JUDY WOODRUFF: Good evening. I'm Judy Woodruff.
On the "NewsHour" tonight: The campaign intensifies.
President Trump takes heat for telling voters
to cast ballots twice to test the system,
as Joe Biden escalates his rhetoric against
the administration.
Then: COVID questions. Misinformation abounds
about diagnoses and death tolls, as the CDC
tells states to prepare for a possible coronavirus
vaccine by this fall.
And we visit Australia to examine a medical
system with universal coverage options that
still relies heavily on private insurance.
ROSALIE VINEY, University of Technology Sydney:
Just as one of the tenets of Australians'
beliefs is that they should have access to
public care, there's also an element that
choice is part of what a lot of Australians
seem to value.
JUDY WOODRUFF: All that and more on tonight's
"PBS NewsHour."
(BREAK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: President Trump has taken his
reelection campaign to Pennsylvania tonight.
His Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, spent
the day in Wisconsin, visiting the latest
crucible in the national churning over racial
justice.
Lisa Desjardins has our report.
LISA DESJARDINS: Kenosha, a community still
reeling, once again pulled into the national
limelight, this time with Democratic presidential
nominee Joe Biden arriving.
This followed President Trump's visit on Tuesday.
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States:
This should never happen. A thing like this
should never happen.
LISA DESJARDINS: Despite local objections
that the city be left to recover and reflect
on its own.
But, today, at an event with community leaders
and law enforcement officials, the former
vice president pitched himself as a unifying
figure.
JOSEPH BIDEN (D), Presidential Candidate:
I honest to God believe we have an enormous
opportunity, now that the screen, the curtain
has been pulled back, and just what's going
on in the country, to do a lot of really positive
things.
LISA DESJARDINS: Protests in Kenosha over
policing and racism have been mostly peaceful
in the past few days. Officials last night
lifted the curfew they put in place after
violence that left extensive destruction in
the city's uptown area. Biden heard some direct
words.
PORSCHE BENNETT, Black Lives Matter Kenosha:
We are heavily angry, not angry as to where
people say, oh, they're protesting. There's
a difference between a protester and a rioter.
I'm only 31, and I have seen enough within
these last two years to say, I'm tired.
LISA DESJARDINS: Biden again condemned all
violence.
JOSEPH BIDEN: Regardless how angry you are,
if you loot or you burn, you should be held
accountable as someone who does anything else,
period.
LISA DESJARDINS: Earlier, after landing in
Milwaukee, Biden and his wife privately spent
an hour with the family of Jacob Blake, whose
shooting by police last month touched off
the city's protests and racial reckoning.
Blake is now paralyzed in a hospital. Biden
said he spoke with Blake himself by phone.
President Trump did not meet with Blake's
family during his visit.
Meantime, the president faced sharp scrutiny
for his words in North Carolina yesterday,
advising that voters send in mail-in ballots
and then also go vote in person as a kind
of insurance.
DONALD TRUMP: Let them send them it in, and
let them go vote. And if their system is as
good as they say it is, then, obviously, they
won't be able to vote. If it isn't tabulated,
they will be able to vote. So, that's the
way it is.
LISA DESJARDINS: But some experts call that
a clear path to fraud.
North Carolina's state Board of Elections
issued a strong statement today, writing:
"It is illegal to vote twice in an election,"
underscoring it is a felony, and stressing
the state has a firm system to ensure mailed-in
ballots are counted and not double-counted.
The president doubled down today, retweeting
his idea. It is the latest twist surrounding
mail-in ballots, with debate over whether
the president is addressing problems or openly
creating them.
Meantime, Facebook announced today it will
block new political ads the week before the
election. And the company said it will add
labels to any post declaring victory before
final results are in.
For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Lisa Desjardins.
JUDY WOODRUFF: In the day's other news: Wall
Street's great tech rally hit a wall, and
triggered a sell-off. The Dow Jones industrial
average lost 800 points, nearly 3 percent,
to close at 28292. The Nasdaq fell almost
600 points, 5 percent. And the S&P 500 fell
3.5 percent.
All of this as new jobless claims hit 881,000
last week. That's the lowest since March,
but partly due to a change in how the number
is calculated.
The U.S. COVID-19 death toll topped 186,000
today out of 6.1 million confirmed cases.
That news came as pandemic expert Dr. Anthony
Fauci said it is unlikely a vaccine will be
ready by late October, as the CDC has suggested.
We will focus on this after the news summary.
The mayor of Rochester, New York, has suspended
police involved in the death of a Black man
last march. Newly released video shows Daniel
Prude ran naked into the street. Police said
he was spitting. They put a hood on him, and
pressed him to the pavement for two minutes.
He died a week later.
Last night, protesters gathered outside police
headquarters. Today, activists demanded charges
be filed.
MIQUEL POWELL, Former Member, Rochester Police
Accountability Board: We're not stupid, man.
We know that if someone is murdered in March
and then it takes until September for you
to say something, you covered that up. That's
the literal definition of it.
And we're not standing for it and we're not
tolerating it. So, we're asking for the officers
to be terminated and then later arrested immediately.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Prude's family says that he
had mental health problems. A medical examiner's
report found PCP in his system. It ruled the
death a homicide caused primarily by physical
restraint.
And the Kremlin today dismissed allegations
that it ordered the poisoning of Russian opposition
leader Alexei Navalny. He is now hospitalized
in Berlin in an induced coma. German officials
say that he was poisoned with a Soviet-era
nerve agent. A spokesman for Russian President
Vladimir Putin said that Germany has not shown
adequate proof.
Still to come on the "NewsHour": the CDC tells
states to prepare for a possible coronavirus
vaccine by this fall; how the airline industry
continues to struggle with the impact of the
pandemic; we examine the president's complicated
relationship with national media; plus, much
more.
Some of the federal government's top health
officials are suggesting a vaccine for COVID
could be sent out in less than two months.
It would be done through a special emergency
authorization of the Food and Drug Administration.
But, as Amna Nawaz tells us, the accelerating
speed of this process is raising questions.
AMNA NAWAZ: That's right, Judy.
In fact, the CDC confirmed it has notified
public health officials in all 50 states and
five large cities to prepare for potential
vaccine distribution. That would be for some
higher-risk people as early as late October
or early November.
But there are a number of concerns about developing
and distributing a rushed vaccine, especially
when the president himself has been promising
one.
Dr. Michael Mina is assistant professor of
epidemiology, immunology and infectious diseases
at Harvard's School of Public Health. He's
also a member of the Center for Communicable
Disease Dynamics.
He joins me now from Boston.
Dr. Mina, thanks for being with us.
We should point out to people, the normal
vaccine process takes years. It's been dramatically
accelerated during the pandemic. And the firms
that are developing a vaccine are already
in phase three of the trials, which is the
final phase before they are supposed to seek
FDA approval.
So, how would an emergency authorization change
the timeline and the process?
DR. MICHAEL MINA, Harvard's School of Public
Health: Well, essentially, what happened is,
having the emergency use authorization as
the goal to actually get this vaccine approved
gives the FDA and gives the manufacturers
of the vaccines quite a bit more room to accelerate
the overall design and study of these.
So, what we have seen, for example, is an
overlapping of the different phases, phase
one, phase two and phase three, that normally
don't overlap in nearly the same way that
we have seen.
And this has compressed the time window considerably,
by years, essentially, to actually get this
vaccine, potentially over the first hurdle,
to get it out into the public domain.
AMNA NAWAZ: But with an emergency authorization,
does it reduce the number of hurdles it has
to go through? Does it lower the standards
in any way?
DR. MICHAEL MINA: Well, ideally, it would
not lower the standards, nor necessarily reduce
the actual -- the overall hurdles that it
needs to get through.
It certainly allows for the evaluation to
be accelerated in many ways. Now, of course,
there's been concerns about whether or not
it might be getting approved too quickly and
sort of rushed through. And that is not necessarily
a function of the EUA in this case. It's -- that
might be more -- those concerns are really
being driven, I think, more from some of the
confusion that's happened at the political
level.
But the EUA is still intended to keep safety
first and foremost, try to evaluate for efficacy
as well as possible before these vaccines
really get out to market.
AMNA NAWAZ: So, if you're further accelerating
the process, what are the potential risks
of that?
DR. MICHAEL MINA: Yes, well, the risks certainly
are to -- if these are not necessarily recruiting
and evaluating as many people as they might
otherwise look at, what we are concerned with,
for example, as we're talking about safety,
is that phase one and two are really designed
around safety, to make sure that people aren't
getting harmed by the vaccine.
We didn't see any real serious safety signals
during phase one and two of this, but these
were also -- these were accelerated. And there
is a chance that, when these really move out
to phase three and then out to post-market,
we could end up seeing what we have been think
of as kind of fringe effects.
What happens at the edges of the distribution?
If you have a bulk of people, for example,
getting slight fevers, there's always a concern
that in a rare number of people that those
fevers could become more serious in terms
of adverse effects.
And so we haven't really had the protocols
set up and the time to really rigorously evaluate
those pieces. So that is a risk, I would say.
AMNA NAWAZ: Let me ask you about some of the
higher-risk communities that they say the
vaccine could be deployed to first.
We know that the front-line health care workers,
essential workers, national security people
also among the high-risk groups so far. You
can talk about Black and brown communities
and Native Americans. We know they have been
disproportionately affected in the pandemic.
You look at the COVID-19 death rate, it's
higher for Latinos, higher for Native populations,
more than two times higher for Black Americans
than for white Americans.
Is there a concern that the government will
have trouble convincing these communities
that have already lost faith in them for failing
to help them during the pandemic, convincing
them to willingly accept a vaccine?
DR. MICHAEL MINA: I think there's a lot of
concern around that.
The vaccine, unfortunately, has been polarized.
And this certainly is -- it's been polarized
by politics. The whole virus and our response
to this virus has become polarized.
And I think any time we're infusing so much
divisiveness into what needs to be a concerted
effort, in this case, to keep people healthy,
to suppress the virus from transmitting at
the population level, to get people to trust
that the FDA and the CDC and the federal government
are doing their due diligence to keep people
safe, whether it's from the virus or from
the vaccine, I am -- it's not surprising that
there is so much concern and confusion that's
abounding in the general public.
AMNA NAWAZ: Dr. Mina, before we go, I want
to ask you to address a claim the president
himself has made and now others are picking
up.
There is this idea that the COVID-19 death
toll is overstated that is now circulating,
that hospitals are misreporting COVID-19 diagnoses
for reimbursement incentives. Is there any
evidence or truth to that?
DR. MICHAEL MINA: No, this is all misunderstanding,
whether intentional or unintentional.
These -- it is very common. By the time somebody
dies from an infection, many things can go
wrong during that course in the hospital.
And so it's actually very rare that, when
somebody dies in a hospital, that they have
a single cause of death necessarily written
on their death certificate.
And so this piece of information has kind
of been picked up and completely misconstrued.
For example, somebody dying of COVID who also
has diabetes, for example, well, we know that
diabetes is a risk factor for severe infections
with COVID, but you still are dying of this
virus, even if you have diabetes.
So, diabetes will make its way onto the certificate
perhaps, but it's not the thing that's killing
you. So, I think that this has been, unfortunately,
another piece that's been politicized. It's
been taken up by people who want to project
a message that this virus isn't something
to take seriously.
And that is -- it's an unfortunate state of
affairs that we are even having to have this
conversation.
AMNA NAWAZ: And we appreciate the clarification.
That is Dr. Michael Mina from Harvard's School
of Public Health.
Thanks so much for your time.
DR. MICHAEL MINA: Well, thanks very much.
JUDY WOODRUFF: There are troubles in the skies.
Major airlines are sending out warnings about
huge losses. And they are making pleas for
help in a big way.
Tens of thousands of flights are canceled
for the fall. Plus, change fees are now eliminated
to attract travelers.
Paul Solman has the story for our series Making
Sense.
MAN: All these people on the plane. I didn't
get in nobody's face.
PAUL SOLMAN: Call them mask wars being waged
on tarmacs everywhere.
ALEXANDER BEJARAN ESTEVEZ, Airline Passenger:
On my last flight, there was actually a gentleman
that refused to wear a mask, and so they had
to bring in airport security.
And the person from airport security said,
like, hey, we already had this conversation
at the gate. So, the airport security took
him off the plane.
PAUL SOLMAN: As they escorted this woman off
to a sitting ovation.
No wonder so many passengers now have a fear
of flying, even Nick Ewen, an airlines journalist.
NICK EWEN, Senior Editor, The Points Guy:
I have personally not taken a flight since
March 1, and that is pretty unheard of.
PAUL SOLMAN: And if you do want to fly, like
NYU Professor Paul Glimcher:
PAUL GLIMCHER, NYU Professor: it's really
hard to imagine jumping on a plane and flying
out to NYU Shanghai, because the Chinese government
wouldn't let me go. The U.S. government wouldn't
let me come back.
(LAUGHTER)
PAUL GLIMCHER: There'd be two weeks of quarantine
at either end. I mean, it seems impossible.
PAUL SOLMAN: And thus the facts on the ground:
passenger volume down some 70 percent from
last year, about 2,000 planes in drydock,
because airlines need them to run at least
80 percent full to make money.
Former Spirit Airlines CEO Ben Baldanza:
BEN BALDANZA, Former CEO, Spirit Airlines:
If they're not going to be able to fill that
much, they're going to have to get a higher
price.
When the prices go up, many fewer people choose
to travel. And so, if airlines are going to
have to rely on a higher price point because
the planes aren't as full, there are going
to be many fewer planes in the air, because
they're not going to be able to support as
big a fleet.
PAUL SOLMAN: So the industry is faced with
an ever more pressing question: Is this the
new abnormal?
NICK EWEN: If the traveler is confident that
they are going to have a minimal risk of contracting
COVID-19 when they go to the airport and when
they get on board a plane, that's really when
we're going to see a rebound in the overall
market.
PAUL SOLMAN: Airlines are pushing new safety
measures, disinfecting assiduously, filtering
the air every few minutes. Carriers like Southwest,
JetBlue and Delta are restricting capacity.
And some passengers are flying worry-free,
like Timothy Strack.
TIMOTHY STRACK, Airline Passenger: I have
flown, approximately, I believe, nine legs,
and I have not contracted COVID. I have tested
negative consistently. And I will do it again
soon.
PAUL SOLMAN: But many more former travelers
are staying put.
HOLLY STETTLER, Nurse: It would probably be
a while before I truly felt safe. And that's
just a product of the career I'm in and the
things I have seen.
PAUL SOLMAN: Nurse Holly Stettler, who's treated
COVID patients, was disturbed that her partner's
recent flight was fully booked, American and
United Airlines opting to maximize sales on
the planes they are flying.
HOLLY STETTLER: The pilot made an announcement
that said, we have a really full, full flight
today, so if you have trouble finding overhead
bin space, let us know, which, in my opinion,
during a pandemic, there should not be any
flight that is flying that is so full that
you cannot find overhead bin space.
PAUL SOLMAN: And there are the non-mask-wearers
during this politicized pandemic.
DAVID J. HARRIS JR., Airline Passenger: For
all the people on the plane that may want
to get off because they don't feel safe, then
get the heck off. I'm staying right here.
(LAUGHTER)
PAUL SOLMAN: Some are belligerent, says Sara
Nelson of the flight attendants union, who
told us about one of her members.
SARA NELSON, President, Association Of Flight
Attendants: The passenger hit her, assaulted
her.
PAUL SOLMAN: For enforcing the mask policy?
SARA NELSON: Yes. The passenger became violent
against the flight attendant and hit her and
hurt her. And she is recovering from that
now.
PAUL SOLMAN: Nelson says the federal government
needs to impose rules and penalties to force
compliance.
SARA NELSON: There's not clear communication
about how to wear those masks, that it's necessary
to wear the mask, and that there's consequences
if you don't.
PAUL SOLMAN: Leaving the policing to the airlines
themselves, despite the fact that over 1,000
flight attendants have been infected and at
least 11 have died.
SARA NELSON: There is a picture of a man right
behind me. His name is Paul Frishkorn. And
he was the first flight attendant to die.
He was a friend of mine.
And he stays here with me while I do this
work on safety and on protecting our jobs.
PAUL SOLMAN: Jobs. Thousands of workers have
already taken buyouts, with the airlines warning
that more jobs, tens of thousands, could be
cut once $25 billion in CARES Act aid runs
out in October.
YOLANDA HUGHES, United Flight Attendant: To
just think about not being able to fly again,
it's devastating.
PAUL SOLMAN: Yolanda Hughes is a flight attendant
for United Airlines. She's kept her job and
health care for now, but has no guarantee
of hours or pay.
YOLANDA HUGHES: We don't have enough people
traveling to support the personnel that we
do have. So, we are begging the administration,
we're begging our representatives and our
congressmen to please help us.
PAUL SOLMAN: The airline, which was $17 billion
in the first half of the year, is asking for
another $25 billion in federal aid.
Pandemic relief talks have stalled in Congress,
but the president says he will support the
industry.
NICK EWEN: I think it is very likely that
we will see at least one notable bankruptcy
among the U.S. airlines.
PAUL SOLMAN: And it's not just because travelers
are afraid to fly. Many now realize they don't
have to.
Ben Baldanza isn't afraid, but he says:
BEN BALDANZA: There is some business travel
that is not going to come back, because they're
-- they will have gotten so comfortable with
the way we're talking right now...
PAUL SOLMAN: Exactly.
BEN BALDANZA: ... and how productive they
can be...
PAUL SOLMAN: Yes.
BEN BALDANZA: ... that they're just going
to say, I don't need that expense.
(COUGHING)
BEN BALDANZA: Excuse me. I'm really sorry.
PAUL SOLMAN: If I were there in person, would
you be more comfortable than you are right
now?
BEN BALDANZA: There's just more complications
about it. I mean, I coughed twice in this
call, and that didn't make you nervous. If
we'd been live, that might have made you nervous.
PAUL SOLMAN: And yet another problem, airlines
are alienating customers with their reluctance
to refund.
Sign language interpreter Betty Colonomos
has been trying to get her money back since
March.
BETTY COLONOMOS, Airline Passenger: This has
almost become a 20-hour-a-week job chasing
after these refunds, because the phone calls,
the e-mails, the waiting.
PAUL SOLMAN: But she'd purchased flight insurance.
The response to her claim?
BETTY COLONOMOS: Oh, well, we categorize coronavirus
to be something under the certain category
of we don't cover that, and blah, blah, blah.
So, I said, great. I got insurance in case
something happens. And guess what? Something
happened, but they're not owning it. So, here
I am.
(LAUGHTER)
PAUL SOLMAN: Are you flying again?
BETTY COLONOMOS: No, I am not flying, and
I have no intention of flying.
PAUL SOLMAN: And so the big question: When
will enough folks take to the skies once again?
Right now, 52 percent of travelers say they're
uncomfortable flying, like Professor Andrew
Caplin and his wife, psychotherapist Ruth
Wyatt.
They had planned to go, she says:
WOMAN: On a snorkeling trip in Indonesia about
a month before COVID hit. But I don't want
to get on an airplane. I don't really want
to travel.
PAUL SOLMAN: How many years before you actually
take that trip to Indonesia, do you suppose?
WOMAN: Three?
MAN: Five.
(LAUGHTER)
PAUL SOLMAN: Anybody give me six here?
(LAUGHTER)
PAUL SOLMAN: Professors Heidi and Richard
Brooks both had COVID in the spring. He was
hospitalized.
MAN: My antibodies are still robust. And I
feel, because of the antibodies, a little
bit more comfortable traveling than I imagine
most people.
PAUL SOLMAN: Wife Heidi had a milder case.
WOMAN: It is a risk, but we can't necessarily
lock ourselves into never being in another
country again.
PAUL SOLMAN: But even the Brooks' travel plans
are on hold until 2022. And the airlines don't
expect a rebound until 2024.
For the "PBS NewsHour," Paul Solman, not flying
anywhere.
JUDY WOODRUFF: As we get deeper into the presidential
campaign season, there are questions being
raised every day, not just about the candidates,
but about how the news media cover them, and,
in the case of President Trump, about his
relationship to one particular news organization.
There's a new book about that.
And before we speak to its author, here's
some background.
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States:
The country's in very good shape, and we're
set to rock and roll.
JUDY WOODRUFF: For an embattled president
fighting for reelection in a year of crises
and chaos, a friendly platform is just a phone
call away.
Even as some journalists at FOX News have
covered the human toll of the coronavirus
pandemic and challenged President Trump on
his record overseeing it...
DONALD TRUMP: I think we have one of the lowest
mortality rates in the world.
CHRIS WALLACE, Host, "FOX News Sunday": That's
not true, sir. We have a -- we had 900 deaths
on a single day.
JUDY WOODRUFF: ... a number of its most prominent
hosts have downplayed the seriousness of the
virus and defended the president's handling
of the outbreak.
LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX News: The media and, frankly,
most Democrats have been acting as though
President Trump is directly responsible for
every case of COVID-19 in the U.S.
DONALD TRUMP: The violence is fueled by dangerous
rhetoric from far left politicians.
JUDY WOODRUFF: FOX's prime-time hosts also
frequently have identical messages to the
president's on largely peaceful protests that
have broken out this year across the country
over police killings of Black Americans.
LOU DOBBS, FOX Business: This is clearly an
effort to disrupt and take over the country.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And when the president said
police are under siege in a recent interview
with FOX's Laura Ingraham, she tried to steer
him away from comparing controversial police
shootings to choking while playing golf.
DONALD TRUMP: But they choke. Just like in
a golf tournament, they miss a three-foot
putt.
LAURA INGRAHAM: You're not comparing it to
golf, because, of course, that's what the
media will say.
DONALD TRUMP: No. I'm saying people choke.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But perhaps no one in the channel's
stable of conservative hosts has been more
influential than Sean Hannity. He's reported
to have a direct line to the president, who,
in turn, is a frequent caller on Hannity's
show.
Mr. Trump has used the outlet to make false
claims without pushback.
DONALD TRUMP: This will be the most fraudulent
election in history.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Even so, the combination has
drawn large audiences and made many millions
in revenue.
In June and July, FOX News was the highest
rated channel in prime time on all of television.
The president's relationship with FOX is the
focus of Brian Stelter's new book, "Hoax:
Donald Trump, FOX News, and the Dangerous
Distortion of Truth." He is also CNN's chief
media correspondent and the host of the show
"Reliable Sources."
And he joins us now from New York.
Brian Stelter, thank you so much for being
here.
You say at the outset that you wrote this
as a citizen and a father, not as a journalist.
Is it possible to separate the two?
BRIAN STELTER, Author, "Hoax: Donald Trump,
FOX News, and the Dangerous Distortion of
Truth": I think it is possible to separate
the two, because all of us, when we are journalists,
are also humans living in this country, trying
to make the best of it, and trying to create
a better future for our kids.
I have two young kids. And I think, in 20
years, when they ask me, what was the Trump
era all about, what happened to America, I
think understanding FOX News is essential
to understanding the Trump years.
You can't understand why the president is
out there misleading the country about voter
fraud and about anarchy in cities that isn't
really happening without understanding where
he is getting it from. He is getting from
"FOX & Friends" in the morning, on "Sean Hannity"
in the evening.
It is that feedback loop, the likes of which
America has never seen before. And because
he is oftentimes getting low-quality information,
not the kind of high-quality information you
get from the nightly news, he ends up misleading
everybody as a result.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You do paint this remarkable
picture of this loop, as you describe it,
between Sean Hannity, other FOX hosts and
the president, the sharing information, sharing
perception of what is going on in the world.
How does it work? Who is helping whom here?
BRIAN STELTER: So, I have heard from a lot
of readers and folks who have said, well,
I didn't know it was this extreme, that there
are even more examples than they realized.
I think FOX helps Trump more than Trump helps
FOX at this point. But, also, these stars
on FOX hurt Trump. When they are trying to
help him, when they are trying to do him a
service, they do him a disservice by misinforming
him. And then it affects everybody.
This is the FOXification of America. And it
is why we feel like we live in two separate
information universes. When you have got a
relative in your family, and you feel like
they are talking a different language, it
is oftentimes because of FOX.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Brian Stelter, you say some
of the decisions that have most seriously
damaged the Trump presidency could arguably
be traced to his TV viewing habits.
BRIAN STELTER: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Give us some examples of that,
and how much TV does he watch?
BRIAN STELTER: Well, that is what I mean about,
when they try to help him, they end up hurting
him.
On the very first day, the first weekend,
the inauguration crowd size debacle, the president
was getting bad advice from FOX.
And, more importantly, with the impeachment
saga, the president was hearing negative news
about Ukraine on FOX. The seeds of the Ukraine
scheme were planted on Hannity's show, and
it led to Trump's impeachment.
So, a lot of this is about what sources of
information the president is receiving. And
that was most dangerous this year, Judy, with
the pandemic. As FOX's stars downplayed the
pandemic, Trump did as well. And that has
had life-and-death consequences.
JUDY WOODRUFF: What are those consequences?
I mean, you write extensively about how dangerous
this is. What are the consequences you see?
And why do you think this program is so successful?
As we said, their programming over the summer
most-watched of all television anywhere.
BRIAN STELTER: Yes.
FOX is like resentment news. It is like grievance
news. It taps into white Christian Americans'
grievances about what is happening in the
country, an increasingly multicultural America.
So, some of the narratives are about that.
That is why we heard all about caravans and
an invasion in 2018 before the midterms. Now
we're hearing about law and order, because
FOX is emphasizing violence in the cities,
in New York and Seattle and elsewhere.
Of course, the cities are not nearly as severely
endangered as FOX portrays them. But the president
watches, and then he reflects those talking
points. And there is an echo back and forth.
And that is why we live in these two separate
information universes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You do focus a lot, of course,
most of this, Brian Stelter, on the prime-time
hosts.
You also write about the other -- the journalists
at FOX, both current journalists, former journalists,
who were your sources for information. How
much do they take their orders, take their
guidance from the owners, from management
at FOX? Because -- and we know what their
political views are.
BRIAN STELTER: Right.
Rupert Murdoch is a right-wing political leader
who has always wanted a close relationship
with the president. And now he has one. His
son Lachlan runs the company day by day.
But I think FOX takes his cues more from the
audience, from the ratings every day. And
that is what has made the channel Trumpier
and Trumpier.
Hundreds of staffers in and around FOX confided
in me, saying: We have gone off the rails.
This is always a channel that leans to the
right, and that is a good thing. There should
be conservative-leaning news and liberal-leaning
news, and lots of kinds of news.
But they say: No, no, it has gotten too extreme
now. The rhetoric is too extreme. The racism
and xenophobia in prime time is too extreme.
Some journalists at FOX have left the network.
Other stay because they want to try to make
it better. And there are anchors like Chris
Wallace, who is going to be moderating a debate,
who's the exception to the rule.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Right.
BRIAN STELTER: But even anchors like Wallace
have had a hard time trying to navigate the
Trump years.
And "Hoax" has all the examples of why.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, you are saying some of
the journalists at FOX are able to escape
this influence that you describe?
BRIAN STELTER: Yes, I think the problem, though,
is that you the news side is losing and the
propaganda side is winning.
And that is what FOX viewers seem to want.
They prefer the pro-Trump talking heads. They
prefer the propaganda. That's not just an
issue at FOX. It's a problem for America.
When the president tells you to distrust the
media every single day, when he uses the word
hoax so often that nobody knows what to believe
anymore, we're going to have a challenge in
this country that's going to long outlast
the Trump presidency.
JUDY WOODRUFF: A kind of bottom-line question,
Brian Stelter.
You have got a great job at CNN. Would you
ever want to work for FOX?
BRIAN STELTER: I think, if anybody at FOX
could peel off an hour where it's all about
fact-checking, all about being as accurate
as possible, then there should be room for
that.
Right now, though, the audience doesn't seem
to want it, and neither is the network.
But I don't think FOX has to be this way.
One of the Murdoch sons, James, Lachlan -- he
may try to take over someday. He's a more
liberal-leaning son. I wonder what could happen
if he tries to take over.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Brian Stelter, we thank you
very much.
BRIAN STELTER: Thank you, Judy.
JUDY WOODRUFF: We continue with our series
on universal health care.
As the United States struggles with the most
expensive health care system in the world,
some have started looking to Australia.
William Brangham and producer Jason Kane report
on how that nation has achieved universal
coverage at a lower cost.
Their story was filmed before the pandemic
began.
WOMAN: Hello.
(LAUGHTER)
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Don't be fooled by this
happy scene. This is a family divided.
OK, it's not quite that serious, but the division
is stark when it comes to, of all things,
health insurance. On one side, Felofani Elisara
and her husband Paul Dunn rely on Australia's
public health care system. It's known as Medicare.
It's paid for by taxes, and it's available
to all Australians and permanent residents.
That public system has gotten them through
some pretty traumatic stuff, IVF treatment
and a hysterectomy for Felofani, and, for
Paul, brain surgery to remove a malignant
tumor.
At first, they panicked over what they feared
would be a huge price tag.
PAUL DUNN, Australia: I was really scared.
I was like, what am I going to do? Do I need
to start a GoFundMe? Which my friends did
for me and my family did for me anyway.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: But then you found out that
the public system was going to cover a majority
of that?
PAUL DUNN: A majority of that, yes.
FELOFANI ELISARA, Australia: Well, it covered
all of it.
PAUL DUNN: It covered all of it, actually.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: On the other side:, Paul's
parents, Carole and Ross, are evangelists
of the private sort.
They skip over the public system and buy their
own private insurance coverage. About half
the country does this. Carole recently had
her knee replaced and said she got great care
and terrific perks.
She says, if she'd been in the public system,
she'd be in agony, on a waiting list.
WOMAN: Well, I'd be crippled, really, in one
leg.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: This hybrid system, with
the public Medicare system as a base, but
then layered with private insurance on top,
is by design.
They're meant to work together, with the private
system taking pressure off the busier public
one. This unique setup meets two basic values,
says health economist Rosalie Viney.
ROSALIE VINEY, University of Technology Sydney:
Just as one of the tenets of Australians'
beliefs is that they should have access to
public care, there's also an element that
choice is part of what a lot of Australians
seem to value.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Help me understand. If you
have a system where any person, any Australian
can go and get free care from their G.P. or
at a public hospital, what is the rationale
for private insurance?
Why would I, as an Australian, ever want to
pay extra, if I can get it for free?
ROSALIE VINEY: So, some of it is about access
to elective care at the time when they want
it. Some of it is about access to the amenities
that a private hospital might offer. Some
of it...
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Amenities like?
ROSALIE VINEY: Private room, better food,
those sorts of things. You have a choice of
menu. Some of it is about choice of your own
doctor.
But some of it is actually about getting quicker
access. So, waiting lists can be long. And
particularly for elective surgery, waiting
lists in the public system tend to be long.
SARAH KOZICKI, Nurse in Training: The whole
sense of waiting for me, like, with endometriosis,
you could be in bed, like, chronic pain. So,
that could mean a year without working, two
years without working. And it's just -- that's
not feasible either.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: A private health plan makes
sense for Sarah Kozicki. She's training to
become a nurse, and every couple of years,
she needs a costly surgery for endometriosis,
which is a painful disorder involving the
uterus.
SARAH KOZICKI: So, for that, I choose to have
private health insurance, that I can go and
have surgery when I need to have surgery.
I can do it in a private hospital, or do it
in a public hospital as a private patient,
and I get to choose my specialist.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: The outcomes for both systems
have been quite good. Australians live longer
than Americans, they're healthier and they
see their doctors more.
They don't die of preventable diseases nearly
as often as we do. And they get these results
for less money, spending about half what we
do per person.
Costs are kept low partially because the government
sets prices for drugs, treatments and other
expenses. But there's one major problem. Increasing
numbers of Australians are choosing not to
buy private insurance, people like Emily Maguire.
She's a teacher, she's healthy, and she says
the rising cost of living makes it hard to
justify paying for a private plan.
EMILY MAGUIRE, Teacher: And, like, the public
health system is so great. Like, they do a
great job.
So, I'm just like, no, I think I will trust
them. And if I need something, then I will
pay for it myself. I'm not too worried. It's
a little bit about, I think, my values as
well. Like, I don't want to be paying for
something that I'm not really getting anything
from, if you know what I mean.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: An estimated 64,000 Australians
dropped their private health insurance in
2018, and this creates what's called a death
spiral for the system.
Younger people, who tend to be healthier,
have been leaving the private market, while
older people, who tend to be sicker, have
been joining it.
Rosalie Viney says that cycle then perpetuates
itself.
ROSALIE VINEY: Private insurance holders tend
to be those who are more likely to use private
insurance, and so we see premiums start to
creep up, associated with use of the care.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Remember, the private system
is meant to relieve pressure on the public
one. So, now the government is spending over
$4 billion a year in subsidies to encourage
people to buy private care. And that cost
keeps going up.
JANINE MOHAMED, CEO, Lowitja Institute: So,
what would be better is if we actually took
a reinvestment of those private health care
dollars, and put it into our primary health
care system.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Janine Mohamed has a very
different idea of where those billions ought
to go. She runs the Lowitja Institute, a research
organization that advocates for better health
care for Australia's Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander populations, people who've
suffered decades of racism and discrimination.
On average, people from indigenous groups,
like Kylie Battese, suffer higher rates of
chronic diseases than their peers. Mohamed
says they die 11 years earlier, on average,
than non-indigenous Australians
JANINE MOHAMED: It just seems ridiculous that
those funds can't be redirected to Aboriginal,
Torres Strait Islander health, when we know
that we have the poorest health outcomes in
Australia.
So, for us, it's, you know, giving the most
privileged more funding.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of
the Brown School of Public Health and a collaborator
with us on this series, says, yes, there are
significant problems here.
But every nation's health system is a work
in progress, and Australia has made important
strides that the U.S. hasn't.
DR. ASHISH JHA, Director, Harvard Global Health
Institute: When we look across the world,
we see lots of different systems that seem
to work. They get universal coverage, good
outcomes, reasonable costs.
They don't all look like each other. And there's
a lot we can learn from Australia, from the
U.K., from Switzerland, all of which have
very different systems from each other. But
each of them can teach us specific things
about how we can improve coverage and lower
costs and improve outcomes for our own country.
That's the key here, is to learn those lessons
without worrying about importing any of these
systems wholesale and trying to transplant
them into the United States.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: The members of the Dunn
family have given up trying to convince each
other that their health care choices are best.
WOMAN: Cheers, guys.
MAN: Cheers.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: They're OK with the division.
WOMAN: And I was going to say, vive la difference.
WOMAN: Vive la difference!
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: For the "PBS NewsHour,"
I'm William Brangham outside Sydney, Australia.
JUDY WOODRUFF: There are many things we take
for granted in the U.S.
Tonight's Brief But Spectacular features Gertrude
Kabwazi, the country director for a nonprofit
that is working to help people deal with COVID-19
and break the cycle of poverty in Malawi.
GERTRUDE KABWAZI, Yamba Malawi: I am in Malawi,
which is situated in the southern part of
Africa.
The poverty levels in this country are very
high. Almost 52 percent of the population
is living under a dollar a day. These people
are suffering more with COVID-19 because they
are communities that were already struggling.
I work for an organization called Yamba Malawi.
Our mission is to uplift the lives of vulnerable
children by empowering communities to break
the cycle of poverty.
Having grown in the village myself, I understand
the challenges that people in the rural communities
face every single day.
Malawi was very late to recognize COVID cases,
simply because we didn't have the facilities
to test, but also because many people in Malawi
do not have access to information. It was
very difficult for those people who are in
remote areas to understand what COVID is,
but even what to do when they're infected.
Nine out of 10 households do not have soap.
And most of the community members do not have
access to running water, clean water. They
live in a one-room house. And there may be
six to 10 members in that house.
So, isolation will be practically impossible.
We are fearing that even the small gains that
have been made through programs like Yamba
Malawi, they are going to be eroded by the
impact of the COVID-19.
Their savings are only minimal, and those
savings can not last them that long. The community
members themselves, they're geared up to contribute
something to deal with COVID-19 in whatever
way they would love to.
The households that have something, they want
to share with the other households that do
not have something. So, it gives me hope that
we are all more united than ever.
My name is Gertrude Kabwazi. This is my Brief
But Spectacular take on empowering the people
of Malawi during COVID-19.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And thank you for reminding
us of something that really matters.
Stay with us, as we reflect on the life of
Hall of Fame pitcher and New York Mets legend
Tom Seaver.
But, first, take a moment to hear from your
local PBS station. It's a chance to offer
your support, which helps to keep programs
like ours on the air.
Now we take a second look at our interview
with one of the world's most renowned scientists
and environmentalists, Jane Goodall.
A new National Geographic documentary explores
her life and career, teaching generations
how interconnected we are with the natural
world.
Jeffrey Brown spoke with Goodall about the
pandemic and her life's work.
This encore presentation is part of ongoing
arts and culture series, Canvas.
JEFFREY BROWN: For decades, Jane Goodall has
traveled the world as a nonstop advocate for
the conservation of animals and the Earth.
Now, like the rest of us, she's confined to
her home. but she says:
JANE GOODALL: I have never worked harder in
my life, because it's the 60th anniversary
of the research at Gombe. We were going to
be celebrating all the year.
We were just in a perfect situation for good
fund-raising, and then, boom, everything stopped.
So I'm trying to keep up the momentum.
JEFFREY BROWN: Her work now is virtual, and
as always, even at 86, virtually nonstop.
As we see in the film, it all began in 1960,
when a young British woman without a college
degree went to what is now Gombe Stream National
Park in Tanzania to live with and study chimpanzees
in a new way.
JANE GOODALL: It's absolutely so vivid. and
of course, it was a time when the chimpanzees
were like part of my family.
And the striking thing was how like us they
actually are. When I got to Cambridge, because
Louis Leakey said I had to get a degree, I
was told I would done everything wrong. I
shouldn't have given the chimps names. They
should have had numbers. I couldn't talk about
personality, mind or emotion. Those were unique
to us, I was told.
But I had been taught by my dog Rusty...
JEFFREY BROWN: Yes.
JANE GOODALL: ... who sits near me, Rusty,
he was a very, very special dog. And there's
never been another dog quite like him.
JEFFREY BROWN: Look at look. Look at Rusty
and look at a young Jane Goodall.
JANE GOODALL: Look at us side by side.
(LAUGHTER)
But Rusty was a special dog. All dogs are
special, really, but he was extra special.
And of course animals have personalities,
minds and emotions. And now science has been
forced to accept we're not, after all, the
only beings with those attributes.
JEFFREY BROWN: Changing minds and practices
hasn't always been easy, but she's gotten
results.
Goodall campaigned against using chimpanzees
and other animals for medical research. She's
also been a leading voice against animal trafficking
and other abuses. And she sees a disregard
for nature and disrespect for animals behind
today's global pandemic.
While the exact origins of COVID-19 are being
examined and debated, evidence points to China's
so-called wet markets, where live animals
and meat are sold. This is a virus that jumped
from animals to humans.
JANE GOODALL: We are all interconnected. And
if we don't get that lesson from this pandemic,
then maybe we never will.
JEFFREY BROWN: How does that force the lesson
us?
JANE GOODALL: Well, it should force a lesson
us because it's our interactions with animals
and the environment, all of it, that has led
to the virus being able to leap over from
some kind of animal into us, as has happened
before.
And I just hope that, when this is over, we're
wiser. And I hope that the Chinese ban on
the wet markets will, A, be made permanent,
and B, extend to the use of wild animals for
medicine like pangolin scales, bear bile,
and so on.
JEFFREY BROWN: Is that the most important
thing you think needs to happen now to prevent
future pandemics?
JANE GOODALL: I think it's extremely important.
But we also need to fight the animal trafficking,
because that, too, brings animals together
in close contact, where they are being sold
in markets, for example.
JEFFREY BROWN: There's been so much attention,
first in China, then Europe and of course,
here in the U.S. And I wonder about your fears
for what's happening in Africa.
JANE GOODALL: I'm extremely worried about
Africa, because so many countries they haven't
got well-developed health care systems.
And people who make their money by living
day by day by day, like the street vendors
and people like that, if they can't ply their
trade and they can't I don't know what's going
to happen. There will be anger. there will
be riots. There will probably be violence.
And so some countries are saying, all right,
let's carry on with business as usual. And
then, of course, the virus will spread. It's
a pretty grim picture. And I don't think anybody
really has got a grip on it.
JEFFREY BROWN: Where is there hope? Jane Goodall
and her institute began creating their own
version of it in Tanzania in 1991 through
a conservation education program for young
people.
Called Roots & Shoots, it's now in 65 countries
around the world and has served several generations.
I wonder if you're thinking about your own
mortality and what you will leave behind and
who will pick up afterwards.
JANE GOODALL: Well, I'm being 86, I'm obviously,
the time I have left is slowly shrinking,
which means I have to work ever harder.
People go, you need to slow down. But I have
to go quicker. The main message that I have
is that every single one of us, every single
day, we make some impact on the planet. And
we have a choice as to what impact we make.
What we buy, what we wear, where did it come
from?
And if enough of us make ethical choices and
start thinking in a new way, then business
will have to change because of consumer pressure,
and governments will just have to obey the
will of the people, because enough of us willing
it.
So, each one of us is part of this growing
it's my greatest reason to hope.
JEFFREY BROWN: All right, Jane Goodall, thank
you for talking to us.
JANE GOODALL: Thank you very much for inviting
me.
JUDY WOODRUFF: She's amazing.
And you can dive into all the arts and culture
coverage in our Canvas series online at artscanvas.org.
We will see you there.
Finally tonight, remembering Tom Seaver, the
Hall of Fame player who was one of baseball's
greatest power pitchers.
Stephanie Sy has the appreciation.
ANNOUNCER: Two-strike count to Sanguillen.
And Seaver sets up, now checks back over his
shoulder. Here's the pitch, swing and a miss,
struck him out, an ovation for Seaver.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
STEPHANIE SY: Ask any New York Mets fan, who
was the greatest player in the team's history,
the surefire answer is Tom Seaver.
He holds the record in a bevy of Mets all-time
pitching categories, including most wins,
strikeouts and shutouts. A winner of three
Cy Young Awards, he's considered one of the
greatest pitchers in the history of the game.
Period.
Over the course of two decades, he won 311
games and was a 12-time All-Star and is still
sixth on the list for most strikeouts of all
time. Known as the Franchise, Seaver led the
transformation of the Mets from a band of
lovable losers to world champions.
In 2011, he reflected on winning the 1969
World Series and what really drove him.
TOM SEAVER, Former Major League Baseball Player:
It isn't the celebration. It isn't the joy.
It isn't the champagne. It isn't. It's what's
on the field. That's where the art form is,
STEPHANIE SY: Seaver debuted with the struggling
Mets in 1967, and his impact was immediate.
He won 16 games in his first season and was
voted the National League rookie of the year.
In 1969, Seaver racked up 25 wins, more than
any Major League pitcher that season. That's
when Tom Terrific won his first National League
Cy Young Award.
That year, the Mets defeated the heavily favored
Baltimore Orioles to win their first ever
World Series.
TOM SEAVER: They thought they were going to
run us right off the field. And we come to
play.
STEPHANIE SY: In 1977, Seaver was traded to
the Cincinnati Reds, but he wasn't done making
history. In 1978, he achieved what had until
then eluded him, pitching a no-hitter.
ANNOUNCER: He bounces to first base. Driessen
has it. He goes to the bag. And Seaver's got
it!
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
ANNOUNCER: Tom Seaver has pitched his first
Major League no-hitter!
STEPHANIE SY: In 1985, Seaver notched another
place in history, when he won his 300th career
game.
ANNOUNCER: The ball game is over. Seaver has
won 300.
STEPHANIE SY: Seaver retired from baseball
in 1986 at 41 years old. He pivoted to sportscasting,
working alongside the legendary Vin Scully.
VIN SCULLY, Announcer: Hi, everybody. I'm
Vin Scully, along with Tom Seaver.
STEPHANIE SY: In 1992, Seaver was elected
to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by the
highest vote percentage ever recorded at that
time.
Seaver's family announced that he would completely
retire from public life, after being diagnosed
with a devastating form of dementia. That,
combined with a recent diagnosis of COVID,
led to the baseball great's passing on Monday.
George Thomas Seaver was 75 years old.
For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Stephanie Sy.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Reminding us why we love so
much of baseball, remembering Tom Seaver.
And that's the "NewsHour" for tonight. I'm
Judy Woodruff.
Join us online and again here tomorrow evening.
For all of us at the "PBS NewsHour," thank
you, please stay safe, and we'll see you soon.
