did that.
The source for the original Reuters story were, again, German government sources. And so far, the only source that has come forward on this aspect of the story has been “German government sources.”
The most unfortunate part of this entire news cycle is that fact that on March 3, the CDC issued guidelines about restricting gatherings of more than 250 people. The first national coverage we could find of this restriction (New York Times and Washington Post, for example) appeared on March 12 in the Times and March 13 in the Post. The good news is that cities and leaders across the country adopted the March 3 guidelines more immediately. Our search about coverage shows that stories appeared in local press much more promptly.
** If we’ve missed an earlier story in The Times or The Washington Post, PLEASE post a link in the comments. We want to be as accurate as possible about how the media has been reporting all aspects of this story. **
In fact, between March 3 and March 11, the CDC posted 15 press releases with updates about the disease.
Aside # 1:
On Thursday, March 5, we flew from Newark, New Jersey to Tampa, Florida on a very crowded flight. The ONLY indication we saw and heard about coronavirus was in a restroom at Newark. We were standing at a sink, near flight attendants. One asked the other: “How long did they say we’re supposed to wash our hands now?” That was it. No masks. No social distancing. Nothing.
We spent several days in Florida attending what turned out to be the end of baseball’s spring training season in 2020. No warnings, statements, or directions from the hotel about social distancing. Stadiums were packed with fans. People crowded around bars and snack stands, not to mention they filled the seats. In town, the restaurants were busy, active, joyous. The entire atmosphere was about as far from social distancing as you can imagine. In other words: it didn't exist.
Aside # 2:
We have first-hand knowledge of an organization that was planning an event for the end of March, that would have gathered approximately 750 people, many of whom would be in a high-risk category: seniors. As of March 11, ticket sales were brisk, promotions were booked and running, people were anticipating it with great excitement. The event was going on as scheduled.
Thursday, March 12: This seems to be the tipping point for a good number of businesses, schools and organizations about the virus, particularly in terms of gatherings and the likelihood of spreading the disease.
Friday, March 13: The organization canceled the event.
In retrospect, the question we have to ask ourselves is this: Why wasn’t the tipping point March 4?
Could it be that we were reading about and outraged and disgusted by coverage we were getting of the German pharmaceutical company bribery story that turned out to be a non-story? Reminder: The news we get is curated. Someone or some group makes every decision about what gets covered and what doesn’t.
And yes, the information on this website is curated. But we never claimed to be a news organization. Just one attempt to take a look back and see what we could see. And as of today, at least in terms of how we are being served by the media, it doesn’t look good.
AKA: Another day of How could he? outrage
March 2: This was the day of the German vaccine company story; or as social media likes to think of it: yet another excellent reason to call into question the ethics of our President. CureVac's then-CEO Daniel Menichella attended a meeting at the White House to discuss coronavirus vaccine development with Trump and members of his coronavirus taskforce.
What wasn’t made clear in the coverage (and outrage) we read about this story is that the White House meeting also included the leadership of at least ten pharmaceutical companies, among them executives from Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, Regeneron and Pfizer, all trying to share information and devise a strategy for next steps. So this wasn't a closed door conference between Donald and Danny.
March 2 (again): Click the link for one of the most candid accounts of the White House meetings with pharmaceutical representatives we've read. And we read a lot of them. (Our source, Stat, is owned by Boston Globe Media.) In our view, there are a few ways to interpret this article, not one more accurate than the other:
- The President is a profound narcissist who can’t take in nor share any information that doesn’t put him in the best light.
- The President invites in experts to address a catastrophe and also has a substantial and qualified team around him to help interpret the science, but he doesn’t listen to them.
- Whether or not an outright bribe was extended, it could be argued that The President wanted the US to “own” the vaccine in the sense that the US would be the country that made it available to the rest of the world. As all narcissists know, being the person who announces a solution is just as good as coming up with the solution. Maybe better because you don't have to do the work. He wanted to be the savior who provided the antidote to the world.
- The President is like us – not a scientist, not a virus expert, and desperate for good news. He’s taking in day after day of complex information but looking for a way to tell this story in the most positive way possible to the frightened and anxious populace.
For another interesting take on this entire bribe narrative, check out this story. It’s an opinion, not a report, but it raises some interesting ideas, particularly noting how things can be lost in translation and that the phrase “only for the US” appears in the Welt am Sonntag story and no where else. The coverage in The New York Times quoted a German government source who was more circumspect: apparently, it wasn’t clear whether the US administration wanted the research and resulting production done on US soil. (CureVac has offices in Boston.) But the Times didn't leave it at that. Here is their follow up story. And no, you don’t have to scroll down for more. It really is that brief.
Even Reuters would not include the “only for the US” caveat because it could not be verified.
Shall we move on?
March 2: U.S. Government announces commitment of the first $37 million in financing (out of $100 million committed) from the Emergency Reserve Fund for Contagious Infectious Diseases at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for 25 countries affected by novel coronavirus COVID-19 or at high risk of its spread.
Nope, we can't. We’re back to the CureVac bribe story.
March 11: CureVac company founder Ingmar Hoerr replaces CEO Daniel Menichella. No reason was given. After nine days as CEO, Hoerr announced he was taking a medical leave from the company.
Mach 15: So did we make an offer or not? according to NBC News, a spokesperson for CureVac denied the report. "To make it clear again on coronavirus: CureVac has not received from the U.S. government or related entities an offer before, during and since the Task Force meeting in the White House on March 2. CureVac rejects all allegations from press," the spokesperson said.
Of note: at the end of the article from NBC News, there is this disclaimer: CLARIFICATION (March 16, 2020, 8 a.m. ET): An earlier version of this story included information that did not meet NBC News' editorial standards. (TWAN Translation: It was wrong.) This information has been removed.
March 16: Looks like USA Today thinks we didn’t make an offer, either.
March 16: ABC News says we didn’t make an offer.
For consideration:
Is it possible that the recently departed CoreVac CEO, American Daniel Menichella, was open to a bribe, a bribe that was subsequently revealed to the German press and ONLY to the German press by German government officials? Yes. And as a result, he was summarily and swiftly dismissed by CureVac? Yes. Is it possible that’s why the COMPANY could truthfully report that CureVac didn’t receive “an offer” from the U.S. government or related entities? Yes.
Why it’s probably unlikely that this bribe took place in two words. Benjamin Franklin. “Three can keep a secret if two are dead.” There were at least nine other pharmaceutical companies represented in the room. Some of them were US based companies. WHY bribe a German company for help? It's not like the President has a warm and collaborative relationship with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. And even if the President did so, it certainly seems conceivable that one of the other executives (or their associates) knew about it, heard about it, or sensed it from the post meeting de-briefing. And no one came forward? No one went off the record as anonymous sources with The New York Times or Washington Post to report this repulsive and vile offer? No one was horrified at the prospect of withholding the vaccine from the world and said, “Wait. This is wrong. We need to be working on a solution for everyone and this kind of selfish approach is not only dangerous, it is not what this industry is about.” No one did that.
The source for the original Reuters story were, again, German government sources. And so far, the only source that has come forward on this aspect of the story has been “German government sources.”
The most unfortunate part of this entire news cycle is that fact that on March 3, the CDC issued guidelines about restricting gatherings of more than 250 people. The first national coverage we could find of this restriction (New York Times and Washington Post, for example) appeared on March 12 in the Times and March 13 in the Post. The good news is that cities and leaders across the country adopted the March 3 guidelines more immediately. Our search about coverage shows that stories appeared in local press much more promptly.
** If we’ve missed an earlier story in The Times or The Washington Post, PLEASE post a link in the comments. We want to be as accurate as possible about how the media has been reporting all aspects of this story. **
In fact, between March 3 and March 11, the CDC posted 15 press releases with updates about the disease.
Aside # 1:
On Thursday, March 5, we flew from Newark, New Jersey to Tampa, Florida on a very crowded flight. The ONLY indication we saw and heard about coronavirus was in a restroom at Newark. We were standing at a sink, near flight attendants. One asked the other: “How long did they say we’re supposed to wash our hands now?” That was it. No masks. No social distancing. Nothing.
We spent several days in Florida attending what turned out to be the end of baseball’s spring training season in 2020. No warnings, statements, or directions from the hotel about social distancing. Stadiums were packed with fans. People crowded around bars and snack stands, not to mention they filled the seats. In town, the restaurants were busy, active, joyous. The entire atmosphere was about as far from social distancing as you can imagine. In other words: it didn't exist.
Aside # 2:
We have first-hand knowledge of an organization that was planning an event for the end of March, that would have gathered approximately 750 people, many of whom would be in a high-risk category: seniors. As of March 11, ticket sales were brisk, promotions were booked and running, people were anticipating it with great excitement. The event was going on as scheduled.
Thursday, March 12: This seems to be the tipping point for a good number of businesses, schools and organizations about the virus, particularly in terms of gatherings and the likelihood of spreading the disease.
Friday, March 13: The organization canceled the event.
In retrospect, the question we have to ask ourselves is this: Why wasn’t the tipping point March 4?
Could it be that we were reading about and outraged and disgusted by coverage we were getting of the German pharmaceutical company bribery story that turned out to be a non-story? Reminder: The news we get is curated. Someone or some group makes every decision about what gets covered and what doesn’t.
And yes, the information on this website is curated. But we never claimed to be a news organization. Just one attempt to take a look back and see what we could see. And as of today, at least in terms of how we are being served by the media, it doesn’t look good.