Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background : This study examines the global media framing of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to understand the dominant frames and how choice of words compares in the media. Periods of health crisis such as the outbreak of coronavirus pandemic add to the enormous burden of the media in keeping people constantly informed. Extant literature suggests that when a message is released through the media, what matters most is not what is said but how it is said. As such, the media could either mitigate or accentuate the crisis depending on the major frames adopted for the coverage. Methods : The study utilises content analysis. Data were sourced from LexisNexis database and two websites that yielded 6145 items used for the analysis. Nine predetermined frames were used for the coding. Results : Human Interest and fear/scaremongering frames dominated the global media coverage of the pandemic. We align our finding with the constructionist frame perspective which assumes that the media as information processor creates ‘interpretative packages’ in order to both reflect and add to the ‘issue culture’ because frames that paradigmatically dominate event coverage also dominate audience response. The language of the coverage of COVID-19 combines gloom, hope, precaution and frustration at varied proportions. Conclusion : We conclude that global media coverage of COVID-19 was high, but the framing lacks coherence and sufficient self-efficacy and this can be associated with media’s obsession for breaking news. The preponderance of these frames not only shapes public perception and attitudes towards the pandemic but also risks causing more problems for those with existing health conditions due to fear or panic attack.

The cast of “Saturday Night Live” addressed the cold open to President-elect Donald Trump, jokingly declaring that they have always stood with him, now that he’s been elected to a second term.

President Trump, speaking at The White House—“Today, I am instructing my administration to halt funding of the World Health Organization while a review is conducted to assess the World Health Organization's role in severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus… On Jan 13, WHO reported that Dr Tedros would be consulting with members of the International Health Regulations (IHR) Emergency Committee, the group that advises the WHO Director-General on whether there is sufficient evidence to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). [...]why did Chinese authorities tell WHO on Jan 11–12 that no additional cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had been detected since Jan 3?

Presidents and executive branch agencies often have adversarial relationships. Early accounts suggest that these antagonisms may have been deeper and broader under President Trump than under any recent President. Yet careful appraisals have sometimes shown that claims about what President Trump has done to government and politics are over-stated, require greater nuance, or are just plain wrong. In this article, we use federal employment records from the Office of Personnel Management to examine rates of entry and exit at agencies across the executive branch during President Trump’s term. A key challenge in this endeavor is that agencies vary in size dramatically, and this variability makes direct comparisons of rates of entry and exit across agencies problematic. Small agencies are overrepresented among agencies with large and small rates. Yet small agencies do important work and cannot simply be ignored. To address such small-area issues, we use a Bayesian hierarchical model to generate size-adjusted rates that better reflect the fundamental uncertainty about what is happening in small agencies as well as the substantial likelihood that these entities are less unusual than raw statistics imply. Our analysis of these adjusted rates leads to three key findings. First, total employment at the end of the Trump administration was largely unchanged from where it began in January of 2017. Second, this aggregate stability masks significant variation across departments, with immigration-focused bureaus and veterans-affairs bureaus growing significantly and certain civil-rights focused bureaus exhibiting signs of stress. Finally, compared to the first terms of Presidents Bush and Obama, separation rates under President Trump were markedly higher for most agencies.

Diagrams released by the the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 202, show for the first time how Pence was evacuated from the Senate chamber and how close rioters came to him on Jan. 6, 2021.

The Supreme Court's 1969 decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio introduced a new paradigm for evaluating incitement by looking at whether the speech was intended to induce imminent lawless action by third parties and whether such action was likely to occur. The tripartite test offered by the Court, however, is arguably overprotective of speech that may cause legitimate harm, including coded speech, or speech whose true meaning is not facially obvious. In particular, coded speech-including dog whistles, or speech designed to elicit a specific reaction from certain listeners-may escape the requisite scrutiny under Brandenburg by giving the speaker plausible deniability, despite contextual clues known to all or part of the audience as to the words' true meaning. Applying speech-act theory, this Note argues that the Court should adopt a more uptake-sensitive approach to incitement, which would allow audience response to assist in determining intent and better capture the veiled manner of such speech.

On January 3, 2020, the U.S. military conducted a drone strike near Baghdad International Airport that killed Qasem Soleimani, the leader within the Iranian military of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The Trump administration initially appeared to justify the strike as an effort to deter imminent attacks on U.S. embassies and personnel, but later insisted that Iran's actions in the months leading up to the strike triggered the U.S. right to self-defense. Domestically, the Trump administration claimed the authority to carry out the strike based on both the president's inherent constitutional powers and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq passed by Congress in 2002. In the aftermath of the strike, Iraq voted to expel U.S. troops from its territory, and Iran conducted a missile strike on American bases in Iraq. Iran also announced that it would cease to observe limits on its production of nuclear fuel-a core tenet of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), from which the United States withdrew in 2018.

PurposeThis study aims to measure economic uncertainty in Turkey by a novel economic uncertainty index (EUI) employing principal component analysis (PCA). We assess the impact of Covid-19 pandemic in Turkey with our constructed uncertainty index.Design/methodology/approachIn order to obtain the EUI, this study employs a dimension reduction method of PCA using 14 macroeconomic indicators that spans from January 2011 to July 2020. The first principal component is picked as a proxy for the economic uncertainty in Turkey which explains 52% of total variation in entire sample. In the second part of our analysis, with our constructed EUI we conduct a structural vector autoregressions (SVAR) analysis simulating the Covid-19-induced uncertainty shock to the real economy.FindingsOur EUI sensitively detects important economic/political events in Turkey as well as Covid-19-induced uncertainty rising to extremely high levels during the outbreak. Our SVAR results imply a significant decline in economic activity and in the sub-indices as well. Namely, industrial production drops immediately by 8.2% and cumulative loss over 8 months will be 15% on average. The losses in the capital and intermediate goods are estimated to be 18 and 25% respectively. Forecast error variance decomposition results imply that uncertainty shocks preserve its explanatory power in the long run, and intermediate goods production is more vulnerable to uncertainty shocks than overall industrial production and capital goods production.Practical implicationsThe results indicate that monetary and fiscal policy should aim to decrease uncertainty during Covid-19. Moreover, since investment expenditures are affected severely during the outbreak, policymakers should impose investment subsidies.Originality/valueThis is the first study constructing a novel EUI which sensitively captures the critical economic/political events in Turkey. Moreover, we assess the impact of Covid-19-driven uncertainty on Turkish Economy with a SVAR model.

Since running for president in 2016, Donald Trump has consistently used social media to question the legitimacy of the American election system. This strategy came to a head in 2021 when his supporters-falsely believing that President Joseph Biden fraudulently stole the 2020 presidential election from former President Trump-stormed the U.S. Capitol Building in a deadly and unprecedented attack on American democracy. Yet, although election misinformation has become prominent in American politics, this problem is not exclusive to the United States. Many other countries, including Brazil and Canada, have had their elections questioned or threatened by actors looking to sow mistrust in democratic institutions. Unlike the United States, however, the governments of those countries have taken steps to combat such misinformation. This Note analyzes the policies adopted in other nations to limit and counter election misinformation on social media to determine what actions the U.S. government could and should take to do the same. The Note argues that a non-partisan approach is vital to the success of any such policy, and that the Canadian approach in particular is the most useful guide for American policymakers. Moreover, this Note argues that a more direct, and arguably more effective, approach will necessarily involve reforming Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to better reflect the role the internet plays in modern society, and to allow the federal government to ensure social media companies are accountable for the roles they play in shaping our democracy.

Former Philadelphia city commissioner Al Schmidt (R) testified on June 13 that after President Donald Trump tweeted about him, he began receiving graphic threats.