Opinion | Woodward not exempt from ‘playing it down’

Jasmin Sani, The Panther Editor-in-Chief

After seven months and 18 on-the-record interviews with The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward, President Donald Trump stuck to his typical rhetoric during a White House briefing Sept. 9. He proclaimed how well we “closed up our country,” despite telling Woodward he intentionally downplayed the severity of the coronavirus to reduce public panic on March 19.

Look where this lack of urgency has left us. With nearly 6.5 million COVID-19 cases, the U.S. is leading as the world’s poorest example of leadership during the pandemic – a result of the federal government’s complacency and its pitiful excuse of a shutdown. The country reopened not because it was safe to do so, but instead in order to refuel the declining economy – whether or not that meant putting thousands of underserved communities at health risks to mitigate their own financial deficit.

“Playing it down” should not mean concealing the truth, under any circumstance, even if Trump’s primary concern was upsetting the people (I mean, he’s already recently done so on multiple different occasions).

The President’s actions don’t surprise me. What does, however, is Woodward’s negligence to expose these 18 interviews sooner. There’s a journalistic integrity and ethics question that's accentuated in debates over whether Woodward’s on-the-record content would’ve made a difference in the public’s response to COVID-19.

My simple answer: Yes. If Trump’s true sentiments toward the coronavirus and how it’s “more deadly than … even your strenuous flus” were made apparent, it would’ve created an overwhelmingly varied perception, and thus efficacy, toward the pandemic – at least among the same Trump supporters who drank bleach because the President suggested disinfectants can treat COVID-19.

If Trump didn’t downplay COVID-19, we’d find an influx of radical Republicans opting to wear masks in public places and in risky and incredibly congregated rallies. However, instead they’ve protested in front of local grocery stores – even shooting an employee in Flint, Michigan – claiming their constitutional rights are violated for being denied entry without a face covering.

Again, Trump himself said he’s a “cheerleader of this country” and didn’t want to invoke fear, but it’s humorous how a president who constantly invokes terror in minority and immigrant communities is now shying away from it. Our society should strive for the fullest extent of the truth, and fear should not dim the ray of light knowledge bears. 

Delays of a proper response could’ve cost the U.S. 54,000 lives, according to CBS News, and it’s outright repulsive that Trump commends his administration’s response to the virus and how “amazing” the U.S.’s fatality numbers are in comparison to other countries. Immediate action of a 76-day lockdown is what led Wuhan, China, to significantly reduce transmission rates. Now, students in Wuhan are going back to schools, night markets are reopening and the city even held a massive pool rave in late August.

But the hindrance of a real, unfiltered response from the President brings me back to Woodward. He held onto this information for months and just decided to release tapes a few days before his book, “Rage,” is to be published Sept. 15. Woodward attributes the wait to his desire to vet the President’s statements, but I can’t find any reason to withhold Trump’s opinions on the pandemic. It’s a quote. It’s a feeling. What is there to verify?

Of course, the 18 interviews Woodward held with Trump explored far more matters than the coronavirus, but it would’ve been ethical to, at the very least, publicize segments of the audio recordings that clearly don’t need affirmation. But to hold off until Woodward’s expose is released – even if there are restrictions with his publisher “Simon & Schuster” – doesn’t sit well with me.

It’s a journalist’s duty to disseminate knowledge, not to “hold onto a scoop” in order to pocket the money from a book that rides off the wake of one of the biggest modern elections in history. It seems like a ploy, a money-grubbing technique, that indirectly puts the lives of thousands of others at risk for Woodward’s personal capital.

Let me put this into perspective one more time. Seven months ago. Eighteen interviews. Trump admitted to the “deadly” effects of the coronavirus on Feb. 7. That’s when the public could’ve been made aware of the President’s true perception of COVID-19. I can only wonder how many lost lives would still be with us today if we had known.