Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Why Trump assassination attempt theories show lies never end

Donald Trump on stage at the Republican National Convention

Former President Donald Trump speaks at the 2024 Republican National Convention on July 18.

J. Conrad Williams Jr.

By: Michele Weldon: Weldon is an author, journalist, emerita faculty in journalism at Northwestern University and senior leader with The OpEd Project. Her latest book is “ The Time We Have: Essays on Pandemic Living.”

Diamonds are forever, or at least that was the title of the 1971 James Bond movie and an even earlier 1947 advertising campaign for DeBeers jewelry. Tattoos, belief systems, truth and relationships are also supposed to last forever — that is, until they are removed, disproven, ended or disintegrate.

Lately we have questioned whether Covid really will last forever and, with it, the parallel pandemic of misinformation it spawned. The new rash of conspiracy theories and unproven proclamations about the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump signals that the plague of lies may last forever, too.


Summer ushers in a Covid surge of the new variant that is unfolding in the U.S. and abroad with emergency room visits up 23 percent, and a 13 percent increase in hospitalizations in this country, the Centers for Disease Control reports. Infections are increasing in 39 states or territories and declining in none. The World Health Organization reports more than 1,000 deaths from Covid in this country in June.

Even though the WHO declared in May 2023 that Covid was no longer a public health concern, the notion that this disease will forever pose a threat lingers. There have been more than 7 million deaths worldwide from Covid to date, and more deaths every day.

The lies surrounding Covid, vaccinations and treatments also still persist, calling into question most every source of news and timely announcements. Covid for many marked the end of innocence for those who believed in the reliability and credibility of news sources.

Reality is freshly challenged as a new Washington Post poll shows that nearly 30 Republican congressional members blame President Joe Biden, the Secret Service, Democrats or the media for Trump's shooting. None of these projections are substantiated.

The infinite future for the Covid pandemic signals a tale of two countries divided into those who are careful with masking and vaxxing due to correct health information and safe practices, and those who defy prevention and treatment because they are part of a political scheme of control and encroachment on their civil rights. The division is once again prominent with the way the Trump rally shooting is interpreted and explained — without factual backup.

Fortunately, last month the Supreme Court denied the lawsuit challenging the government’s right to restrict social media platforms from disseminating Covid-19 misinformation. The lawsuit was in reaction to Surgeon General Vivek Murthy seeking to stem the tide of inaccurate vaccine information that could cost thousands of lives.

The prevailing falsehoods about Covid are not just bothersome or inconvenient, they change behaviors that result in the spread of infections, hospitalizations and deaths. Playing what one expert calls “Covid roulette” with risky behaviors based on false information can result in more cases. Untruths are a matter of life and death.

Politifact has fact-checked more than 2,300 claims about Covid vaccines, including the Instagram post in January that claimed 17 million people died from vaccines. Not true.

A recent Brown University study of “50 papers published between Jan. 1, 2020, and Feb. 24, 2023, that investigated the efficacy of 119 misinformation interventions,” found that actions to counter inaccuracies around Covid and publications are urgently needed.

“Public health practitioners, journalists, community organizations and other trusted messengers are tasked with responding to health misinformation every day,” said co-author Stefanie Friedhoff, an associate professor at Brown’s School of Public Health and co-director of the Information Futures Lab.

Whether or not people believe Covid infections will last another year, decade or century, it is critical to guarantee that reliable, factual information about Covid is available and that misformation is debunked as swiftly as possible.

A March 2024 Gallup News poll shows “ 59% of Americans believe the pandemic is over.” More than half, or “57%, report that their lives have not returned to normal, and 43% expect they never will.”

Yes, Covid is on the rise and hopefully new vaccine variants can keep the spread under control and prevent deaths. The vaccine for disinformation of any and all sorts is a commitment to what is real and a vigorous rejection of false narratives. Debunking the latest untrue assertions can also prevent deaths from possible political violence.

As a nation, we can and must handle the truth.

Read More

Meta Undermining Trust but Verify through Paid Links
Facebook launches voting resource tool
Facebook launches voting resource tool

Meta Undermining Trust but Verify through Paid Links

Facebook is testing limits on shared external links, which would become a paid feature through their Meta Verified program, which costs $14.99 per month.

This change solidifies that verification badges are now meaningless signifiers. Yet it wasn’t always so; the verified internet was built to support participation and trust. Beginning with Twitter’s verification program launched in 2009, a checkmark next to a username indicated that an account had been verified to represent a notable person or official account for a business. We could believe that an elected official or a brand name was who they said they were online. When Twitter Blue, and later X Premium, began to support paid blue checkmarks in November of 2022, the visual identification of verification became deceptive. Think Fake Eli Lilly accounts posting about free insulin and impersonation accounts for Elon Musk himself.

This week’s move by Meta echoes changes at Twitter/X, despite the significant evidence that it leaves information quality and user experience in a worse place than before. Despite what Facebook says, all this tells anyone is that you paid.

Keep ReadingShow less
artificial intelligence

Rather than blame AI for young Americans struggling to find work, we need to build: build new educational institutions, new retraining and upskilling programs, and, most importantly, new firms.

Surasak Suwanmake/Getty Images

Blame AI or Build With AI? Only One Approach Creates Jobs

We’re failing young Americans. Many of them are struggling to find work. Unemployment among 16- to 24-year-olds topped 10.5% in August. Even among those who do find a job, many of them are settling for lower-paying roles. More than 50% of college grads are underemployed. To make matters worse, the path forward to a more stable, lucrative career is seemingly up in the air. High school grads in their twenties find jobs at nearly the same rate as those with four-year degrees.

We have two options: blame or build. The first involves blaming AI, as if this new technology is entirely to blame for the current economic malaise facing Gen Z. This course of action involves slowing or even stopping AI adoption. For example, there’s so-called robot taxes. The thinking goes that by placing financial penalties on firms that lean into AI, there will be more roles left to Gen Z and workers in general. Then there’s the idea of banning or limiting the use of AI in hiring and firing decisions. Applicants who have struggled to find work suggest that increased use of AI may be partially at fault. Others have called for providing workers with a greater say in whether and to what extent their firm uses AI. This may help firms find ways to integrate AI in a way that augments workers rather than replace them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Parv Mehta Is Leading the Fight Against AI Misinformation

A visual representation of deep fake and disinformation concepts, featuring various related keywords in green on a dark background, symbolizing the spread of false information and the impact of artificial intelligence.

Getty Images

Parv Mehta Is Leading the Fight Against AI Misinformation

At a moment when the country is grappling with the civic consequences of rapidly advancing technology, Parv Mehta stands out as one of the most forward‑thinking young leaders of his generation. Recognized as one of the 500 Gen Zers named to the 2025 Carnegie Young Leaders for Civic Preparedness cohort, Mehta represents the kind of grounded, community‑rooted innovator the program was designed to elevate.

A high school student from Washington state, Parv has emerged as a leading youth voice on the dangers of artificial intelligence and deepfakes. He recognized early that his generation would inherit a world where misinformation spreads faster than truth—and where young people are often the most vulnerable targets. Motivated by years of computer science classes and a growing awareness of AI’s risks, he launched a project to educate students across Washington about deepfake technology, media literacy, and digital safety.

Keep ReadingShow less
child holding smartphone

As Australia bans social media for kids under 16, U.S. parents face a harder truth: online safety isn’t an individual choice; it’s a collective responsibility.

Getty Images/Keiko Iwabuchi

Parents Must Quit Infighting to Keep Kids Safe Online

Last week, Australia’s social media ban for children under age 16 officially took effect. It remains to be seen how this law will shape families' behavior; however, it’s at least a stand against the tech takeover of childhood. Here in the U.S., however, we're in a different boat — a consensus on what's best for kids feels much harder to come by among both lawmakers and parents.

In order to make true progress on this issue, we must resist the fallacy of parental individualism – that what you choose for your own child is up to you alone. That it’s a personal, or family, decision to allow smartphones, or certain apps, or social media. But it’s not a personal decision. The choice you make for your family and your kids affects them and their friends, their friends' siblings, their classmates, and so on. If there is no general consensus around parenting decisions when it comes to tech, all kids are affected.

Keep ReadingShow less