After years of the media demonizing and attacking any scientists supporting the lab theory of COVID-19, agencies like the FBI have concluded that it is the most likely scenario. Even the Washington Post and other long antagonistic media outlets have come to admit that the theory is credible. None of that has apparently changed minds over at the Los Angeles Times, which helped lead the media mob against dissenting scientists. That includes the L.A. Times science columnist Michael Hiltzik, who is often cited as an example of the unrelenting and aggressive campaign to cancel those scientists who challenged the natural origins theory. Hiltzik and the L.A. Times just ran a column renewing attacks on those who support this theory, a column that continues to omit key countervailing information from the readers.
The L.A. Times appears to be the last dog in this fight. As discussed in my recent column, media outlets that ridiculed or ravaged scientists over the theory have acknowledged that it is indeed plausible.
For example, in 2021, New York Times science and health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli was still calling on reporters not to mention the “racist” lab theory.
Likewise, the Washington Post denounced Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark) when he raised the theory for “repeat[ing] a fringe theory suggesting that the ongoing spread of a coronavirus is connected to research in the disease-ravaged epicenter of Wuhan, China.”
After Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) mentioned the lab theory, Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler mocked him: “I fear @tedcruz missed the scientific animation in the video that shows how it is virtually impossible for this virus to jump from the lab. Or the many interviews with actual scientists. We deal in facts, and viewers can judge for themselves.”
Then, as more government reports indicated that the theory could be correct, the Post shrugged, and Kessler wrote that the lab theory was “suddenly credible.”
Most recently, newly-confirmed CIA Director John Ratcliffe released the CIA report, which details how it views the lab theory as the most likely explanation for the virus, though assigning a “low confidence” finding.
The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and other news outlets reported on the finding that the lab theory was the most likely. The BBC reported that “the CIA on Saturday offered a new assessment on the origin of the Covid outbreak, saying the coronavirus is ‘more likely’ to have leaked from a Chinese lab than to have come from animals. But the intelligence agency cautioned it had ‘low confidence’ in this determination.”
I noted in the column that the finding does not resolve the debate, which will continue. The point was that there can now be a debate. The CIA did not reject the lab theory over the natural origins theory despite the overwhelming message that was sent by the L.A. Times in treating the theory as racist or looney.
Hiltzik discusses my column while objecting that I added a link to the CIA definition of “low confidence” not long after the blog posting (Such additions are common on this blog and other blogs. I often note such changes, but there was no material change in the point of the column which focused on the free speech issue). The point is not that the recommendation was made with low confidence, but that the theory was found to be plausible.
Hiltzik criticizes my column and others for highlighting the most recent disclosure. However, he omits that this follows even stronger findings from agencies like the FBI and evidence (as discussed in my column) that government scientists found the theory credible.
He also omits any mention of the fact that he is widely cited as one of the most aggressive voices seeking to cancel scientists who voiced support for the theory. While arguing that scientific journals have not embraced the theory, he leaves out that he targeted schools that sought to allow academic discussions of the theory.
Hiltzik decried an event associated with Bhattacharya, writing that “we’re living in an upside-down world” because Stanford University allowed dissenting scientists to speak at a scientific forum. Hiltzik also wrote a column titled “The COVID lab leak claim isn’t just an attack on science, but a threat to public health.”
Instead, Hiltzik defends China in the column against claims that it was not forthcoming in the investigations into the virus:
“The Chinese government has been accused, mostly by the lab-leak camp, of suppressing evidence of the role of the Wuhan lab out of embarrassment or fear of international repercussions. But that’s highly misleading. The truth is that China is no happier about evidence that the pandemic originated in one of its wildlife markets.”
News organizations reported how China shut down contacts with scientists and closed off access to the lab, including refusing to give data to WHO.
Even NBC, which once piled on the attacks on dissenting scientists, has noted that China has steadfastly fought disclosures and only released information that was going to be made public.
As Hiltzik notes, even the World Health Organization (WHO) denounced China for its lack of transparency. WHO has long been accused of being dominated by China, particularly in its initial investigations into the virus.
The L.A. Times, however, is still downplaying such complaints and attributing them to fringe writers. Hiltzik portrays the criticism as mostly the ravings of “the lab-leak camp” and says the accusations are “misleading.”
He also does not discuss the findings of other federal and congressional reports.
He focuses instead on the lack of “peer-reviewed journals” supporting the theory. It is an ironic point from a writer who attacked Stanford for even allowing scientists to share their work in an academic setting.
Once again, however, none of these reports are dispositive either way. That is the point. The debate that figures like Hiltzik fought to prevent can finally occur.
However, the L.A. Times is still trying to chill that debate by portraying anyone supporting the theory as purveyors of “disinformation.” Hiltzik writes:
“The uncritical retailing of the CIA assessment underscores the perils of scientific misinformation and disinformation for public health. The Trump administration’s evidence-free focus on the Chinese laboratories ranks as anti-science propaganda.”
Even though agencies like the FBI are giving more credence to the lab theory, the L.A. Times is still portraying the position as dangerous disinformation.
It takes an element of rage to maintain this dwindling position. Many of the experts who were once ridiculed for questioning the efficacy of masks, the six-foot rule, natural immunities, and school closures have been supported in recent reports. There is growing support for the view, for example, that our closure of schools did not have a meaningful impact on the transmission rate of the virus. Yet, that was another debate that was snuffed out under the attacks over spreading disinformation. (Notably, Hiltzik also supported closing schools and has rejected claims that it was a mistake).
I value writers like Hiltzik for challenging scientists on issues like the lab theory. For those of us with little scientific knowledge, such debates among knowledgeable people are essential. Most of us are open to either theory. However, figures like Hiltzik actively sought to curtail that debate when it was most needed. He portrayed the very discussion of the theory as a public health danger and now continues to invoke the catch-all “disinformation” label to dismiss countervailing views.
It is a particularly ironic moment when L.A. Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong is promising to restore objectivity to the newspaper and even posting a “bias meter” for readers to be warned about slanted material.
The L.A. Times and Hiltzik are obviously and heavily invested in the rejection of the lab theory. However, when you are dismissing Chinese obstruction, the burden on the newspaper is becoming not just crushing but embarrassing. There is an alternative. The L.A. Times could admit that it was wrong in demonizing scientists and that both of these theories are plausible.
Most importantly, it could embrace the need for an open and civil debate on the question. As the leading newspaper in the state with the greatest concentration of academic and research facilities, the L.A. Times owes it to its readers to be honest and open with both sides of the origins debate.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
67 cases of TB in Kansas. Call me shocked, Actually not, it’s a red state, they don’t trump voters don’t believe in science.
Please, if your sick, and you voted for trump, stay home, pray to trump, then call your local refuse center to have them pick up your dead body in 2 days after you die from a disease the rest of us get treatment for.
Catastrophic Anthropogenic Immigration Reform is a first-order forcing of excess murder, rape, crime, and disease. That and migratory Americans from red Democratic states with socially liberal orientations.
Lot of talk here today about cults and cultish behavior. So here is a possible kewl one! Zizians. Out of Washington State – young computer nerds – Murders in Washington State and the Vermont murder of a border patrol agent, so far.
An excerpt:
Bauckholt rented one unit through Airbnb starting in July 2023 and moved to the second unit later that year, the owner said Tuesday. Youngblut began renting the original unit in November 2024 and had paid nearly $10,000 to extend her stay until the end of March, he said.
The owner, who did not want to be identified for safety reasons, said he had sent messages to all his renters during a recent cold snap asking them to let their faucets drip to avoid frozen pipes. He never heard back from either one, but an individual renting the other half of Youngblut’s duplex said her hot water wasn’t working, so the owner went to check on the plumbing.
“The thing that struck me the most was that there was a stretcher in the living room. Like, what in the world is going on with these people?” he said.
[and]
In 2022, the landlord was impaled by a sword during a violent incident following a dispute with his tenants at the time, who were living in box trucks on his property.
Lind shot two of his alleged attackers during the assault on him, killing 31-year-old Emma Borhanian and injuring another person, which authorities ruled to be self-defense, according to court records obtained by Open Vallejo. But he was left seriously wounded and blinded in one eye.
Suri Dao and Alexander Jeffrey Leatham were charged with murder, attempted murder, and aggravated mayhem for the death of Borhanian, and the attempted killing of Lind, according to court records.
Thomas Young, who was a friend of Lind’s, told Open Vallejo that when he searched the box trucks after the attack, he made a “creepy” discovery.
Stashed inside the trucks, which were allegedly registered in Vermont, were used surgical equipment, more than a dozen laptops, and expensive electronics.
“It was actually very uncomfortable,” Young said. “You kinda wanted to put on a hazmat suit before going into it. It was really just creepy in the extreme.”
Before his death last week, Lind was set to testify against his alleged assailants at their trial in April, according to court records.
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/border-agent-murder-vermont-cult-b2687992.html
Any chance that Michael Hiltzik is one of the DNC Trolls here???
Dennis McIntyre once said that he was 73 years old, and this dude is 74, now. Coinky-dink???
My comment has nothing to do with the lab theory of bats etc. Professor Turley why don’t you talk about the problem of Trump, in a matter of 8 days is hell bent on destroying this country of ours,and other countries that we safeguard, as he said he would, and the people he serves, will be destroyed as well because he doesn’t care about anyone but himself and his own retribution!!!!!
Yes, professor.
M
China owes 195 countries $250 trillion (to be increased) in damages.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Netherlands, issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes.
The International Court of Justice must find that the preponderance of evidence proves that it is more likely true than not that China is liable for the deliberate or accidental release of “China Flu, 2019″ from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.
This is much bigger than the origin of COVID. The lesson is not that the virus was man-made or nature-made. That argument is left to another day and for historians. The bigger lesson is a group of people shutdown or at least tried to shutdown the discussion on the origins. Other than the usual players in politics, for the life of me I cannot figure out why politics trumped science.
I can say both those from government and the media shouting down the others only increases distrust from citizenry when it is obvious someone did not have the country’s best interests in mind. You wonder why traditional media is losing ground, just look.
It turns out the lab leak is a viable option, what does the other side say now? The hard part is not that some believed in the natural market because that has happened in the past, but to the exclusion of an engineered virus is probabilistic at least and dangerous at best.
One has to wonder why all of the vitriol over the cause and why the name calling. Maybe they were given marching orders.
Look no further than what is obvious. This was a lab leak (accidental vs intentional) of an engineered pathogen that implicated the US who was helping to fund the research. If this was a natural occurrence, both China and the US are not responsible. Discussion was shut down to protect the guilty. Why the LA Times is still so focused on the subject is curious.
Varchat – it is WORSE than you are claiming – not only are China and the US jointly responsible, But Fauxi PERSONALLY bears responsibility.
Fauci is the Godfather of Covid-19. In 2017, he said a pandemic would occur during Trump’s first term.
Well stated, Quiet Man.
As Deep Throat said, “Follow the Money”.
The political elites are trying to figure out how to drastically reduce the world’s population, while keeping themselves safe in their remotely located havens.
What other reason for developing infectious diseases that can wipe out massive amounts of people? Look at the move to crowd people together, by mass transit, ghetto style housing, the homeless all over the streets. Huge schools and not “home schooling”.
Look at the hysteria over the legalization of killing children, born and the soon to be born. Take a look at these pro-abortion women. do you think anyone would want to have sex with them.
The gender changing catastrophe is another way to reduce the population.
I am amazed that the political elites can convince their toadies to follow their marching orders.
Anybody know how much China is paying Hiltzik?
Anybody know how much China is paying Elmo Muskrat??
I do.
His revenue from China is about $22 billion year.
Nasty.
Dear Mr. Turley, Mr. Hiltzik reminds me of the staunch Nazi’s who continued to do the Nazi salute and scream “Heil Hitler” although he was dead, and they had lost the war. The democrats will continue oppose anything Mr. Trump suggests or stands for. There is hell to pay if they don’t by their own party. Sounds just like a cult to me.
Man the libtarded left has moved so far left… Turley who is liberal, sounds like a Regan era Republican, right of center.
And to be clear, its not Turley who moved…
This is why the FCC and FTC had rules about who controlled the media and how much of the media they could control.
Covid “Lab Leak” theory confirmed in China
There’s the truth and then there’s China.
The LA Times probably helped create the alternative universe, aka California, that some of its writers still cling to. The Times may represent the best example of lousy journalism not just because of how it frames what it prints, but also because of what it chooses to omit.
Does anyone recall Obama’s 2004 Illinois US Senatorial campaign against republican Jack Ryan? The Times, cheered on by David Axelrod, sued for the release of sealed court documents about custody of the Ryans’ children. I’m sure they hoped to embarrass Ryan and challenge his fitness to represent Illinois in the US Senate.
Fast forward, Ryan dropped from the race and was replaced by Alan Keyes. Obama won, and mid-term ran against and defeated Hillary Clinton for the democrat nomination for President.
LA Times reporting about Obama’s long relationship with neighbors Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, two notorious leftist and violent academics from Chicago, amounted to little more than ‘nothing to see here it’s all ancient history.’
The LA Times had eyewitness accounts and possibly videos of neighborhood meetings attended by Obama and others including Ayers. They refused to share what they had with their readers and Illinois voters. Obama defeated McCain and became President in 2008.
What motivates a newspaper to emphasize child custody history in one situation more than meeting conversations with extreme politcal mentors in another? Answer, the kind of double standards and hypocrisy that continue at the LA Times. Good luck to Los Angeles Times owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong.
Good discussion with Dr. Simone Gold an anti-COVID vaxxer:
Though yes, I’m interested in learning the origins of this madness and who was involved, ultimately all that matters to me is the resulting tyranny of the modern left globally, for *years*, and never, ever letting it happen again. And The LA Times and its child staff can go blow, they are and have always been irrelevant absurd.
And PS to the poster that queried about Chinese medical professionals who dissented ‘disappearing’ during that time – yes, they did. *Poof*. Gone, just like that. The past administration and all that led up to it are a kind of corruption we had never seen before in the states. Let us never, ever see it again. And that means never, ever voting dem again, for anything, they are bought by the globalists whole hog, including the CCP, ALL of them whether they realize it or not (and the younger DNC, because they are basically spoiled and stupid, do not realize they are nothing more than idiot shills for powers that care nothing for them).
The problem concerning such a debate is that Wuhan Institute of Virology is apparently conducting classified research as well. Meaning, experiments that its virologists are not permitted to publicly disclose or discus. So much for the dispositive. But there are, seemingly, only two possibilities here – either the virus was created in China or it was created here in the US. And truthfully, the very fact that response was so heavily politicized, so tyrannically leveraged for political purpose, warrants our mutual collective distrust, the People are rightfully every bit as distrustful of their own government today as they are of the Chinese.
betuadollar: Nice comment.
(honest Q: If NIH/US-based Eco Health Alliance funded the subject research, wouldn’t/shouldn’t/couldn’t we have had pretty-much automatic access to the classified info?)
Actually, the highest probability is that the virus was created in Wuhan with funding from the U. S. by way of Fauci’s agency, but directed through a grant recipient. Both the Chinese government and the American government were motivated to leave the matter in doubt.
We can go back and forth, yada yada, on this important matter for-EVER , but we can never know the real, dispositive truth until China and Wuhan have a “come to Jesus” meeting with global representatives and reveal both inculpatory and exculpatory findings–ALL of them. There is obviously missing information (not necessarily intentional) that is hindering resolution.
That includes accessibility to, and information from, all lab personnel (to my knowledge, only one female ever came forward?) Even if tissue samples from the three sickened/deceased lab personnel were provided, their authenticity, without genealogy DNA, would remain equivocal.
I encourage persons to look at my attached link; I find it objective and full of facts which I did not know. (for those in a hurry, take a look at the very last (short) paragraphs.
https://www.firstpost.com/world/amid-scrutiny-of-us-funded-coronavirus-research-in-china-new-docs-flag-safety-transparency-issues-13834655.html
Professor Turley writes, “The L.A. Times appears to be the last dog in this fight.”
And they will remain in this fight in perpetuity. The LA Times is a pipe organ of Beijing. Our West Coast oligarchs still believe the good old days of exploiting cheap Chinese labor will return, and they are flat wrong. Globalism isn’t dead, but after 40 years, it’s starting to show its age, and that also will not change. All the wishful thinking by plutocrats won’t change that, but they control what the LA Times prints.
Beijing exploits fifth columns like the LA Times because Beijing understands (probably correctly) that if Beijing isn’t meddling in California, the U.S. will be meddling in the First-Island Chain. It’s a zero-sum game, so the CCP economically cultivates agents on the West Coast for strategic reasons.
The Democratic Party blithely ignores these risks by relentlessly antagonizing America’s interior. These red states are the glue that holds East and West together. To the extent the interior becomes decadent and marginalized, to that same extent, Washington’s control of the West Coast weakens.
China understands this. That is their strategy. The Democrats, themselves, have no strategy for national unity. It’s just a phony, elitist nihilism. And BTW, if China ever does control the Pacific Rim, the West Coast won’t get rich. They’ll wind up like smoldering LA.
China has similar globalist tensions between its interior and coast, but China doesn’t have a wolf at its western door. We do.
All this might sound nuts to most people, but in 50 years, it won’t. Western decadence makes anything possible.
I think the American people are slowly waking up to this risk, but the problem remains. 48% voted for the Disintegration Party, and a President took bribes from Beijing and remains at large. 40 years ago, that same man would have been impeached and convicted.
The most important thing Donald Trump can do is pull the Democratic Party away from the influence of Beijing’s front groups on the globalist Left. We won’t survive with only one sane political party.
A very cogent analysis. Reminds me of 50 years ago when I was a highschool student at the height of the Cold War, my social studies teacher said that in 50 years our main geopolitical rival would be China, not Russia. It also reminds me of a trope popular in those days: “Very clever these Chinese.”
Kansas, I knew that was you 😉
The one saying I remember of that era is Never Trust the Chinese.
1st of all, it’s in the LA Times. If accuracy were rated as a percentage, the LA Times would hit somewhere between 38% and 49%. In other words, believability is not something they can brag about.
And,
B, why can’t we worry about sanity at the LA Times is a year or so, when even the intellectual laggards get the message.
Sincerely Yours,
Me.
“Western decadence makes anything possible.”
Exactly. And worse, is the threat from INSIDE the U.S.
Gang membership is estimated at 1.4 million across the country. I think that number is way low, and that doesn’t even count the unaffiliated criminals, the twosies and threesies here and there. And you have Democrats wanting to disarm the law-abiding people.
But anyway if 1.4 million gang members, how many active duty military in the country? – 1.3 million. And 85% of those are non-combat forces, leaving about 200,000 actual “fighters.” We have cops, and we have reserves but still – gang members outnumber combat forces 7 to 1.
Cops? About 1.3 million in the country. About 20% are support staff, leaving a little over a million actual cops on the street.
Can you imagine this turning to a guerilla war in the future?
And it is worse in Europe.
Excellent points, Floyd. Nobody can hurt you like the people you need to trust.
I’m glad you’re on my side. Good allies are rare.
Thank you! One advantage we have here, is that there are a large number of gun nuts, who are well-armed, and law-abiding. I read or saw something recently that said there were at least 40,000 Islamists in Great Britain. Only 75,000 in the British Army. No idea how many of those are support staff.
That ought to be interesting, if the country implodes. Asymetrical warfare and all.
The big issue is not where C19 came from, but the efforts – including those of our government to silence one hypothesis.
Worse the view that Government actively censored was the one of the then president of the United States.
Various journalists are free to chose what view they wish to accept – even argue for.
They are free to criticise the weaknesses of other views.
They are not free to work to suppress views they disagree with.
And government particularly may not constitutionally or legally suppress any view.
I do not care if someone is claiming that Covid came from little green men – that view may not be supressed.
Further science journals must allow the presentation of papers and research with credible evidence even of a heterodox claim,
Further those committed to seeking the truth about anything, do not seek to suppress views they disagree with.
While there is no rule of logic that dictates that it is what is true that gets supressed,
It is human nature that Censorship occurs when what is being censored challenges a belief rather than a conclusion of evidence.
It is not an accident that the lab leak Thesis is proving more credible than the natural origens theory.
The more vigorous the efforts to suppress the more likely what is being supressed is true.
The Alpha Bank nonsense was a Hoax,
There was no Russian Collusion.
The Hunter Biden Laptop was not Russian disinformation.
Joe Biden is cognitively impaired,
Masks do not stop the spread of Covid.
Lockdowns do not stop the spread of Covid,
The vaccine does not stop the spread of Covid.
Closing Schools does not stop the spread of Covid.
We can not prove beyond a doubt where Covid came from, but it is far more likely to have originated from a lab, than a wet market.
It is also not random chance that a Billionaire who has been successful in multiple different endeavors, would be right and a government scientist would be wrong.
It appears that, despite what appear to have been the best efforts of owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, the LA TImes staff is determined to keep that s*** stained rag circling the bowl at an accelerating clip. I would advise the good doctor to consider looking for a buyer while any value remains to be salvaged from what is looking more and more to be a poor investment.
There’s a simpler solution, fire the CEO and Editor and bring in people who are clearly dedicated to balance in reporting and editorializing and who will fire any reporter or columnist who claims different views are disinformation or misinformation or to be cancelled.