President Donald Trump issued an executive order reducing the number and schedule of recommended childhood vaccines. Outlets on the right framed the decision as shifting medical power to parents, while outlets on the right and center tended to emphasize pushback from the larger medical community.

The Details: Trump's order, called the "Gold Standard Childhood Vaccine Recommendations," reduces the number of recommended vaccines from 18 to 11 as well as suggests parents spread out the vaccines over 5 appointments rather than administering them all at once. The order also splits vaccines into three categories: those recommended for all children, those recommended for children at high risk of infection, and those recommended after consultation with a physician. In the memo, the president wrote, "Parents can still choose to give their children all of the vaccinations if they wish, it's up to the parents—we're making recommendations that are strong—but it's up to the parents if they wish, and they will be covered by insurance. However, this updated recommendation finally aligns the United States with other advanced and developed nations around the world. More importantly, it aligns us with common sense and knowledge."

For Context: Trump said that his new recommendations align more closely with other peer nations in Europe, according to Fox News (Right bias). However, Reuters (Center) reported that "vaccine experts say that other developed countries that may recommend ⁠fewer shots face different disease risks and have different healthcare systems."

How the Media Covered It: Fox News wrote that Trump's order "dramatically shift[s] medical power to parents," emphasizing the reported alignment with other countries' vaccine schedules and the president's continued support of the Make America Healthy Again movement. Reuters reported on the World Health Organization's response to the order, writing that the organization "defended" its "science-based" process of determining childhood immunization schedules. Both Reuters and CNBC (Lean Left) denied Trump's comments linking vaccines to autism. Reuters wrote that "scientific studies and public health authorities have found no evidence of a link" between autism and childhood vaccines, and CNBC wrote that Trump "falsely tied vaccines to autism."

Written by the AllSides staff (of humans). Learn more. Support our mission. Suggest an improvement to this summary.

A short text message chain involving Dr. Anthony Fauci sent from his government phone in early 2021 revealed he thought mRNA COVID-19 vaccines could have "theoretically" been "associated with miscarriage" in the first trimester of pregnancy.

The Details: The messages were released by Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) on Monday. Johnson's office said the phone had over 34,000 messages and 522 voicemails. In the exchange with Fauci were Doctors Vivek Murthy and Rochelle Walensky, the former US Surgeon General and CDC Director, respectively.

Key Exchange: Murthy asked on January 25, "For pregnant women considering getting the vaccine, are you aware of any data or theoretical reason why vaccinating early vs late in pregnancy would be preferred?"

After a reply from Walensky, Fauci wrote, "There are no data or theoretical reason to believe that vaccinating early versus later in pregnancy would be preferred… There is this misperception out there that we need to deal with that mRNA somehow can 'get into your genes'. When the misperception gets extended to an early developing fetus, the anxiety heightens." He added, "I asked around a bit more and another issue came up that you need to be aware of. Since many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester."

Later in the chat, Fauci said, "A large number (more than 10,000) pregnant women have been vaccinated. No issues have arisen. The FDA and the ACIP and the ACOG are all permissive for pregnant women to have a choice."

Previously: Several outlets across the spectrum that covered the story noted that days later in 2021, the Food and Drug Administration had found "thus far, no red flags about… pregnant women."

How The Media Covered It: The story was widely covered by major outlets from the right, though several major outlets from the left and center covered the story also. Outlets from the right generally framed Fauci's texts as an admission of risk or "concerns," and often noted his "no red flags" comment days later in headlines. Brittany Bernstein of National Review (Lean Right bias) split from this framing and published an analysis headlined, "No, Fauci's Texts Are Not Proof of a Conspiracy to Hide Vaccine Risks to Pregnant Women." From the center, Forbes and The Hill framed headlines around the release of the texts. Several outlets from the left noted the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine in headlines.

Written by the AllSides staff (of humans). Learn more. Support our mission. Suggest an improvement to this summary.

Jason Arday, a high-profile professor at Cambridge University, resigned after investigations by major British outlets revealed inconsistencies and plagiarism in his personal story and works, prompting widespread media discussion on race and academia.

For Context: Arday was raised by Ghanaian immigrant parents and in 2023 became the youngest-ever black professor at Cambridge. He resigned on August 5.

The Investigations: Most notably, investigations from The Times (Center bias), The Telegraph (Center), and The Guardian (Left) revealed different false claims made by Arday.

The Telegraph: On July 24, The Telegraph said it analyzed Arday's 401-page PhD thesis and found "more than 100 passages" that were "identical or nearly identical to a 2009 PhD thesis by Paula Zwozdiak-Myers." In his thesis, The Telegraph, which described Arday as "a poster boy for the university's diversity drive," said he mentioned Zwozdiak-Myers by name 17 times. The Telegraph also spoke to several other academics who said they were suspicious of inconsistencies in Arday's work previously. On August 5, The Telegraph claimed he had repeatedly lied about being the author of a book titled Being Young, Black and Male: Challenging the Dominant Discourse.

Arday's Statement: On July 31, Arday told The Times, "I am accountable for the mistakes I've made. I hold myself accountable and other people should hold me accountable. We're talking about academia here. I didn't murder somebody. I think the cruelty that I've experienced, and the positioning of me as this kind of liar and fantasist, is totally unacceptable."

The Guardian: On August 1, The Guardian published a report that opened by mentioning a keynote speaker Arday gave in April where he accused conservatives of being racist and overscrutinizing the works of black academics. "That's the cancer that we need to eradicate from academia," Arday said. The Guardian said some of the audience thought Arday's speech was "strange" for a keynote. The publication then mentioned The Telegraph's July 24 report and two academics who previously criticized Arday's work, which it described as having "controversial views on race." Though it offered a softened framing at times, The Guardian reported, "But prominent academics of color that the Guardian spoke to said the claims of plagiarism were legitimate, and that Arday's alleged actions risked undermining others who study race."

The Times: On August 5, The Times analyzed Arday's work and said it found "false funding declarations; participant quotes that appear to have been taken from another researcher's own analysis; and 'impossible' samples, such as a breakdown of his participants' genders, which adds up to 110 per cent."

Police Investigate Journalist: On August 4, The Telegraph reported that Times journalist Jack Grove was investigated for four months by London police as he questioned Arday about his work. Grove said he hadn't been made aware of the investigation until after it ended and told his side of the story on August 5. American outlet Reason (Center) highlighted the investigation in a news feature on August 11.

From the Right: Taki Theodoracopulos, founder of The American Conservative (Lean Right) described Arday as a "black conman" who "was a poster boy for diversity" and criticized leftism because "Those who at first suspected our hero to be a cheat and a liar and a total phony were called a despicable lot of patronizing ignoramuses." Theodoracopulos added that even after Arday was forced to resign, he "did not offer an admission of guilt, nor did he apologize" and that "his ardent defenders on the left continue to attack the accusers who discovered his lies." Julie Burchill of The Spectator (Right) said Arday's story "has highlighted the strangeness of academia," where students gleefully put themselves "into lifelong debt to enter this LaLa Land."

From the Center: David Moriquand of Euronews (Center) said, "As to be expected, Arday's fall from grace has led rightwing media outlets and commentators to pile-on and exploit his story, making him their poster boy in an ongoing culture war centered around 'wokeness' and DEI." Moriquand questioned whether Arday is a "liar and fantasist who duped the system" or "a victim of that very same system which has led to an ambitious man being caught in the crossfire of the agendas of both liberal types who have exploited him and far-right figures guilty of scapegoating him."

From the Left: Jason Okundaye of The Guardian argued, "The takedown of Jason Arday has overjoyed the right, and must be a wake-up call for the left." He said Arday "rightly" resigned, but that it "won't end the targeting of senior black figures or the lazy way institutions promote faux equality." In an opinion for New Statesman (Left), Cambridge professor Nick Guyatt called on the university to thoroughly investigate how Arday ascended to the level he did, but "reject" media hype that racial politics and "woke" have taken over top British institutions. Guyatt said, "Since at least the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, much of the UK press (and conservative media around the world) has been obsessed with DEI and the narrative that white people are being discriminated against on every front by a liberal elite which prizes diversity over fairness." Daniel Engber of The Atlantic (Left) chronicled Arday's "unlikely ascent," which he said came to a "tragic end," and ultimately likened him to Icarus, the Greek god who flew too close to the sun.

Written by the AllSides staff (of humans). Learn more. Support our mission. Suggest an improvement to this summary.

The University of Michigan (UM) will switch from letter grades to "pass or no credit" for some first-semester freshmen beginning in fall 2027. Outlets across the political spectrum highlighted debates over whether this will be effective or if higher-ed institutions are coddling students.

The Details: Only incoming freshmen in UM's College of Literature, Science, and the Arts (LSA) will be part of the pilot program, known as "grade covering." The university said the decision is part of an effort to "curb the mental health crisis unfolding among college-aged individuals." The university will retain internal records of the students' grades for academic advising, potential academic awards and scholarships, however, grades collected during the first semester won't be factored into GPA calculations. LSA students' grades will be recorded in their transcripts and reflected in their GPAs beginning in their second semester.

For Context: Other institutions including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, California Institute of Technology, Swarthmore College and Wellesley College have implemented similar grading policies. Conversely, the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences voted in May to cap the number of A-grades given out by professors to 20%.

'Coddling' Students: Fox News (Right bias) said the policy "shield[s]" students. The outlet quoted psychotherapist Jonathan Alpert who said, "We're raising a generation of students to believe that discomfort is dangerous…A bad grade can be upsetting, embarrassing and stressful. That's not a mental health emergency. That's college." Alpert also criticized what he said was "therapy culture invading the classroom." The New York Post (Right) quoted Alpert separately saying, "At some point, young people have to learn that feeling bad is not the same thing as being harmed."

Praise for the Decision: The New York Times (Lean Left) and Washington Post (Lean Left) both led with the decision being an effort to "ease stress" for freshmen. The Times noted opposition to the change, but focused more on students and faculty who praised the idea, including the UM student body president who said the system is "an incredible thing" that "will do a lot to help get students into a routine that is healthy and sustainable." 

A Shift in Higher-Ed: Wall Street Journal (Center) wrote the move comes "as schools wrestle with grade inflation and the need for remedial instruction for freshmen ill-prepared for college-level classes." The Journal mentioned other universities that have sought to reinstate entrance exams and testing because incoming students were less prepared. It quoted a former Michigan professor who said he didn't think the new policy would make much of a difference because "grades have lost their value as an indication of quality or excellence."

Written by the AllSides staff (of humans). Learn more. Support our mission. Suggest an improvement to this summary.