Why Bill Maher is wrong about the naming of medical conditions and why it matters.
In a recent edition of "New Rules" on his show "Real Time" talk show host Bill Maher states that "You can't blame politicians for breaking a rule you just made up."
Maher is known for a espousing a particular set of "liberal" values generally summarised by his stance against all forms of organised religion (which he is firmly against and regularly insults as stupid and childish), in favour of the liberalisation of laws on the recreational use of cannabis (an area in which he speaks candidly about his own use), and against hypocrisy (Maher regularly notes that he attacks 'liberals' as much as 'conservatives'). It is notable that Maher's application of these values is usually inconsistent - for example he regularly attacks ageism yet devotes particular ire against 'millenials' (in Maher's usage this is primarily a term for those under the age of 30 - against the generally accepted usage of the term in demography - although this is not uncommon and in some cases is due to the common misuse of this term in popular media). Maher's positions while generally in line with his core stated values are rarely applied consistently. He furthermore regularly lauds the attitudes of individuals such as Neil deGrasse Tyson and Steven Pinker - which have been labelled by my colleague @hagenilda as Irritating STEM Bros for their general ignorance of the humanities and misuse of historiography. In Maher's most recent contrarian monologue he attacks calling Donald Trump's usage if the term "the Chinese virus" for SARS-Cov-2 (the coronavirus which causes Covid-19 and commonly referred to simply as the "coronavirus" or "novel coronavirus" xenophobic and being attacks on breaking of a rule "you just made up". Maher's justification is that, according to him, medical science has always named diseases for their origin. He sites the Zika virus, Ebola virus, and Hanta virus as being named after rivers (erroneouslay in the case of Zika which is in fact named after a forest), Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), South Asian respiratory syndrome (SARS), along with a fever commonly described as being from "the Rocky mountains" in addition to "and of course the Spabish flu." Maher state this is not about culture but about facts. This is ironic given the numerous errors in his summation of virus names.
Under examination the flaw in Maher's logic is relatively obvious. With the exception of the Spanish flu the others are named for topographical features and geographical regions - not individual countries. The Ebola river in the Democratic Republic of Congo was chosen to avoid stigmising the town were cases first appeared, the Middle East and South Asia encompass multiple countries (it is also notable that whilst MERS was first documented in the Middle East its primary epidemic was in the Korean peninsular), the Rocky Mountains while primarily assiciated in the state of Colorado also range across other states stretching from Canada to New Mexico, and finally as discussed in previous entries the Spanish flu is more currently referred to by its strain designation. The term Spanish flu is the result of the fact that Spanish neutrality in World War 1 meant the press was free of wartime censorship and able to freely report the severity of the pandemic - leading to a belief that it disproportionately affected Spain - when in reality it affected multiple countries and in fact originated in the USA. China, on the other hand, while complicated in international law by the conflicting claims to sovereignty of the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China (commonly referred to in the west as Taiwan or Chinese Taipai for the avoidance of confusion) refers to complex constructed entity - a country created in part by external factors and encompassing a number of ethic groups and distinct geographic regions. Referring to SARS-Cov-2 or the resulting condition- Covid-19 - as the 'China virus'/'Chinese virus'/'Chinese coronavirus' - is not only unlike from all of the examples Maher cites, but feeds a dangerous narrative - placing responsibility for the current pandemic on an individual country. Maher uses this as a route to talk about criticism of cultures attacking Chinese wet markets (where a variety of live animals are sold and which have long been a cause for concern in terms animal-human disease transmission) and the wearing of the Burka -
- an entirely unrelated matter which echoes of racist dog whistle politics. This narrative of 'outsider responsibility' feeds the same set of myths and misinformation which has led to attacks on aid workers (including those attempting to treat the pandemic) in Africa (notably in the Central African Republic - as documented by the BBC World service - which result from an Italian missionary having been identified as being the first case in the war-torn region) and a conspiracy theory that the condition was created by France to destabilise African states where it had been involved in attacks on Islamist groups. Maher also links the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic to the eating of bats which is already considered by current studies to be highly unlikely - the disease is believed to have spread from bats to livestock and then to humans rather than directly.
This degree of inaccuracy also feeds misinformation in the West which led some individuals from certain ethic minorities to claim that ethnic minorities cannot contract the virus - a belief which along with the legacy of systemic racism and inequality - has been cited as a factor in the disproportionate impact of on ethnic minorities. While in some cases the impact of this element has clearly been overstated, and it is clearly true that many of the comorbidities which cause a disproportionate impact by Covid-19 on ethnic minorities are the result of systemic racism, the impact of such misinformation is still of some significance. Much has been said of the impact of inaccurate information being spread through social media (from spurious cures, to conspiracy theories claiming that the virus was created in a laboratory (something which scientific reporting has already debunked), to claims it is spread by the infrastructure of new 5G mobile technology (based on either ignorance of or disregard for the actually science behind both the technology and viral behaviour) - and in some sense discussions in this medium are similar. While to many it is obvious that talk shows such as Maher's and others (including those hosted by other influential media figures such as Stephen Colbert, Seth Myers, John Oliver, etc) are not the same as reporting in the news media the lines are often blurred. While some - notably Myers and Colbert - see it is their particular responsibility to call out misinformation generally and that originating from the government of the day - most make it clear that their shows are intended primarily as entertainment. John Oliver, host of Last Week Tonight - also produced by HBO, and which has been noted and recognised for its emphasis on covering both major new stories but also issues which do not gain much mainstream coverage, regularly highlights that their role is as a comedy show which deals with serious issues in a humorous and thought provoking way - and goes so far as to state that calling the show news or journalism is a disservice to actual journalism. At times like this - where misinformation can be spread rapidly and where seemingly anything not matter how clearly based in factual reality can be labelled and dismissed as 'fake news' - it is particular important that those whose media products are regularly considered as sources of information regardless of political ideology - need to be particularly careful. This is not complicated - and can be accomplished by as little as restating the basic medical advice of limiting contact, staying home where possible, and good hand hygiene - as has been done by a diverse assortment of media figures who normally cover completely unrelated matters (such as SportsNet's Steve Dangle who has continued to put out videos on ice hockey both through SportsNet dealing with the now suspended NHL season and 'classic matches/questions' and through his own channel alongside content based on his other interests). Indeed many Ice Hockey channels, particularly those which cover other world leagues beyond the NHL, but also those which would normal switch to reporting other leagues when NHL seasons are cancelled or curtailed (mostly commonly due to lockouts resulting from disputes between the League and the NHL Players Association) have - with or without publicly acknowledging it - taken the responsible editorial decision not to cover the few remaining leagues which continue to operate in defiance of the warnings from medical science (such as the lower leagues in Belarus).
We live in strange and uncertain times, everyone is adjusting, but the importance of care when it comes to editorial content in anything with a popular platform can't be underestimated. This is about facts - and the selective use of evidence to support existing prejudice is a dangerous practice.
