What media outlets covered the J&J halt?
Foreign State Media and International Media coverage of the J&J Vaccine Halt. Russian and Chinese media outlet s covered the suspension of the J&J vaccine, and shared their coverage to the social media accounts of their various regional bureaus.
Is J&J suspension a conspiracy theory?
First, anti-vaccine supporters and influencers framed the adverse events as further evidence of the dangers of vaccines, and occasionally layered in a conspiracy theory that the incidents of clots had been vastly undercounted; these are very common and predictable narratives regularly leveraged by anti-vaccine activists around nearly every prominent instance of a possible side effect, even if the side effect was not found to be caused by a vaccine. A now-removed TikTok video discussing alleged J&J side effects gained moderate traction across Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and on more fringe sites such as Gab, once again illustrating the pernicious way that unverifiable claims can hop between platforms.
Is the J&J halt neutral?
Across the spectrum, we observed that coverage of the J&J halt was primarily neutral. Many outlets focused on coverage of the FDA/CDC joint statement and live press hearing. In the left-wing media ecosystem, many quoted Dr. Fauci and the CDC and FDA’s joint statement that the pause was out of “abundance of caution.” (see examples here and here ). Positive coverage of the halt was found on both in the left-wing and right-wing media ecosystems; one Fox News post discussed the positives of halting the vaccine. At the same time, there were instances of criticism of the Biden Administration’s halt of the vaccine. Much of the non-neutral coverage from the right echoed criticism of the Biden administration’s decision by former President Donald Trump on April 13th, which stated that the reputation of the J&J vaccine would be permanently challenged (see examples here, here, and here ). Some left-wing media posts echoed this frustration (i.e., the Daily Beast’s commentary ). Additional coverage focused on the question of whether communities would have shaken confidence in immunization overall due to the pausing of the vaccine. However, and importantly, this criticism, is predicated on overall confidence in the vaccine; Reason Magazine, for example, noted that, “The risks of blood clots are much lower than the risks of COVID-19 illness, hospitalizations, and deaths.” (see figure 3).
