Total number of sources:40Persons (24 )
Private Sector (None)
– The Times
– Fox News
– New York Times
– Valmy SAS
– Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet journal
– Donald Trump
– Soviet Union
– Chinese Government
– Paul Flynn
– Senator Marco Rubio
– Rick Scott
– Xi Jinping the Chinese president
– French Government
Crown corporation/ public media:
– Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, world health organization’s director general
– Mike Ryan, trauma doctor head of the WHO’s COVID-19 response
– John Mackenzie, a virologist and advisor on the WHO’s emergency committee
– Lawrence Gostin, director of the WHO Collaborating Center
– Dr Gro Harlem Bruntdland
– Kofi Annan,
– David Heymann, executive director of the WHO’s communicable disease cluster
– Gian Luca Burci, former legal counsel up until 2018
– Keiji Fukunda, former WHO assistant director general
– Andrew Cassels, director of strategy at the WHO between 2008 and 2013
– Clare Wenham, professor of Global Health policy at LSE
– Catherine Worsnop, professor at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy
– Sara Davies, professor of global health at Griffith University in Australia
– Rana Mitter, the director of the University of Oxford China Centre
– Fantu Cheru, a professor at American University (could be under documents as well)
– Mehari Taddele Maru, professor at the European university institute
– Words from Anthony Costello, director of institute for Global Health at UCL
– Professor of global health at the University of Sydney
– David Fidler, fellow in global health at the council on Foreign Relations + consultant at the WHO
Unknown/ undefined sources:
– WHO’s Supporters
– Son of former WHO staff member in China
– 5,000 military personnel
– National Governments
– Chinese officials
– Chinese doctors
– American company in Jüchen, Germany
– 194-member states
Streeters/ general public:
– A farmer in Guangdong
– Hospital Staff
1. Indicating the Basics
This paper critiques the article, “The WHO v coronavirus: why it can’t handle the pandemic,” reported by Stephen Buranyi, a specialist in science and environment. The article was published on April 10, 2020, by The Guardian. This is one of the many articles that The Guardian Publishes monthly to address current global issues. Further, the article is in the news section, under the coronavirus subsection.
2. Describe the Issue
The main issue addressed in the article concerns WHO’s failure in containing the spread of the novel coronavirus. The author tracks WHO’s operations, including its major successes and failure. What follows is an in-depth review of why the organization has been shaky and unable to contain the spread of the virus, despite having succeeded in containing the outbreak of SARS and other deadly outbreaks. It is a news report. Other than being time-sensitive, the piece’s contents are not fictional. Its primary purpose is to inform, unlike feature stories which seek to entertain readers. Further, it is objective, based on reasonable facts, written in an active style, with lively and informative prose. Regarding length, the article has 4642 words, divided into 45 paragraphs.
3. Reason for news coverage
The main reason for writing the piece is to inform. The coverage seeks to clarify why the World Health Organization’s response to curbing the virus’s spread has failed. Further, the article brings together different challenges that the organization has faced since its establishment, how it has managed to succeed despite these challenges, and why Coronavirus’ case is unique.
4. Summary: Summarize the main point(s) of the article (232 words)
One of the main argument is that the World Health Organization is not political affiliation. Despite its struggles to contain major outbreaks, the organization has faced numerous criticism, claiming that the WHO is a failure. However, unlike other organizations such as the WTO, the World Health Organization cannot bind and sanction its members and operates on a small annual operating budget smaller than many university hospitals. Even though it managed to contain the outbreak and spread of smallpox, the organization’s sprawling structure, vague mandate, and reliance on diplomacy, and lack of corporation from member states has made its operations difficult. According to WHO officials, individual states have a major role in limiting exposure, primarily by tracking suspected infected individuals. States must share critical scientific resources and information. However, many countries have ignored WHO’s advice to pursue their national strategies at the expense of national health. WHO’s strategies to obtain relevant information from the Chinese government has also been thwarted by constant accusations by countries such as the U.S that the WHO is being lenient on China. Overall, unlike what other countries that oppose the WHO say, the organization is crucial now than ever. While the organization thinks at the global scales, individual countries do not think of how to reduce the global numbers, only their own. In other words, the WHO is a global force, but many people are not thinking globally.
5) Critique/discussion: Describe the major strengths of the coverage, the major weakness, and give your overall opinion/evaluation of the coverage.
a. What type of sources/interviewees are used (streeters, academics, government officials, professionals, non-governmental organization, activists, etc.)?
The article has used interviews, including streeters, academics, government officials, professionals, and non-governmental organizations. Examples of academics include, Clare Wenham, professor of Global Health policy at LSE, Catherine Worsnop, professor at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, Sara Davies, professor of global health at Griffith University in Australia, and Rana Mitter, the director of the University of Oxford China Centre. Examples of government officials include Donald Trump, Soviet Union, Chinese Government, Paul Flynn, and Senator Marco Rubio. David Fidler, fellow in global health at the council on Foreign Relations, is an example of non-governmental organization.
b. Is it balanced, presenting both sides of the issue (for/against)?
The article is balanced. First, the author presents reasons why many people consider WHO a failure as far as fighting coronavirus is concerned. He then goes ahead to identify some of the reasons why the current affairs concerning the outbreak of the virus have got more to do with the individual countries and not the WHO. For example, he states that if at any point the WHO seemed tentative or weak during their handling of the novel coronavirus, it is partly caused by the rough experience the organization has had in the past years (paragraph 21). This way, the author does not deny that the WHO organization has failed in its response to the outbreak of coronavirus. However, much of this failure is linked to the bumpy ride the organization has had in the past years—criticism.
c. Is it clear?
The article is clear. The author uses a simple language without technical words and jargon. The article is interesting and very informative. It is well structurally-organized, with a clear introduction, major points, and a conclusion. The information presented is also well-reasoned, supported by evidence, even though sources of these evidences are not included. Overall, the author shows good mastery of rhetoric, combini