One Tick Bite in New York Made Fox's Front Page. 1,556 Ebola Deaths Didn't.
Fox: 'No cure, no vaccine' — about one tick case1,556 deaths, 3,532 cases in DR CongoWFP chief: 'fastest spreading Ebola epidemic that we have ever seen'Fox homepage Saturday: zero mentions of EbolaOwner: Murdoch family
👁Decoded
Saturday evening, Fox News's homepage, tucked among the headlines: "No cure, no vaccine: Experts warn of rare Bourbon virus after first NY case." One case. The first one in New York. A rare tick-borne virus — genuinely worth a line, no argument here.
*
Same evening, same homepage, all of it searchable: the word "Ebola" appears exactly zero times. "Congo" — also zero.
*
Here's what those zeros are sitting on. The World Health Organization said this week that the current outbreak is the worst in DR Congo's history — that's the BBC's front page on Saturday: "Current Ebola outbreak worst ever in DR Congo, WHO says." Al Jazeera, a day earlier: "DR Congo Ebola epidemic becomes world's second largest outbreak" — 3,532 confirmed cases, 1,556 deaths, and a WHO warning that the true scale "could be up to four times higher than official figures suggest."
*
The acting head of the UN's World Food Programme put it as plainly as a UN official can: "It's the fastest spreading Ebola epidemic that we have ever seen. The world needs to pay much more attention."
*
And the detail that makes Fox's headline choice almost poetic: the strain driving this outbreak is Bundibugyo — which has no approved vaccine and no approved treatment. "No cure, no vaccine." The exact alarm Fox sounded. For the tick.
*
To be fair: Fox has covered this epidemic. In May — when the headlines were "US warns Americans not to travel to Congo amid deadly Ebola outbreak" and Fox's radio rundown asked "Could Ebola Spread To The United States?" The virus was a story exactly as long as it was pointed at an American airport. Once it settled into being a Congolese catastrophe, it stopped clearing the bar.
*
This isn't a hard story to find. The BBC front-paged it. Al Jazeera has been running the numbers all week. The WHO held the press conference. The wire copy exists.
*
Coverage isn't a measure of how dangerous something is. It's a measure of who it's dangerous to. One tick bite in New York makes the front page. One thousand five hundred and fifty-six funerals in Congo — so far — doesn't.
“Coverage isn't a measure of how dangerous something is. It's a measure of who it's dangerous to.”
Comments (6)
quietfifth
this one made me angry tbh
7h ago
GlanceTwice
1,556. I had to go search it myself because I couldn't believe I hadn't seen it anywhere. Which is the point, I suppose.
9h ago
jornolurker
in fairness local outbreak stories do serve readers. the sin isnt covering the tick, its the zero column inches for the other thing
17h ago
RathminesReader
A tick in Westchester is closer to Fox viewers than 1,556 funerals in West Africa. That's the whole business model in one front page.
18h ago
BiasBingo
Tick bite vs 1,556 deaths. Bingo card complete: proximity bias, audience pandering, and the funding cuts that caused it never once mentioned.
20h ago
triage_nurse_tom
I work in healthcare and the Bundibugyo detail is exactly right — no approved vaccine exists for that strain. The Bourbon virus juxtaposition is brutal.