By Betty Andrews
The Washington Post[1] actively fact checks dubious claims made by politicians and public figures and, during his time in office, Donald Trump has made false claims frequently enough to warrant an entire webpage dedicated to compiling them. As of April 3rd, he had made 18,000 false or misleading claims over the course of 1,170 days, an astonishing rate in comparison to Barack Obama’s 2920-day term, which provoked fact-checks from the Washington Post for 250 questionable statements. Given the impunity provided by his position as President of the United States, these false claims and the confidence with which they are delivered and promptly denied by Trump could be characterized as negative parrhesia, the inverse to Foucault’s[2] fearless speech. In targeting those less powerful than himself, Trump engages in reckless speech, putting many at serious risk of harm. In the context of a global pandemic, the consequences of reckless speech become both more visible, and more deadly.
Some of this speech is more direct, for example the potential consequences of advocating for injecting bleach are clear. Yet this speech is more subtle, but no less deadly, elsewhere. When Trump frequently suggested stockpiling the medication hydroxychloroquine – his justification being ‘what do you have to lose?’- it’s clear that he is addressing a demographic that excludes those who rely on this drug to survive. The drug is used to treat lupus, which disproportionately effects women, and malaria which disproportionately effects migrants, and these issues are also intersected by class and socioeconomic factors. Here Trump displays a blatant disregard for the lives of many who are already disadvantaged by chronic illness, especially those who can’t afford to stockpile.
In denying the pandemic as a hoax, Trump’s reckless speech has had serious, quantifiable, consequences that extend further than the government’s own policy and response. Bursztyn et al (2020)[3] have carried out a study drawing comparisons between two pro-Trump talk shows on the Fox News television network, one presented by Sean Hannity and the other by Tucker Carlson. Hannity, like Trump, minimized the severity of the situation, whilst Carlson gave a more realistic interpretation. This study found a strong link between higher levels of infection and viewership of Hannity’s talk show at a country level. Those who watched Hannity were also less likely to change their behavior, and thus contribute to the further spread of this pandemic. The spread of disinformation, then, has tangible, deadly consequences.
At this time, those who engage in fearless speech are much needed. However, medical professionals within the government advocating for sensible strategies in terms of vaccine development are being moved to less influential positions or dismissed altogether, compounding the negative consequences of the actions they attempt to protest. As evidenced by the Washington Post, Trump’s reckless speech is nothing new, but is thrown into stark relief in the context of a deadly disease.
Although the consequences of previous false claims are likely less obvious and less direct in a world that is not gripped by a pandemic, they must exist, nonetheless. I suspect also that the fall out will always be disproportionately felt along these same gendered, racialized, and economic lines, and as such these acts of reckless speech demand investigation and accountability.
[1] “Tracking all of President Trump’s false or misleading claims”. The Washington Post, 29 May 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2&tid=lk_inline_manual_2&tid=lk_inline_manual_3&tid=lk_inline_manual_4&tid=lk_inline_manual_2&itid=lk_inline_manual_2
[2] Franks, Mary Anne. “Fearless Speech,” First Amendment Law Review 17, no. Symposium (2018): 294-342. https://falrunc.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/fearless-speech.pdf
[3] Bursztyn, Leonard et. al. Misinformation during a pandemic. PDF File. April 19, 2020. https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_202044.pdf
A little about Betty:
Betty Andrews just finished a joint degree in Social Anthropology and International Relations at the University of St Andrews. She is an avid whitewater kayaker with a passion for issues of social justice and equality and hopes to pursue a career in human rights and anti-trafficking.