The advent of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, brought with it an unprecedented era of information disorder. From conspiracy theories regarding the origin of the coronavirus to several unfounded and unverified myths regarding treatment options and preventive practices, the world witnessed an enormous flood of misinformation, making it impossible for many to understand what is real and what is not. The information disorder is being spread by people across various demographics from world leaders, to religious leaders, traditional leaders, key government functionaries, and private citizens.
Information disorder around the pandemic is well-established, with the World Health Organisation (WHO) describing the situation as an infodemic, “an over-abundance of information – some accurate and some not – that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it.” Over 100 fact-checkers around the globe under the #CoronaVirusFacts Alliance have been at the forefront of countering this misinformation, often creating a reference link for all covid-19 related fact-checks on their websites. As at 30th September, 2020, they have collectively published over 7,000 fact-checks in more than 70 countries in over 40 different languages.
Several social media platforms rose to the challenge, devising various means to track and dispel misinformation around the pandemic. Facebook, for instance, has a partnership with several fact-checking organisations to combat the spread of the pandemic. This is in addition to its policy of keeping its subscribers updated on fact-checks on information they have previously shared. Oftentimes, several posts are taken down and blocked from spreading further. Global and local health agencies such as the WHO and the Nigerian Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) are exploring online and other social media platforms to provide “evidenced-based information” to the general public. They are also collaborating with fact-checkers to debunk false claims and curb the spread of misinformation around the pandemic.
We employed a content analysis research method to conduct the study, using a pre-established coding guide to gather required data. We explored the Dubawa and Africa Check websites for coronavirus-related fact-checks, with both having dedicated sections for coronavirus fact-checks on their respective pages.
From the coronavirus page on Dubawa, we extracted all 99 stories published on its page. Of these, 3 articles unrelated to the pandemic were eliminated from the study. General covid-19 misinformation media literacy articles and Dubawa’s bi-monthly newsletters were delisted to limit our analysis to core fact-checks. We also eliminated stories making reference to other African countries to limit the analysis only to fact-checks with specific reference to Nigeria and general COVID-19 misinformation which may likely trend locally. In all, we analysed 64 core covid-19-related fact-checks on Dubawa.
Some social media users are circulating a video of Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike, wherein he purportedly accused operatives of the Special Anti Robbery Squad (SARS) of perpetrating crime in Nigeria, thereby suggesting the Governor’s support for the nationwide #EndSARS protest.
CLAIM: Garba Shehu, the Senior Special Assistant for Media and Publicity to President Muhammadu Buhari claimed on twitter that fuel was sold at N600 per litre on Easter Sunday in 2013. No Evidence: There is no evidence to show that fuel was…
A viral WhatsApp message claims nobody is President-elect in the United State until the safe harbour period (between November 3 and December 8) is over.
Mostly True. While it is true there is a safe harbour deadline and other timelines before the swearing-in of the president, the use of the term President-elect is not forbidden and has…
Coronavirus Q & A
Is there a widely approved vaccine for COVID-19?
According to WHO, there is not yet an approved vaccine. Many potential vaccines for COVID-19 are being studied, and several large clinical trials may report results later this year. If a vaccine is proven safe and effective, it must be approved by national regulators, manufactured to exacting standards, and distributed. WHO is working with partners around the world to help coordinate key steps in this process. Once a safe and effective vaccine is available, WHO will work to facilitate equitable access for the billions of people who will need it. More information about COVID-19 vaccine development is available here.
How effective and safe will the COVID-19 vaccine be?
WHO is cautiously optimistic that safe and effective vaccines for COVID-19 will be successfully developed. There is a robust pipeline of potential vaccines in development, and some have already advanced to large (phase III) clinical trials based on promising early data. But for now, we can’t be certain if or when a COVID-19 vaccine will be available. That is why we must not rely on a future vaccine to fight this pandemic – we must use all the tools we already have at our disposal, such as testing, contact tracing, physical distancing, and the use of masks.
More information about COVID-19 vaccine development is available here.
What can you do?
Be alert, share our tips, and don’t share information you are not sure of!
Coronavirus infection count
Note: Total cases may be more than officially stated owing to the inability to include unconfirmed cases. Stay safe!
Tip of the week
#FakeNews Alert
Beware! Viral WhatsApp message claiming that MTN is offering N15000 as customer reward is a hoax. Disregard the message and the link, as it may be a phishing site for scammers. Nonetheless, MTN has already tagged the information as false. The message reads:
“MTN GIFT
Check if Your number has been chosen by MTN to receive ₦15000 As Party of customer REWARD Program For Who have been using MTN for more than three months MTN USERS ONLY
In this piece, we examined 203 coronavirus-related fact-checks published by Dubawa and Africa Check since the outbreak of the pandemic. Our analysis was limited to fact-checks focusing on Nigeria and general misinformation on the COVID-19 pandemic. Majority of claims in the analysed fact-checks centre on potential COVID-19 treatments and cures. Remarkably, government entities comprising the institution, its officials, and agencies were mostly targets of debunked claims in the study. While we cannot conclude, based on our findings here, that donor funding may have some influence on the fact-checking process, we found that fact-checks with potential interest to two major funders of fact-checking organisations, Facebook and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation were significantly higher than others within the entire family of fact-checking organisations.
Screenshots of Dubawa coronavirus pagesScreenshots of Africa Check coronavirus pages
Introduction
The advent of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, brought with it an unprecedented era of information disorder. From conspiracy theories regarding the origin of the coronavirus to several unfounded and unverified myths regarding treatment options and preventive practices, the world witnessed an enormous flood of misinformation, making it impossible for many to understand what is real and what is not. The information disorder is being spread by people across various demographics from world leaders, to religious leaders, traditional leaders, key government functionaries, and private citizens.
Information disorder around the pandemic is well-established, with the World Health Organisation (WHO) describing the situation as an infodemic, “an over-abundance of information – some accurate and some not – that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it.” Over 100 fact-checkers around the globe under the #CoronaVirusFacts Alliance have been at the forefront of countering this misinformation, often creating a reference link for all covid-19 related fact-checks on their websites. As at 30th September, 2020, they have collectively published over 7,000 fact-checks in more than 70 countries in over 40 different languages.
Several social media platforms rose to the challenge, devising various means to track and dispel misinformation around the pandemic. Facebook, for instance, has a partnership with several fact-checking organisations to combat the spread of the pandemic. This is in addition to its policy of keeping its subscribers updated on fact-checks on information they have previously shared. Oftentimes, several posts are taken down and blocked from spreading further. Global and local health agencies such as the WHO and the Nigerian Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) are exploring online and other social media platforms to provide “evidenced-based information” to the general public. They are also collaborating with fact-checkers to debunk false claims and curb the spread of misinformation around the pandemic.
We employed content analysis research method to conduct the study, using a pre-established coding guide to gather required data. We explored the Dubawa and Africa Check websites for coronavirus-related fact-checks, with both having dedicated sections for coronavirus fact-checks on their respective pages.
From the coronavirus page on Dubawa, we extracted all 99 stories published on its page. Of these, 3 articles unrelated to the pandemic were eliminated from the study. General covid-19 misinformation media literacy articles and Dubawa’s bi-monthly newsletters were delisted to limit our analysis to core fact-checks. We also eliminated stories making reference to other African countries to limit the analysis only to fact-checks with specific reference to Nigeria and general COVID-19 misinformation which may likely trend locally. In all, we analysed 64 core covid-19-related fact-checks on Dubawa.
Hence, we analysed 203 coronavirus-related fact-checks on claims likely to have spread among Nigerians. The coding guide was the research instrument used to gather data for the study. A pilot study was conducted to test the instrument which was also subject to inter-coder reliability using two coders. The variables examined are misinformation source, content fact-checked, verdict of fact-checks, issue focus, fact-checking tool(s), and target entity of fact-checked claims. The study period covers from the inception of the pandemic with earliest fact-checks published in February, 2020 to September 30, 2020.
Results
The first variable examined is the month of publication of the analysed fact-checks. Majority of the fact-checks were published in March and April, the months following the first recorded case of coronavirus in Nigeria and Africa. Almost half of the analysed fact-checks {45 in April (24.1%) and 49 in March (22.2%)} were published during this period. Africa Check had its highest fact-checks in April while Dubawa had its own in March. Thereafter, there was a gradual decline in the fact-checks, but with some form of consistency between June and July. By the end of the study period, September, published fact-checks had dropped to a mere 2% (n=4). It is observed that Dubawa published a number of coronavirus-related articles but they are mostly media literacy articles clarifying issues of concern to consumers of media products. These were excluded from our analysis which simply focus on fact-checks.
We examined sources of the claims fact-checked. The identified sources here describe where the information was found and sometimes also publicly shared. Facebook led the list of sources with about 46% of total sources identified in the study. This excludes claims notably found/shared on more than one platform noted here as “across social media platforms”. Several claims were notably shared on “Facebook and WhatsApp” mostly on Africa Check. These were all recorded as “across social media platforms”. This might have also influenced the low frequency of claims fact-checked on WhatsApp in Africa Check. Dubawa however fact-checked its highest claims from WhatsApp followed by Facebook and Blog sites. News media were the least reported as sources of fact-checked claims. Fact-checks on news media reports focused on media coverage of issues as well as direct coverage of public officers’ speeches at public events.
Africa Check’s increased fact-checks on claims on Facebook might have been influenced by the organisation’s collaboration with the tech giant to limit the spread of false information. Africa Check has a public disclosure on this partnership which it includes at the end of its fact-checks. However, the organisation has claims it is striving “to ensure no donor has a controlling influence.”
Alternatively, the high fact-checking of claims of facebook might simply be as a result of its ubiquity among social media subscribers. As at the end of 2019, Facebook active subscribers in Nigeria are estimated to be over 27 million. Hence, it might be logical to assume that there will be more information and misinformation being shared on Facebook than on other platforms. Facebook and WhatsApp are reportedly the most common social media platforms in Nigeria. According to this survey, over 80% of respondents confirmed using each of Facebook and WhatsApp. This is in contrast to only 19% and 11% who confirmed using Instagram and WhatsApp respectively.
Claims in the fact-checks were reportedly presented as text, images/graphics, video and audio. Coding into text and images/graphics was tricky as the categorisation can sometimes be blurred. To address this ambiguity, we focused on the part of the content where the claim is made. We also relied on the description of the content as specified in the fact-check. Pictures, images, infographics, screenshots, pictures with embedded texts, and similar contents were coded as image/graphics since they are often presented as images and shared as such.
Majority of the fact-checked contents (61%; n=124) were thus categorised as text. This was followed by those categorised as images/graphics (24%; n=48) which accounted for about a quarter. Video (13%; n=27) and audio were the least with audio recordings only accounting for 2% (n=4) of the analysed fact-checks. The two organisations, Dubawa and Africa Check recorded similar patterns in contents in their analysed fact-checks.
Fact-checks often include verdicts (ratings) of fact-checkers on fact-checked claims. In this analysis, we found slight variations in the verdicts issued by each organisation. Dubawa appears more consistent with its regular use of True, False, Misleading, in its fact-checks. These are all within its published rating system.
Africa Check was, however, inconsistent as it regularly used False, Fake, Incorrect, on claims verified to be false with no identified distinctions in the use of these terms to describe false contents. Its published rating system included “incorrect”, but not “False” or “Fake” which were regularly used to rate several of the debunked fact-checks. Other claims are rated: Correct, Misleading, or Checked. Occasionally, both Dubawa and Africa Check declined giving any verdict in their fact-checks despite taking a stance in the body of the fact-check.
Over 80% (80.3%, n=163) of the analysed fact-checks were rated false and were grouped as Incorrect / False / Fake to integrate the ratings by both organisations. This was distantly followed by those rated as Correct / True (9%, n=18), and Misleading with 8% (n=17). Dubawa had two fact-checks rated Mostly False, Each of them was written on multiple claims and was rated as such because most of the claims were found to be false while others may be true or lack evidence for a logical conclusion. The fact-checks coded Insufficient Evidence were so rated by the organisations or concluded as such by the researcher where a fact-check has no rating but its contents make such suggestions. The high frequency of false claims might thus suggest that suspicious claims often turn out to be false, with obvious exceptions.
Fact-checks on the pandemic have debunked a wide range of claims since the outbreak. The global #CoronaVirusFacts Alliance has documented 26 clusters of misinformation in its waves of hoaxes around the pandemic. In this analysis, we identified 11 broad themes in the analysed fact checks. These include cure and prevention myth; official policies or pronouncements of governments or organisations; issues relating to COVID-19 funding, palliatives and freebies for the general public; prevention myth focusing on potential practices or behaviour to prevent individuals from being infected with the virus; issues around testing capability, testing data and status of individuals; coronavirus-related or speculated deaths; number of cases; origin of the virus; risk factors, transmission myth on spread of the virus; copying myth describing specific behaviours necessitated by the reality of the pandemic; among few others.
Fact-checks around issues related to treatment and cure for the virus had the highest coverage accounting for nearly a quarter (23.2%, n=46) of the 198 issue-based fact-checks identified in the study. Issues of official policies and pronouncements; funding, palliatives and freebies; and prevention myths followed in close proportions. Fact-checks on transmission and copying myths, among others, were the least recorded categories.
Apart from specific issues identified above, we also examined identified entities that were the target of misinformation in the analysed fact-checks. This was limited to 100 of the debunked fact-checks rated false among the analysed lot. Federal government, its officials and agencies and foreign governments and their officials each gulped almost a quarter of the identified entities in the relevant fact-checks. Claims targeting the federal government included key government officials falsely attributed to specific claims. The increased targets on foreign government and their officials were populated by false claims targeted at President Donald Trump of the United States, President Vladimir Putin of Russia, and President Andry Rajoelina of Madagascar who became popular during this pandemic for promotion of his country’s self-acclaimed COVID-19 treatment formula. Several claims were falsely attributed to Trump despite reports that he regularly promoted coronavirus misinformation. Prominent individuals were also falsely targeted for COVID-19 false information. Prominent among these was Bill Gates and his Foundation targeted in 5 of the 10 fact-checks in this category. A New York Times report noted Bill Gates as “the leading target for coronavirus falsehoods,” which might explain the increased fact-checks on him. Others in this category were business Mogul, Alhaji Aliko Dangote, entrepreneur and footballer Ronaldo reportedly giving freebies and donating business facilities as coronavirus treatment centres.
Fact-checking tools used in analysed fact-checks included Reverse Image Search mostly done through google and then through other image search engines such as TinEye and Yandex. Other tools used included CrowdTangle, LinkTally, and audio tracing. The most common fact-checking process identified is termed cross-referencing in this analysis. This describes a combination of verification steps such as referencing, scrutinizing the information, finding verifiable facts or evidence to prove the accuracy or otherwise of the claim. It also includes conducting interviews with key actors or experts on the topic of discourse. Almost 80% (78.5%) of identified fact-checking instances identified in the analysed contents involved cross-referencing.
Conclusion
In examining the focus of fact-checks on coronavirus in Dubawa and Africa Check, findings suggest that misinformation around the pandemic was rife in the early months of the outbreak, with high fact-checks published in March and April while experiencing gradual decline afterwards. Findings here might suggest some possibility of collaborative efforts driving publication of fact-checks around the issues of interest with high tracking of misinformation on Facebook and debunking of noticeably high number of claims targeting Bill Gates, especially on Africa Check. This is so as Africa Check regularly displays Bill Gates Foundation as one of its major funders. Such likely influence can however not be concluded as some other factors, as discussed above could be driving such fact-checks of potential interest to fact-check funders.
Fact-checkers need to provide clear understanding of meanings of their ratings and explain possible differences that might be intended for similar but perhaps different ratings. Some lack of consistency in fact-check ratings found in this study could suggest unintended conclusions for readers. The high rate of false, incorrect, and fake ratings, however. suggest that suspicious claims considered worthwhile for fact-checking often turn out to be false as suspected.
Findings from this study suggest that misinformation on potential cure, official policies and pronouncements, funding of COVID-19 and palliatives; and prevention, are frequently shared on social media platforms in Nigeria. This calls for concern and continuing vigilance of fact-checkers, as some claims can have costly consequences, proclaiming unwholesome practices, and could have gone viral before they are fact-checked and perhaps subsequently taken down. Most misinformation rated false were found to have targeted government entities both locally and beyond. This calls for concerted efforts of government institutions to continuously track misinformation about them in the public place and debunk them promptly. Facebook appears to be the dominant platform through which misinformation on coronavirus is mostly spread in Nigeria. This may be due to the intended tracking of misinformation on the platform due to existing collaboration with fact-checkers. Facebook, which also owns WhatsApp, has a stipulated policy to limit the spread of Covid-19 misinformation and harmful contents across its platforms.
The world woke up on Friday 2nd October 2020 to the biggest news of the Covid era when the President of the United States of America, Mr. Donald Trump, announced that he and his wife were going into quarantine on account of a Covid19 infection.
Mr. Trump, by that event, enrolled himself into a compact league of world leaders who have been criticized for their skepticism and the lethargic approach towards curbing the novel coronavirus.
Since health experts and citizens have wondered if the fatality rate was not enough to awaken these leaders, considering the devastating impact of the deadly virus, DUBAWA takes a sweeping review of the global landscape, exploring the claims of the leading lights of this movement of COVID-19 deniers that have now expanded the meaning and content of what the coalition of nine global institutions [WHO, UN, UNICEF, UNDP, UNESCO, UNAIDS, ITU, UN Global Pulse, and IFRC] have defined as infodemic,that art of unrestrained propagation of misinformation about the pandemic.
The global attention to the pandemic is a point of serious worry because, as the nine global institutions noted their 23rd September 2020 statement that, “The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is the first pandemic in history in which technology and social media are being used on a massive scale to keep people safe, informed, productive, and connected.”
To that extent, the actions and omissions of global leaders can play a significant role in making this campaign succeed or fail, as the movement once stated: “At the same time, the technology we rely on to keep connected and informed is enabling and amplifying an infodemic that continues to undermine the global response and jeopardizes measures to control the pandemic.”
This is partly why the world worries: “Misinformation costs lives. Without the appropriate trust and correct information, diagnostic tests go unused, immunization campaigns (or campaigns to promote effective vaccines) will not meet their targets, while the virus continues to thrive.
“Furthermore, disinformation is polarizing public debate on topics related to COVID-19; amplifying hate speech; heightening the risk of conflict, violence and human rights violations, and threatening long-term prospects for advancing democracy, human rights and social cohesion” the global institutions said.
Here, therefore, are the four key world leaders as we trace the trail of time on their tepid approach to coronavirus and how they fell victims to their own disbelief.
President Donald Trump of the USA: the chief doubter
On Thursday, President Donald Trump tested positive for the coronavirus after claiming “it will disappear”, later ratifying the use of Hydroxychloroquine as a cure for COVID-19 and further accusing journalists of deliberately exaggerating the virus.
President Trump’s carefree approach toward the virus was apparent. First, he failed to formulate a national testing strategy, refused to wear a facemask (even after some of his aides tested positive), then he wafted with the idea of injecting patients with bleach, maintained that the virus “affects virtually nobody” at one of his mass-attended campaigns and even mocked his contender, Joe Biden, at Tuesday’s presidential debate, saying “He could be speaking 200 feet away and he shows up with the biggest mask I have ever seen.”
Even when more than 200,000 Americans had died from the virus, Mr. Trump described the coronavirus as an “invincible enemy” but this is not the case now, as just 32 days before the US elections, Mr. Trump is now required to be quarantined from what he once deemed as invincible.
Mr. Trump was meant to go on campaign trips and face Joe Biden for the second presidential debate but with the sudden turn of events, he is likely to do none. Mr. Trump’s contraction of the virus is hoped to improve his concern towards his approach to the pandemic, alongside several of his aides who seem to share his anti-science view of the virus.
During the presidential election, most of Mr. Trump’s staff did not wear masks in the auditorium. Even Hope Hicks, a senior aide to the President, who was present at the debate, also tested positive. This clearly illustrates the validity in words of Miles Taylor’s, a foremost Trump critic, who tweeted, “We should ALL wish for our President and first lady to recover. But this is also a serious national security concern and an alarming upshot of the White House’s lax approach to this deadly pandemic”.
Mr. Trump questioned the existence and the severity of the coronavirus, threw sarcasm at some of the measures meant to curb the spread, accused journalists of overhauling the virus, and even suggested unconfirmed remedies as a cure for the virus. In the end, he could not save himself and had to admit his becoming a fallen victim to the virus. At 74, the President is considered more vulnerable to the virus but no one can tell the severity of Trump’s situation until a few weeks from now.
President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil: the Bad
Yet, it is not only Mr. Trump who had unpopular and dogmatic views about the virus. He might have given some voice to it, but there were some world leaders who also shared his ideologies and frequently mocked the severity of the disease. President Jair Bolsonaro carries similar views as Trump over the Virus. He frequently tagged the virus as a “mild measly cold” and even when Brazil was rated as the second most hit country by the virus, Mr. Bolsonaro still attended rallies, went round without facemask, thus encouraging his supporters to disregard masks.
Alarmingly, with over 144,000 coronavirus related deaths in Brazil, Mr. Bolsonaro dismissed the threat of the virus as mild, and in July, when he contracted the virus, he kept on promoting the hydroxychloroquine pills as a remedy for the disease against the guidance of the general health practice that tagged the pill as ineffective to the virus and potentially hazardous.
Little has changed even after Bolsonaro’s recovery because on September 22, during his address in the UN virtual General Meeting, Mr. Bolsonaro still accused some media of “politicizing” the virus and planting fear and panic amongst the population. Though he also claimed to have spent over $400 million towards COVID-19 vaccine research and development, he still told reporters “that no one can force anyone to get a vaccine.” Mr. Bolsonaro seems to tie his recovery from coronavirus to Anti-malaria drugs and how mild he thought the virus was.
Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus: the Ugly
Like Mr. Trump and Mr. Bolsonaro, Alexander Lukashenko, the President of Belarus who has been in power since 1994 perceived the virus as a case of media exaggeration, even tagging it as a mere “Psychosis” that is targeted at shifting people’s reality. Unlike most countries and even his fellow ideologues who later placed a lockdown on their nations, Mr. Lukashenko refused to impose a lockdown and proffered vodka and saunas as a remedy for the virus all through the wave of the pandemic. Even when neighboring countries went on total lockdown, Belarus remained open, and Mr. Lukashenko remained defiant.
Even when cases of infected persons continued to soar in Belarus, he said “it’s better to die standing than life on your knees.” After contracting the virus in July and his eventual recovery, Mr. Lukashenko said “I lived through the virus” but still remained indifferent as regards the virus, rather focusing on how to maintain his decades of authoritarian rule that is facing protest from civilians.
Boris Johnson of Britain: the Repentant
Borris Johnson, the Prime Minister of Britain who also dismissed the idea of lockdown and social-distancing and perceived the virus as a passing circumstance had a change of paradigm after contracting and battling the virus in March. Unlike Mr. Lukashenko and Mr. Bolsonaro, Mr. Johnson spent 3 days in an intensive care unit and had to hand over power to his deputy. After his recovery, he took a different turn, appreciating the National Health Service, letting out that it had “saved his life, no question.”
The British Prime Minister, on a return to his office in April, preached for what he once stood against. He cautioned people to take the measures seriously and brought tight restrictions to curtail the influx of the virus and encouraged people to work from home if they can.
Though Britain has been considered the worst hit in Europe, with more than 56,000 reported deaths, the case seemed to have faired marginally after Mr. Johnson’s recovery.
Nevertheless, some of these leaders seem stubborn even after their experience as victims of the virus, their ordeal verifies one thing, ‘the existence of the virus’. And it should also be noted that many leaders and government officials have succumbed to the virus, like the case of Late Abba Kyari and and Late Senator Ajimobi in Nigeria.
Conclusion
Coronavirus is still ravaging communities and though some leaders have taken good measures for their nations, many are still stuck in controversy, risking the lives of their citizens in the process. Time has, however, proven that not even the leaders who once ignored and shunned the virus were immune. Hence, the prevalence of the virus can be argued but not certainly its existence or even its severity.
Of recent, many notable personalities and political figures around the world go about their respective public functions with the ‘Air Doctor’ virus blocker tag. Sometimes known as ‘Virus Shut-Out’, they look like normal ID badges.
But according to their manufacturers, they are made of chemicals to wipe out airborne pathogens and protect wearers from disease.
The manufacturers noted that the Air Doctor badge releases small amounts of chlorine dioxide which can kill airborne pathogens, including the coronavirus.
It can be hung on the chest, pocket, or bag.
But how true is this claim and how effective are these virus blockers?
How does it work?
As we adapt to new realities, new questions constantly arise. What kind of masks should be worn? Can air blockers be the solution for any of these problems?
Manufacturers claim that virus removal cards can kill bacteria and viruses because of the key ingredient; chlorine dioxide, a disinfectant used to treat drinking water and sterilise medical equipment.
The claim is that it is able to “provide protection against airborne pathogens”, presumably including the novel coronavirus.
The tags, according to the manufacturers, “eliminate all forms of microbial life” and provide “ultimate protection against airborne infection diseases”, including for children, pregnant women and immuno-compromised people such as cancer patients.
The product is sold under various commercial names, including Air Doctor, Virus Shut-Out and Chlorine Card.
Also, a Japan based company Kiyou Jochugiku Co. Ltd in July, launched “Air Doctor” in India. According to the company, it is a portable product that helps prevent viruses, bacteria, and fungi from coming in contact with the user within a 1-meter radius. It contains sodium chloride, natural inorganic substances – natural zeolite.
The company noted that the product is approved worldwide by the World Health Organization (WHO), United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA), Occupational Safety and Health Administration and The Japan Ministry of Health, Welfare & Labor.
The product has been marketed as a flu treatment in Japan since 2015, long before the novel coronavirus emerged late last year in the Chinese city of Wuhan.
However, the Japanese consumer affairs agency on May 15, 2020 warned the public that the product was ineffective against COVID-19.
How much does it cost?
According to the manufacturers, once it is opened, the tags are effective for up to one month.
However, the effective period may differ under different circumstances.
Dubawa found out that Cleaneat Integrated Services, is one of the major dealers of Air Doctor, Virus busters, and other air purifiers in Nigeria.
Dubawa found the items for sale online, checks revealed that the price of Air Doctor depends on the quality and also fluctuates depending on the level of demand for the tags.
Currently, the retail price for the Air Doctor tag is N17,000 while the wholesale price is N150,000/pack containing 12 pieces.
How effective are these cards?
The card has been banned in several countries this year, including in the US, Thailand, and the Philippines.
The “virus blockers” were originally created in Japan. They have been banned in Vietnam and Thailand, but are on sale in Hong Kong, the Middle East, Russia, and the U.S. under a number of different brand names.
In April, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warned people to avoid products containing chlorine dioxide, saying that its ingestion by a number of individuals as a prophylactic against the virus has resulted in “serious and potentially life-threatening side effects.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has banned Virus Shut Out badges from entering domestic ports, and instructed Amazon to remove the product from their site.
Last month, when President Donald Trump made comments suggesting that injecting disinfectant could treat the coronavirus, supporters in conspiracy circles such as QAnon jumped at the notion that he was referring to chlorine dioxide — the chemical compound has long been touted and sold by fringe figures as a cure for everything from HIV to the common cold.
No available evidence ‘Air Doctor’ purifies the air – NCDC
The Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC), which is the country’s national public health institute, has stated that there is no available evidence to suggest the use of a body-worn tag often marketed as ‘Air Doctor’ purifies the air around the wearer.
The efficacy of such air-purifier pouches outdoors is also yet to be established, with Kiyou Jochugiku saying it becomes less effective in open-air settings.
Notable personalities in Nigeria have appeared in public in recent weeks wearing the “virus removal cards”, clip-on tags marketed as prevention against infectious diseases.
‘Devices have not been registered by NAFDAC’
The National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control disowned Air Doctor and other products that are marketed as capable of blocking COVID-19 from infecting the wearers.
The regulatory agency told PUNCH HealthWise that the devices have not been registered by NAFDAC, even though it received applications for registration of some of them.
An epidemiologist and population health scientist at Harvard University, Dr. Ibraheem Abioye, said, “There is really no evidence that the products work. The sellers claim that the products sanitise the air around the wearer. But we know that some of the people who have been the main advocates still became infected with COVID-19.
“There are already science-backed actions that people should take and shams like these are likely to put people at risk.”
Conclusion
Since the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, WHO has repeatedly stated that there is no specific cure or prevention for COVID-19.
In August, the World Health Organization said there may never be a magical cure for the coronavirus even as scientists and drugmakers across the globe race to find a safe and effective vaccine.
Air Doctor products are not licenced by FDA and in any other country by its drug control agency.
The active ingredient in Air Doctor and similar products is authorized to be used to disinfect medical instruments or food and is not to be used as a human protection against infection.
The researcher produced this fact-check per the Dubawa 2020 Fellowship partnership with The Nation to facilitate the ethos of “truth” in journalism and enhance media literacy in the country.
A viral video claims the president of Guinea Bissau beat up a minister for Squandering COVID-19 funds.
Full Text
With the continuous spread of Coronavirus (COVID-19), there has been a lot of intervention for health sectors of countries coming from individuals, organisations, foreign bodies or the government itself.
Recently, a viral video on social media shows a man being beaten up and with the claim that the assaulter was the president of Guinea Bissau in West Africa.
The video, with accompanying texts, suggests that the president is beating one of his ministers who allegedly squandered coronavirus (COVID-19) funds.
The 18 seconds video which was shared with a text inserted at the top of the video reads, “President Guinea Bissau beating up a minister who squandered COVID-19 funds. I want this president”.
Guinea Bissau and COVID-19
Guinea Bissau recorded its first case of coronavirus (COVID-19) in March 2020. Subsequently, the Emballo led government declared a state of emergency on March 19 as part of its effort to curb the spread of the virus. This state of emergency has been extended repeatedly till September.
The Centre for Disease Control (CDC) in August noted that the risk of COVID-19 is high in Guinea-Bissau and recommended that travellers avoid all nonessential international travel to Guinea-Bissau.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) recruited four international health experts, to support the government of Guinea-Bissau in combating and effectively responding to COVID-19 outbreak in the country.
Researching COVID-19 funding to know the kind of funds the country has received so far as COVID-19 intervention, several documents by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) were found online but none could be accessed as they all suggested the pages does not exist or had been removed.
Screenshots of COVID-19 funding result for Guinea Bissau.
The country is also a beneficiary of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) debt service relief to 25 of its member countries under the IMF’s revamped Catastrophe Containment and Relief Trust (CCRT). This is part of the Fund’s response to help address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
A keyword search by Dubawa showed different results but only two: a youtube post and a Reddit post, were related to this video/claim. The Youtube post was made by Victor Mochere, who has over 4,0000 subscribers on September 22, 2020. So far, the video has generated 5,306 views and 20 likes.
Screenshot of Youtube post.
However, the Reddit post had been taken down with reasons clearly stated on the site that there’s no compelling reason to think that this video is what the linked website claims it to be.
Screenshot Reddit’s post.Screenshot of the website linked in Reddit’s post.
Dubawa also conducted a google reverse image search with screenshots from the video which showed several unrelated posts except for the post by Reddit.
The first results led to the twitter account of one @thebodjona in Accra Ghana.
Screenshot of @thebodjona’s Twitter account.
The search also led to another twitter account of @VuyooyuV.
Screenshot of @VuyooyuV’s Twitter account.
The only related post from the reverse image search by Reddit has the same story and claim.
An analysis of the video on Invid, a verification plugin that helps verify videos and pictures showed that the video was licensed as false content.
Screenshots of Invid’s analysis result.
Using the image magnifier to zoom into screenshots from the video, it was difficult to identify the face of the actor as the president of Guinea Bissau, Umaro Cissoko Embalo. Also, since the name of the said minster and the ministry he heads was not mentioned, it was impossible to cross-check if the person being beaten in the video looks like him or not.
Conclusion
From Dubawa’s findings and analyses of the video, the claim that the president of Guinea Bissau beat up its minister over COVID-19 fund could not be substantiated. No evidence to back the claim.
Information circulating across WhatsApp groups claims that a free N4, 000 and 1000GB internet data is available for all Nigerians to stay safe at home.
FALSE. The promise of N4, 000 and 1000GB free internet data available for all Nigerians to stay at home is misleading. The website sets out to stylishly invade user’s privacy.
FULL TEXT
Despite the constant efforts by Dubawa and other Fact-checking organizations to debunk misinformation and Disinformation on social media, fake news peddlers are not giving up, rather they are still planning new ways to trick unsuspecting readers.
Since the outbreak of COVID19, there has been several information making the rounds, including relief grants for COVID19, many of which turned out to be false. For instance, a crisis grant of N652,100 was said to be available for families as well as the NCDC’s promise of COVID relief grants, all of which Dubawa has fact-checked and debunked.
Recently, a message circulating on WhatsApp claims that there is urgent support available for all Nigerians to stay home in order to avoid coronavirus.
The message reads; “Urgent, in support of all Nigerians. Obtain N4000 Balance credit and 1000GB free internet from here.”
VERIFICATION
Dubawa clicked on the website using a mobile phone and a Laptop with softwares that detects dangerous websites.
Screenshot of scamdoc
On the first click on the website using a mobile device, the link led us to a site with motion Logos of GLO, MTN, 9Mobile and Airtel. And, on the top of the site it recorded 2,422,525 cases of infected persons with COVID19.
The inscription on the first click on the site reads; “To face the corona virus – free credit Nigeria. Click Continuer”.
Screenshot of the first click of website
We clicked on the “Continuer button” which led us to another website requesting we answer one-minute survey to get free credit.
Question 1 of the survey requests we choose our network provider, and suggests MTN, Glo, Airtel, 9mobile and others.
Screenshot of the click of second click
We decided to choose one of the network providers and the site also led us to another site, asking us how regularly we wash our hands. Dubawa clicked on one of the suggested options, and the site took us to the third question, which reads, “have you had symptoms of the disease, answer Yes or No”.
Screenshot of the click of third click
Then the website congratulates the user and requests that the user share the message to 20 friends and click continue.
Recall, Dubawa has fact-checked a similar whatsApp message requesting users to share with 20friends before claiming the COVID19 relief grants, and users who wanted to return to the previous page(s) were dribbled to a site of no return.
Screenshot of the click of fourth click
Similarly, we tried returning to the previous site and the site took us to another website with the name of homepaged Bet9ja, a popular betting brand in Nigeria, and requested users to open a Bet9ja account.
Further, Dubawa opened the link with the Laptop with features that detect dangerous sites, McAfee Website Advisor immediately restricted us from opening the sites, indicating that the site may be risky to visit.
Screenshot of McAfee WebAdvisor restricting user
A part of the McAfee WebAdvisor Malicious sites reads; “Web pages that deploy code specifically designed to hijack your computer’s setting or activity. This includes self-installing applications called “drive-by executable life downloads.” This site was referring to the link already shared on whatsApp groups.
A screenshot of McAfee WebAdivisor
In confirmation of McAfee WebAdvisor Malicious site, we noticed a pop-up page requesting access to our computer.
More indicators
Scamdoc, a reliable tool that fact-checks the authenticity of websites, rated the site 10%, which is a very bad trust score, warning, “only for experienced users”.
To further verify the website, Dubawa used the Whois domain, a website that provides service identification and contact information for websites. The analysis of Whois domain shows that the site was created in August 2019, updated in August 2020, and is to expire in August 2021.
Screenshot warning users of the danger of the site
Dubawa further observed that the total number of coronavirus cases recorded on the website (2,422,525) is not accurate about both global or Nigerian total recorded cases. In three separate days, Dubawa clicked on the site, it has the same recorded cases, which is impossible as there have been daily updated reports of the number of COVID19 infections each day both in Nigeria and outside the country .
A screenshot of the website requesting user create bet9ja account
Further observation on the site includes the rating by few individuals. The number of times Dubawa checked, but the minutes the reviewer posted on the benefit of the website stood still. In a genuine website, the minutes each reviewer replied changes. Further when Dubawa clicked on the pictures of the reviewers, it led to another site showing that the website and poster is active on the internet.
Conclusion
FALSE. Dubawa’s probe of the website shows that the promise of N4,000 and 1000GB free internet data available for all Nigerians to stay at home is misleading and aimed at invading users’ privacy.
A viral video on social media with a message claims there is a warning against coronavirus microchip vaccines
FALSE
Full Text
Coronavirus, which surfaced in Wuhan China in December 2019 has on Friday September 25, 2020, infected 32,416,537 people globally, 987,743 deaths and 23,932,423 recoveries.
As the global pandemic lingers, the search for a vaccine continues while the spread of misinformation also continues on vaccine development.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), there are currently over 169 COVID-19 vaccine candidates under development, with 26 of these already in the human trial phase. WHO is working in collaboration with scientists, businesses, and global health organisations through the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator, to speed up the pandemic response.
In August, 2020, a video , accompanied with a message warning Christians not to take the COVID-19 vaccine, went viral. In this video, the man who claims to be the project lead said he was part of the team that developed a microchip which uses lithium and can be inserted in the forehead or hand.
In this seven minutes, 54 seconds video, the speaker claims over a million dollars of taxpayers money was spent on this chip but no one should take it as it is a sign of the beast according to the bible in Revelation 13 verse 16.
The message that accompanied the video reads, “A project engineer who made the microchip that will soon be implemented along with the covid vaccine WARNS US NOT TO TAKE IT. Please listen carefully to his story and his message in this video.. After watching, please share also to save lives. God bless!”
“What i want to tell you is that this is real, the microchip is real, credit cards are failing, they can be counterfeited, smart cards can be counterfeited, they can be stolen, they can be lost, all kinds of things can happen to a card but you cannot lose your hand. Very quickly, they are going to move to this thing in the hand and i tell you as a christian, you cannot take this. No matter what anybody says, God says you cannot take it.”
Screenshot of the viral message
Verification
A quick look at the video showed it is an old video. Dubawa discovered that while the message that accompanied the video links the chip with COVID-19, the speaker did not at any point in the video say the chip was meant for COVID-19 vaccine or mention coronavirus or COVID-19.
A closer look at the video showed the video had been altered as it had several jump cuts with some part of the speaker’s speech cut out and that of the interpreter totally cut off. Further, at 7minutes 17seconds into the clip, the audience behind the speaker and interpreter disappeared. Also, the flower on the pulpit in front of the speaker disappeared.
Dubawa went ahead to conduct a keyword search which produced a fact Check by Reuters on coronavirus and microchip.
Screenshot of Reuters Fact check.
Dubawa also conducted a google reverse image search of screenshots from the video. This search produced different results dated as far back as 2002.
The search led to a site called BITCHUTE which shared the video with the title “the microchip and mark of the beast”. The video which had gotten 274 views and 3 likes on this website was published August 11, 2020.
Screenshot of Bitchute’s post.
Another result of this image search led to a website called healthymoneyvine.com which had different health related contents including the video warning against vaccine collection.
Screenshots of Healthymoneyvine’s page.
Another result led to a youtube page by David WhiteHeart with the title “Carl Sanders, Microchip Engineer, talks about marks of the beast implant.”
This post made on August 11, 2020 has 411 views, 4 comments and 12 likes so far.
Screenshot of David Whitehead’s post.
Another youtube post by Tigidig with the caption “Microchip was already existed, is this the sign of end times in the bible?”, was published August 25,2020 with 377 views and two comments.
However, in this post, the video was 3:26secs, unlike the other posts where the video was 7:54 seconds long.
Another youtube post made in May 2020, by Micheal Zion indicated that the man who invented Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) microchip speaks out. This particular video which is the longest at 29minutes has 3116 views and 96 likes.
Screenshot of Micheal Zion’s youtube post.
The search also produced an article published in 2002 by taddlecreekmag.com tagged the video a testimonial of Carl Sanders, the inventor of microchip.
Screenshot of Taddlecreed”s article.
Conclusion
A careful study of the video and the above highlighted red flags shows there is no connection between the content of the video and coronavirus. Neither has there been any move to make a chip associated vaccine, judging from efforts on vaccines compiled by the WHO. This makes the claim false and misleading.
Since 2018, Dubawa has been implementing comprehensive plans that utilize expertise from election observers deployed across the country to engage in active and rigorous fact-checking on political claims and other issues that may affect voters’ decisions. These plans are usually conducted in three phases: pre-election, election day and post-election, and include an effective distribution strategy for circulation on social media platforms including Facebook and Twitter.
Next, we published a full-length fact-check on a recurring claim about the ownership of a national asset – the Edo Modular refinery. It was claimed that one of the achievements of Godwin Obaseki, the re-elected governor of Edo State is the development of the refinery. To the contrary, the refinery is fully owned and developed by AIPCC Energy Limited and the company was only a beneficiary of the Edo state government policy of attracting investments to the state. Read the full fact-check to learn more about government ownership of projects, the misleading use of terms like legacy project and redeemable shares to describe political achievements, and how the absence of public disclosure can mask the truth.
We also fact-checked the Edo state governorship debate between the All Progressives Congress (APC), Osagie Ize-Iyamu, and the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Godwin Obaseki. For the claim on the unemployment rate in the state, our fact-check provided accurate data and compared the figure with the national unemployment rate and the position of Nigeria in relation to other countries. The claim that Obaseki introduced the Edo state health insurance scheme was also verified by our team and was found to be true, although the success of the scheme cannot yet be determined as enrollment into the scheme is still ongoing.
We did, however, discover two misleading claims by the candidates. Obaseki claimed that his predecessor “borrowed recklessly” thus, leaving a debt burden of 120 billion naira. After a review of the total internal and external debt portfolio of the state during that time, we arrived at a figure close to but not exactly what was stated. On the other hand, the claim by Osagie Ize-Iyamu, the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the saturday election, that the Edo state government receives 600 million naira in security votes monthly was false. To understand why this claim was rated “misleading” by our researchers and to know more about security votes, monthly allocations and its use, read the full length fact-check here.
As the much anticipated election was conducted over the weekend, our team worked around the clock to verify claims that could inform voters’ decisions. This includes false claims on the prevalence of violence in certain polling units and false claims about electoral misconduct. To find a full list of on-the-spot fact-checks published during the election, check our Twitter and Facebook pages. Stay updated to our social media platforms as we continue the post-election fact checking activities.
As a reaction to the footage of the wedding of President Muhammadu Buhari’s daughter where guests were seen spraying Naira notes, some Facebook users recently argued that spraying of naira notes is an offence in Nigeria. How true is this?
A Facebook page shared a picture of a certain man with the claim that he is the tallest in Nigeria. The picture portrays a Nigerian man who appears unusually tall, posing alongside other men who could…
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in a recent tweet claimed that the Edo Modular Refinery is the “project” of Governor Godwin Obaseki, explaining that the governor…
QandA
Can face masks suffocate one to death?
Doctor U. Jerry Agim, a registrar at the National Hospital Abuja, explained that a face mask cannot suffocate an individual to death. He noted that as a health worker, he wears a face mask at least 9hours daily and sometimes he falls asleep with it during his call duty. Nevertheless, a study on the effects of wearing a mask concluded that in general, increased physical activity leads to more oxygen demand at our tissue level; hence, there could be a less efficient exchange of airflow. However, the severity of this differs from the wearing of face masks. (Continue reading)
Is COVID-19 Vaccine available in Nigeria?
No, it is not available and may not be available until next year at the earliest. The Presidential Task Force on COVID-19 and Minister of Health, Osagie Ehanire, said that Vaccines will not be available until next year at best. The Federal Government has also cautioned Nigerians to be careful amidst the COVID-19 pandemic because vaccines will not be available until 2021. (Continue reading)
Is the bank self-certification mandatory?
Yes, it is mandatory. According to the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) anyone who fails to register and submit their self-certification forms risk forfeiture of their bank accounts and other assets with financial institutions. The FIRS chairman, Muhammad Nami said persons holding accounts in different financial institutions are required to complete and submit the form to each one of the institutions.(Continue reading)
What can you do?
Be alert, share our tips and don’t share false news!
Coronavirus infection count
Note: Total cases may be more than officially stated owing to the inability to include unconfirmed cases. Stay safe!
With the common trends in picture and video manipulation – photoediting/deepfakes – it is advisable to verify information before passing on to the next person. If it is supposed to be comical, make sure to include a public disclosure statement that explains the type of content!
For accusatory posts like this, begin your verification by conducting a quick audit of the social media account. Is the page known for posting mostly inciting stories? What are people saying in the comment section? Next, check if the story was published by any other media platform that is believed to be credible. You can conduct further verification on the likelihood of the event happening but with preliminary investigation, you should have a well formed opinion on the credibility of the news.
On July 28, Nigerian social media space was flooded with several versions of a video of a woman, identified as Stella Immanuel, among a group of United States’ doctors, vehemently making unsubstantiated claims about hydroxychloroquine and the ravaging COVID-19 pandemic, while dismissing other promoted preventive behaviours. The video went viral globally, generating tens of million in views across social media platforms. The video added to the streams of misinformation on the pandemic with the potential to hinder progress being made in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. The video was fact-checked by several fact-checking organisations and they all dismissed the claims. In this piece, we examine the virality of the video among respondents, their convictions on the claims made and likely behaviour in the possibility of suspected COVID-19 infection. Our findings supported virality of the video with more than 90 percent being aware of the video, but with limited shares among respondents. Despite repeated fact-checks, those who still believed claims made in the video were found more likely to try hydroxychloroquine than those who do not. Respondents mostly expressed positive views towards wearing facemasks to limit the spread of the virus. The virality of the video compared to its fact-checks supports the need to stop misinformation from spreading in the earliest possible time. Hence, fact checkers must continuously be alert to track misinformation in the public space and stop its spread immediately.
Introduction
Among frequently shared misinformation about the coronavirus is the controversial use of hydroxychloroquine either as a curative or preventive measure to the ravaging pandemic. This was recently heightened with the viral video of a group that called itself America’s Frontline Doctors. On July 27, members of the group appeared before the United States Supreme Court in branded white coats and made a series of claims dismissing official response and measures to curtail the pandemic. The choice of the Supreme Court frontage was probably to lend credence to the group.
Among vehement speakers at the event is a controversial Nigerian-trained US-based doctor, Stella Immanuel, who made unsubstantiated claims regarding hydroxychloroquine as a cure to COVID-19 and dismissed wearing of face masks. Days later, Stella Immanuel claimed she was on a spiritual mission to save the world. Others in the video might also be of questionable personality, with this report indicating little evidence most had worked as COVID-19 frontline workers as suggested by the group’s name.
The video has since been debunked by fact-checkers (e.g. Dubawa, Africa Check, Politifact), confirming that hydroxycloroquine is not yet approved as a cure for COVID-19, since research is still ongoing to test the efficacy of the drug. In this piece, we examine how selected Nigerians perceived this viral video and their subsequent reaction following the “FALSE” verdict of fact-checkers. Specifically, we examine the virality of the video among respondents and their perception of the claims made before and after reading any of the fact-checks.
Method
This study adopted the online survey method using google form to prepare a 21-item questionnaire. The questionnaire’s link was shared through WhatsApp messaging app for people to respond to, with an additional message for recipients to help share among their contacts. Responses were gathered over a two-week period from Saturday, August 8 to Saturday August 22, 2020. A total of 222 respondents filled the questionnaire from across the country and beyond, but with the South-west recording dominance. The respondents comprise 54 percent male and 46 percent female. The age distribution of respondents is presented in the pie chart below.
Figure 1
Findings
Findings from this study support the virality of the video. Ninety percent of respondents confirmed familiarity with the video. Seven percent said they were not aware of the video while about 3 percent were unsure if they had seen the video. Majority of respondents confirmed seeing the video on more than one social media platform. Less than 20 percent confirmed sharing the video. WhatApp and Facebook led single platforms through which people saw the video.
Figure 2
Across age groups, 80 to 100 percent of respondents confirmed seeing the video. The elderly population (above 60 years) more readily shared the video. Half of respondents over 60 years confirmed sharing the video.
Figure 3
Figure 4
Respondents mostly expressed neutrality in believing her claims, but with more denouncing her claims than believing it. Those neutral about the claims and those with higher belief in the claims shared the video more than those with less conviction about the claims. Some of those who believe her claims noted they were persuaded by her convincing oratory which according to them was “detailed with proof.” Other reasons for believing her claims were confirmation of their previous suspicion of a cure, lingering controversies within the scientific community, support based on success in clinical trials locally and shared experiences of recovered covid-19 patients Those who considered the claim a hoax noted their ingenuity of covid-19 misinformation and said they considered the “staged event” a “political propaganda” with unsubstantiated claims which should be viewed with scepticism, among others.
Figure 5
Soon after the video went viral, other social media posts emerged to counter the claims in the video even before fact checks were published on the claims. One hundred and forty-six (146) respondents confirmed reading the countering social media posts even though the majority still remained resolute in their beliefs on the claims made.
Figure 6
In the days following the release of the video, several fact checking organisations published fact checks on claims made in the video, amid other elements such as the so-called America’s Frontline Doctors, and individual members who featured in the video. Almost Forty-four percent (43.9%; n=94) of respondents confirmed awareness of the video fact-check while a slightly higher percentage (44.4%, n=95) claimed not to be aware. Another 12 percent were unsure of themselves. Of the 94 respondents who confirmed awareness of the fact-checks, only 68 percent confirmed reading it.
Respondents mostly became aware of fact checks on the video after seeing online posts of fact check debunking claims made in the video. Many also found out about it through shared posts on the fact checks or were notified by social media platforms. Few respondents reported learning about the fact checks through news mention mostly on notable news media organisations such as Cable News Network (CNN) and Channels TV.
How respondents knew about the fact-checking?
Percentage of Respondents aware of fact-checking on the video
I saw the post of the fact-checked article
36%
Someone shared the fact-checked article with me
30%
I was notified on social media
27%
News media mention
7%
Total(n)
100%(94)
Table 1: How respondents aware of fact-checking of the video knew about it
Respondents in the study were neutral in supporting fact-checkers’ verdict on claims made in the video. The greatest percentage (35%) of respondents gave average scores to their support of the false verdict of fact checkers. However, the percentage of those supporting the verdict (Rated 4 and 5) are generally higher than those opposing it (Rated 1 and 2). Those opposing fact checkers’ verdict confirmed their likelihood to take hydroxychloroquine (or in combination other drugs) to prevent COVID-19 in contrast to those supporting it. Similarly, those indecisive (rated 3) and those not supporting fact-checkers’ verdict (rated 1 and 2) were found more likely to self-medicate with hydroxychloroquine if they suspect they might be infected with COVID-19.
Figure 7
Respondents expressed diverse views on promoted behaviours in the video. Majority of respondents simply expressed support for wearing facemask while a few more supported the idea with notable caution. Another dominant view focused on its preventive capability, emphasising its need to curb the spread of the virus. However, some considered the preventive ability of facemask to be relative based on specific circumstances. Less dominant views considered wearing facemask simply as a civil behaviour in obedience to official directive. Others deemphasised its necessity in curbing the virus, noting it generally filters the air we breathe in and prevents common air-borne disease. Few respondents considered it unnecessary and/or ineffective in limiting the spread of the virus while few others focused on its limitations and considered it to be hazardous suggesting it might be risky for some with underlying breathing challenges. Others were indifferent or considered wearing facemask as an individual’s choice.
Views on wearing masks
Frequency
Percentage
Support the idea
80
38.3
Preventive
77
36.8
Official directive
12
5.7
General prevention
11
5.3
Support the idea with caution
11
5.3
Relatively preventive
5
2.4
Ineffective / unnecessary
5
2.4
Hazardous
3
1.4
Indifferent
3
1.4
Others
2
1.0
Total
209
100.0
Table 2: Themes in Respondents’ views on wearing masks
Figure 8
Respondents sharing video?
Respondents’ sharing fact-check?
Total
Yes
No
Yes
6%
12%
18%
No
13%
69%
82%
Total(n)
19%(37)
81%(159)
100%(196)
Table 3: Respondents’ sharing of the video and its fact-check?
Generally, the level of information sharing on the video appears to be minimal among respondents. As noted in table 10, the extent to which respondents shared the original video and its subsequent fact checks is minimal, occurring in less than 20 percent in both cases.
Conclusion
Findings from the study above confirm earlier observations that fact checks do not often attain the virality of misinformation posts they countered. As noted by Funke (2019), this need not discourage fact checkers as there have also been several promising results on potential of well-written fact checks to change people’s misconceptions. Fact-checkers must learn to debunk misinformation without further promoting the misinformation, by limiting detailed references to the debunked claims.
Efforts of giant social media platforms, though commendable, need to be intensified to stop the spread of misinformation as early as possible. For instance, the viral video examined in this study had been viewed more than 14 million times on Twitter and 16 million times on Facebook before its removal. Despite that, it is still likely available among millions of social media users who had downloaded it to their device’s memory while still available. No doubt, the number of views would have been much higher had it been left online. Fact checkers thus have to be increasingly alert to stem the spread of misinformation through prompt publication of their fact checks and aggressive promotion of their fact checks.
Although face masks have been recommended, wearing them is not as comfortable as they look. Is this known discomfort so bad that it can make one feel dizzy or lead to suffocation?
A study on the effects of wearing a mask concluded that in general, increased physical activity leads to more oxygen demand at our tissue level; hence, there could be a less efficient exchange of airflow. However, the severity of this differs from the wearing of face masks.
Another study among surgeons who routinely wear surgical masks show there was an increase in heart rates and a decrease in oxygen saturation of their blood, after an hour of putting on a surgical mask. The findings were, however, reported as inconclusive, as they did not account for factors like physical exertion and environmental conditions.
What are experts saying?
Doctor U. Jerry Agim, a registrar at the National Hospital Abuja, speaking with Dubawa in a phone interview said a face mask cannot suffocate an individual to death. He noted that as a health worker, he wears a face mask at least 9hours daily and sometimes he falls asleep with it during his call duty.
He explained there are several factors that could have led to the man’s death. Factors like intoxication from the alcohol the victim took, inability to remove face mask when feeling discomfort, underlying health issues like Asthma, COPD, cancer, pleural effusion, pulmonary oedema, Covid-19 etc.
Mr Agim said alcohol on its own depresses the respiratory centres and other body reflexes and can also induce hypoglycemia i.e to reduce blood sugar which can also kill an individual. He added that alcohol does not only depress the respiratory centres, it depresses the whole of the central nervous system which can result in coma.
He noted that if a person has any of the above-mentioned health issues, wearing a face mask will cause discomfort and make it more difficult to breathe so the ideal response is to remove the mask.
He further explained that wearing a mask in an environment with poor ventilation can reduce the person’s oxygen supply and even course dizziness or fainting spell.
“I can say categorically, the face mask did not suffocate him. The alcohol intoxication killed him from either one of the two mechanisms or both explained above.”
Excerpt from Interview.
Another medical personnel, Doctor Okpanachi Achile, who is a house officer at the Federal Medical Centre in Kogi State, told Dubawa that it is possible but the face mask is not the main cause.
He said alcohol intake especially drunkenness can lead to aspiration- foreign bodies including stomach contents entering the airway. Aspiration he explained occurs when foreign material is inhaled into the airway.
He added that as drinking increases, people become sleepy or fall into a stupor and after a very high level of alcohol consumption, the respiratory system becomes depressed and the person will stop breathing.
According to him, Comatose patients may aspirate their vomit resulting in vomitus in the lungs, which may cause “drowning” and later pneumonia if survived.
He said the causes of death include asphyxiation due to a blocked airway and irritation or infection of the respiratory tract due to inhaled material, or aspiration pneumonia.
Speaking on the face mask, he said the face mask could have increased the risk of aspiration by obstructing the outflow of the vomitus. A soaked face mask he said is a very poor medium for gaseous exchange. “In a man with the already compromised respiratory system, it’s like adding insult to injury,” he said.
“Not anybody that sleeps with a face mask will just die. There are other factors, which is the major cause. Depending on the circumstance, it is not just a clear cut that it is because he wore a face mask but the face mask worsened whatever happened to him.”
Excerpt from interview
Conclusion
Although the use of a face mask can cause discomfort, it is not proven that it can suffocate an individual. So there is a need to continue to wear them as outlined by the guidelines of Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) as long as health authorities see them as necessary in a pandemic.
Screenshot warning users of the danger of the site
