Credits for the political cartoon goes to A.F. Branco.
When the pandemic was hitting its stride in 2020, some people including Donald Trump speculated that the COVID-19 virus did not happen naturally, but leaked from a virology lab. Specifically, they hypothesized that the virus leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology as it was the epicenter of when it all happened.
However, when Trump put forth the lab leak hypothesis, the mainstream media immediately pushed back against such a suggestion. Many outlets called it a conspiracy theory. Some even said the hypothesis was already "debunked". CNN described the hypothesis as something that came straight from a comic book and accused Trump for playing politics.
Other outlets like NYT and Business Insider called it a "fringe theory".
Check out the entire thread for more examples. In case Twitter disappears Drew Holden's account, here is an archived version.
As you can see with the second images on some of these tweets, the outlets have made a rather abrupt about face on the lab leak hypothesis. A year ago, they were ridiculing it as a fringe conspiracy theory. After over a year, they are finally taking it seriously.
But the thing is that there were already many people, not just Trump and conservatives, who posited the lab leak hypothesis and explained why they think it is plausible. Content creator laowhy86 made a video on April 1, 2020 on possible evidence of the virus getting leaked from a lab. For instance, one piece of evidence he referenced was a follow-up job posting in December 24, 2019 from the virology institute for dealing with a new virus (2:19). This actually lines up with the recent reports of 3 Wuhan lab workers falling ill in November 2019, a month before the follow-up job posting.
laowhy86's video on how COVID spread around the world.
It is one thing to be skeptical of a hypothesis. In fact, that's how all hypotheses should be approached. However, the mainstream media seems to be incapable of differentiating skepticism from dismissal. Even worse, some journalists pettily dismissed the lab leak hypothesis because of guilt by association, which was the case with former top science correspondent of NYT, Donald McNeil. This is unscientific, full stop.
What's even more despicable, in my opinion, was the reaction to the revelation that the lab leak theory has some credence. Apoorva Mandavilli, a lead reporter of NYT, still refused to acknowledge the potential validity of the hypothesis because it had "racist roots". Paul Graham caught Vox stealth editing its original publication from March 2020 and not be transparent about the changes.
In an alternate universe where the mainstream media took the lab leak hypothesis seriously, would more lives be saved? Would there be less infections? It's hard to say. However, I think it's undeniable that it would have drastically changed the US-China dynamic. The US and the rest of the world would've likely made a very aggressive effort to hold the CCP accountable whether it be an international investigation and/or economic sanctions.
That said, it's a waste of time debating on the hypotheticals. The ship has already sailed. What can be done now is to hold the mainstream media's feet to the fire. It needs to realize that, to quote Saagar Enjeti of The Hill, "Acknowledging this likelihood [ of the lab leak hypothesis] is not political. It is a statement of fact and the more facts you learn, you see that if the lab leak hypothesis is true, it implicates Dr. Fauci, the US government, the global health establishment, and the Chinese government". If a theory has some validity, then it must be taken seriously and be rigorously tested. That's how science works.
