When a crisis sprouts, one can bet the conspiracy theorists will have their day. While such people used to get relegated to the fringes where they belonged, the current political environment allows such baloney to have a home within certain quarters of the mainstream Right.
After the Sept. 11 attacks, many on the fringe Left concocted absurd conspiracies about the attacks, including the ridiculous idea the terrorists carried out the attacks with the knowledge and approval of President George W. Bush. A decade later, during the Great Recession, cranks on the Right convinced themselves that President Barack Obama had a plan to enact martial law and subject dissenters to isolation in concentration camps operated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, aka “FEMA camps.”
Thankfully, social media largely didn’t exist in 2001. In 2009, it hadn’t yet reached the level of growth that exists today. But today, President Trump doesn’t possess the capacity to accept responsibility for anything negative, and he uses his massive Twitter following to claim everything is a plot against him — whether it’s the media, Democrats, or the dreaded “deep state.” As a result, exotic goofball theories over his troubles routinely get floated, not just within the fever swamps but among some mainstream “conservatives.” They find broad acceptance among those who want their biases confirmed. It’s also a great way to build a social media following, especially if you’re a commentator and writer in the political world.
Why do research and reporting when one can merely “ask questions” on Twitter or fall in line with Trump and rail about the media and the deep state?
The latest théorie du complot making its way around the Twitterverse has to do with the data modeling the government is using to track the coronavirus, including forecasts for deaths and the impact on hospitals across the country. The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington publishes models for the United States. It’s used by Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx in conjunction with their roles in advising the president and taking part in the daily press briefings. The institute receives substantial funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Microsoft founder Bill Gates was out in front of predicting a pandemic several years ago and stepped forward as a leader to use his fortune to help fund the development of a COVID-19 vaccine.
And there’s the fuse to light the conspiracy dynamite.
Not all of them are alike. First, there are the QAnon-level conspiracies, but even those get picked up by anencephalic members of the Right such as Newsmax’s Emerald Robinson:
The more you study this virus, the more you find the same name: Bill Gates.
He’s the 2nd largest funder of WHO.
He’s building 7 vaccine labs.
Fauci. Tedros. Event 201. ID2020.
He basically controls global health policy.
What’s the plan? Using vaccines to track people.
— Emerald Robinson ✝️ (@EmeraldRobinson) April 6, 2020
The “vaccine tracking” conspiracy is in a zone all by itself. But there’s another milder conspiracy making the rounds that focuses on the data modeling. The IHME models have changed over time, predicting fewer deaths as time goes by. Such improvements, instead of getting received positively, have become fodder for people to “ask questions” about the modeling since it’s been so “wrong.” For example:
Bill Gates-Funded IHME Coronavirus Model Wrong Again – 12,000 ICU Beds Projected For New York Today, Only 4,100 Used https://t.co/uJ8YchWhvE via @gatewaypundit
— Bill Mitchell (@mitchellvii) April 5, 2020
First, data modeling is not an exact science. It can be frustrating when forecast models change. We see it all the time with hurricanes. Having lived in eastern Florida for 14 years, I know all too well what it is like to have the state placed under a state of emergency with mandatory evacuations and witness items such as water fly off the shelves. We’d then watch as the potentially dangerous hurricane changed course and headed out to the depths of the Atlantic Ocean.
The COVID-19 forecasts operate under the same set of rules. Public health models provide possible scenarios designed to inform policy decisions but can change over time. The Gates truthers have latched onto language on the IHME website for their “Aha!” moment. The site says, “COVID-19 projections assuming full social distancing through May 2020.”
The “raised question” in this scenario is this: “How can the forecasts change so drastically if they were assuming full social distancing from the start?” The explanation goes back to the old medical saying of, “When you hear hoofbeats, assume horses, not zebras.” Medical students had a habit of arriving at exotic medical conclusions instead of the more likely, common explanation.
The FAQ section of the IHME website contains the (common) explanation for the updated forecasts:
Earlier forecasts took into account that states such as Texas, Florida, and Georgia hadn’t yet implemented stay-at-home orders. Texas issued its order on April 2, followed by Florida and Georgia on April 3. Other states, including Connecticut and Massachusetts, still haven’t. As the IHME receives updated information, the forecasts get adjusted. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
The notion that data modeling is static or that updating estimates based on new information means the original estimates were “wrong” is nonsensical, and using it to question someone’s motives and advance a political agenda as it relates to the economic situation is dangerous. It’s worse when the president listens to the cranks and bases his words and actions not on the information provided by experts in the field but by people blowing steam on social media.
Is it fair to debate the merits of stay-at-home orders and the effect they have on the economy and the people out of work as a result? Absolutely. But that debate should center around rational and responsible thought processes. It should not happen in an echo chamber of stupid accusations about Bill Gates’s supposed thirst for power or Fauci muddling his way through the public health sector for 50 years so that he can have his moment in the sun at age 80.
If anything, the crisis will finally push the government at all levels to make better preparations for the next time it happens and mitigate the damage early instead of having to play catch-up.
