Pandemia leva a quebra de quase 50% no número de turistas em março

Pandemia leva a quebra de quase 50% no número de turistas em março

Os efeitos da pandemia da Covid-19 já começam a fazer-se sentir no setor.

Pandemia leva a quebra de quase 50% no número de turistas em março

Notícias ao Minuto

30/04/20 11:00 ‧ HÁ 15 MINS POR BEATRIZ VASCONCELOS

https://www.noticiasaominuto.com/economia/1468799/marco-com-quebra-de-quase-50-no-numero-de-hospedes-e-58-5-de-dormidas?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer&utm_content=geral&fbclid=IwAR1km6ujxVCXGEfSgasjhJCR-EgBOKqKAUOl-I-8t62ySjnktpWflwY-ZJM

A pandemia do novo coronavírus está a pressionar fortemente o setor do turismo que, em março, registou uma quebra de quase 50% do número de hóspedes para 701 mil, de acordo com os dados divulgados esta quinta-feira pelo Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). O número de dormidas também sofreu uma queda de 58,5% para 1,9 milhões.

No mês anterior, sublinhe-se, o setor tinha registado um crescimento de 15,3% e de 14,7% do número de hóspedes e de dormidas, respetivamente, segundo os dados do INE.

"As dormidas de residentes terão diminuído 56,9% (+26,4% em fevereiro) e as de não residentes terão decrescido 59,2% (+9,5% em fevereiro)", pode ler-se no relatório do INE.

Além dos efeitos gerados pela pandemia do novo coronavírus - que, em março, começou a dar os primeiros sinais em Portugal - o efeito de calendário também não ajudou.

"Para além dos grandes condicionalismos que a atual pandemia originou na atividade turística, estes resultados foram também influenciados pelo efeito do período de Carnaval que, este ano, ocorreu em fevereiro e, no ano anterior, ocorreu em março", pode ler-se.

Por nacionalidade, quem mais deixou de visitar Portugal em março?

No geral, revela o INE, a "totalidade dos principais mercados emissores registou decréscimos em março", altura em que começaram a ser implementadas algumas restrições por causa do novo coronavírus.

Ainda assim, as maiores diminuições verificaram-se nos mercados chinês (-78,8%), italiano (-75,8%), norte-americano (-68,5%) e espanhol (-66,1%). O mercado canadiano foi, entre os principais mercados emissores, o que registou menor decréscimo (-37,8%), ainda segundo o INE.

[Notícia em atualização]

'Another Wuhan in the making?': Undercover in a Thailand market selling .../ 'We did it to ourselves': scientist says intrusion into nature led to pandemic

'We did it to ourselves': scientist says intrusion into nature led to pandemic

Leading US biologist Thomas Lovejoy says to stop future outbreaks we need more respect for natural world

Phoebe Weston

@phoeb0

Published onSat 25 Apr 2020 06.00 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/25/ourselves-scientist-says-human-intrusion-nature-pandemic-aoe?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0dyZWVuTGlnaHQtMjAwNDI5&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=greenlight_email&utm_campaign=GreenLight

The vast illegal wildlife trade and humanity’s excessive intrusion into nature is to blame for the coronavirus pandemic, according to a leading US scientist who says “this is not nature’s revenge, we did it to ourselves”.

Scientists are discovering two to four new viruses are created every year as a result of human infringement on the natural world, and any one of those could turn into a pandemic, according to Thomas Lovejoy, who coined the term “biological diversity” in 1980 and is often referred to as the godfather of biodiversity.

“This pandemic is the consequence of our persistent and excessive intrusion in nature and the vast illegal wildlife trade, and in particular, the wildlife markets, the wet markets, of south Asia and bush meat markets of Africa… It’s pretty obvious, it was just a matter of time before something like this was going to happen,” said Lovejoy, a senior fellow at the United Nations Foundation and professor of environment science at George Mason University.

His comments were made to mark the release of a report by the Center for American Progress arguing that the US should step up efforts to combat the wildlife trade to help confront pandemics.

Wet markets are traditional markets selling live animals (farmed and wild) as well as fresh fruit, vegetables and fish, often in unhygienic conditions. They are found all over Africa and Asia, providing sustenance for hundreds of millions of people. The wet market in Wuhan believed to be the source of Covid-19 contained a number of wild animals, including foxes, rats, squirrels, wolf pups and salamanders.

Lovejoy said separating wild animals from farmed animals in markets would significantly lower the risk of disease transmission. This is because there would be fewer new species for viruses to latch on to. “[Domesticated animals] can acquire these viruses, but if that’s all there was in the market, it would really lower the probability of a leak from a wild animal to a domesticated animal.”

He told the Guardian: “The name of the game is reducing certain amounts of activity so the probability of that kind of leap becomes small enough that it’s inconsequential. The big difficulty is that if you just shut them down – which in many ways would be the ideal thing – they will be topped up with black markets, and that’s even harder to deal with because it’s clandestine.”

The pandemic will cost the global economy $1tn this year, according to the World Economic Forum, with vulnerable communities impacted the most, and nearly half of all jobs in Africa could be lost. “This is not nature’s revenge, we did it to ourselves. The solution is to have a much more respectful approach to nature, which includes dealing with climate change and all the rest,” Lovejoy said.

His comments echo those of a study published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B earlier this month that suggested the underlying cause of the present pandemic was likely to be increased human contact with wildlife.

Experts are divided about how to regulate the vast trade in animals, with many concerned the poorest are most at risk from a crackdown. Urgent action on the wildlife trade is clearly needed, said Dr Amy Dickman, a conservation biologist from the University of Oxford, but she was “alarmed” by calls for indiscriminate bans on the wildlife trade.

She is one of more than 250 signatories of an open letter to the World Health Organization and United Nations Environment Programme saying any transition must contribute to – and not detract from – the livelihoods of the world’s most vulnerable people, many of whom depend on wild resources for survival. Other signatories include representatives from the African Wildlife Foundation, the Frankfurt Zoological Society and IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature).

The letter reads: “Covid-19 is inflicting unprecedented social and economic costs on countries and communities, with the poor and vulnerable hardest hit. The virus’s suspected links with a Chinese ‘wet market’ has led to calls to ban wet markets and restrict or end the trade, medicinal use and consumption of wildlife. However, indiscriminate bans and restrictions risk being inequitable and ineffective.”

Scientists and NGOs are concerned that over-simplistic and indiscriminate restrictions will exacerbate poverty and inequality, resulting in an increase in criminality. This could accelerate the exploitation and extinction of species in the wild, authors of the letter warn.

“People often seem more willing to point the finger at markets far away, as bans there will not affect their everyday lives – although they will often affect the rights of extremely vulnerable people,” said Dickman.

There are also concerns about the impacts of an outright ban on a number of indigenous populations, such as tribes in Orinoquia and Amazonia, with representatives describing it as an “attack” on their livelihoods.

Mama Mouamfon, who is based in Cameroon and directs an NGO called Fondation Camerounaise de la Terre Vivante (FCTV), said banning the trade would damage livelihoods: “Bush meat is very important for people in the forest because it’s one of the best ways to get animal protein. With this issue of poverty and people living in remote areas, it’s not easy for them to look for good meat,” he said.

“Sometimes people take decisions because they are sitting in an office and are very far from reality. If they knew our reality they would not take that [same] decision.”

'So what'? Bolsonaro's response to coronavirus deaths riles Brazilians

Pressure mounts on Joe Biden to address sexual assault claim

Pressure mounts on Joe Biden to address sexual assault claim

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee has remained silent amid new reporting on allegation of 1993 assault

Lauren Gambino in Washington

@laurenegambino

Published onThu 30 Apr 2020 03.59 BST

Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, is facing growing pressure to publicly address an allegation of sexual assault made by Tara Reade, a former aide to his Senate office.

The former vice-president has remained silent about the accusation, a position that is seen as increasingly untenable in the wake of new reporting. Many major Democratic women’s organizations and prominent feminists have also declined to comment publicly on Reade’s claim that Biden, then a senator from Delaware, assaulted her in 1993.

Biden’s deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield said in a statement this month that “this absolutely did not happen”, but she has not commented further.

Reade’s allegation emerged as Biden’s primary victories positioned him to face Donald Trump, who has been accused of sexual misconduct and assault by more than a dozen women, in the general election. Now Democrats, who widely embraced the “believe women” ethos of the #MeToo movement, are grappling with how to respond.

On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that women’s rights activists are quietly pushing Biden to break his silence, urging him to make a statement before the end of April, which is Sexual Assault Awareness Month. According to the Times, some of the women’s groups involved drafted a public letter that they have not released, which praises Biden’s work as an “outspoken champion for survivors of sexual violence” while encouraging him to “model how to take serious allegations seriously”.

An editorial in the Washington Post called on Biden to address the claims against him and release any records related to Reade’s employment, including any complaints she may have filed while working in his office.

“Tara Reade deserves to be heard, and voters deserve to hear her,” the paper’s editorial board wrote on Wednesday. “They deserve to hear from Joe Biden, too.”

Reade was one of eight women who came forward last year with stories involving unwanted touching or displays of affection by Biden. None alleged sexual assault and Biden vowed to be “more mindful”.

At the time, Reade told a California newspaper, the Union, that Biden habitually touched her neck and shoulders when she worked as an aide in his Senate office from 1992 to 1993. She told the paper that she was asked to serve drinks at an event because Biden liked her legs and, when she refused, was sidelined and eventually pushed out of his employ.

A year later, in an interview with the leftwing podcast commentator Katie Halper, Reade alleged that Biden had pinned her against a wall and digitally penetrated her in the basement of a Capitol Hill office in the spring of 1993. She said she had not come forward with the allegation sooner because she was scared of the backlash and was still grappling with what had happened to her.

Reade said she filed a report in the Senate and claims she was forced out of his office after complaining to her supervisors, a charge disputed by several former Biden aides but corroborated in part by people she said she told at the time and in the years after.

In an interview this week with the conservative website the Daily Caller, Reade called on Biden to release any documents related to her employment. She said: “I would like to hold you accountable for what happened to me, to how your staff protected you and enabled you, bullied me multiple times into silence.”

Fresh reporting has re-energized calls for Biden to address the subject.

On Monday, Business Insider published a report based on interviews with two women who corroborated key elements of Reade’s story. Lynda LaCasse, a former neighbor of Reade, said that Reade told her about her encounter with Biden when they lived in the same California housing complex in the mid-1990s. The second woman, Lorraine Sanchez, said Reade had told her that she had been sexually harassed by her former boss while working in Washington DC.

Last week, the Intercept published the transcript of a 1993 call to Larry King’s CNN talkshow featuring a woman from California inquiring vaguely about what her daughter could do about the “problems” she encountered while working in the office of a “prominent senator”. The woman, who Reade identified as her late mother, said her daughter did not want to go public with the allegations out of respect for the senator.

BuzzFeed News reported on Tuesday that Biden’s campaign had circulated talking points to surrogates and supporters instructing them to describe him as a “fierce advocate for women” who has never faced a “complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct” over the course of his nearly 50-year-political career. The talking points also inaccurately suggest that a New York Times report this month concluded that the incident “did not happen”.

In the article, the New York Times spoke to three former Senate aides who said the behavior Reade described was inconsistent with Biden’s conduct and had no recollection of an assault happening. The Times also spoke to two interns who recalled that Reade abruptly stopped supervising them, supporting Reade’s claim that she had been stripped of that responsibility. Neither intern recalled any discussion of inappropriate behavior by Biden.

In a joint appearance with Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, billed by the campaign as a “women’s town hall”, Biden was asked a question about women locked in with abusive partners amid the Covid-19 pandemic.

“Violence against women is a huge problem, and especially right now,” he said, adding that ending violence against women has “been one of the leading causes of my life”.

While Biden has yet to speak out publicly, several of the women who he is considering as running mates have been questioned about the allegation and his conduct, angering some feminists. Writing in New York Magazine, the columnist Rebecca Traister said joining Biden’s presidential ticket amounted to drinking from a “poisoned chalice” because his promise to choose a female running mate “ensures that whoever she is, she will be forced to answer – over and over again – for Biden’s treatment of other women”.

Tarana Burke, the woman who started #MeToo, said she too was grappling with Reade’s allegation – but said it was possible for Biden to “be both accountable and electable”.

On Wednesday the #MeToo activist and actor Rose McGowan called Democrats a “cult” for, in her view, collectively downplaying Reade’s story. “I’m really sad, and I’m really tired,” she wrote on Twitter. “I normally share thoughts, but tonight it’s emotion.”

Debaixo de um céu (quase) sem aviões, a lei do ruído passou a ser cumprida no Campo Grande

No dia 23 de Abril só houve 17 movimentos de aviões a descolar e aterrar na Portel

LISBOA

Debaixo de um céu (quase) sem aviões, a lei do ruído passou a ser cumprida no Campo Grande

Tal como há quase um ano, os ambientalistas da Zero voltaram a medir o ruído numa zona de Lisboa muito afectada pelo som constante da passagem dos aviões de e para a Portela. A diferença é assinalável.

Abel Coentrão

Abel Coentrão 29 de Abril de 2020, 7:06

https://www.publico.pt/2020/04/29/local/noticia/debaixo-ceu-quase-avioes-lei-ruido-passou-cumprida-campo-1914241

A legislação do ruído tem sido cumprida, nas últimas semanas, no Campo Grande, em Lisboa. O problema é que isso só está a ser conseguido por causa do Estado de Emergência e da fortíssima redução dos movimentos de aeronaves no Aeroporto da Portela, como constatou a associação ambientalista Zero, que voltou a fazer agora, neste ponto da cidade, um exercício de medição do ruído ambiente, semelhante a outro realizado em Julho do ano passado.

Quando ali esteve em Julho do ano passado, para dar números (medidos em decibéis) a uma percepção evidente a quem mora nesta e noutras zonas de Lisboa mais próximas da Portela, a Zero percebeu que somado ao ruído de base, do tráfego automóvel, que já deixava pouca margem abaixo dos limites legais, o barulho dos aviões a descolar ou a aterrar acrescentava ao quotidiano dos habitantes toda uma camada de poluição sonora já em clara violação da lei.

Aproveitando o inesperado da actual situação, a Zero decidiu voltar ao local do crime com as mesmas ferramentas - um sonómetro devidamente homologado e certificado, operado pela empresa NoiseLab - para um exercício de comparação que ninguém esperava poder realizar em condições normais. A associação bem tem pedido que se reduzam os movimentos à noite, mas foi preciso um vírus, e uma pandemia global que nestes dois dias atirou para quatro o número de aviões a passar ali no período nocturno, para, por más razões, se perceber o impacto disso no ambiente urbano.

O aeroporto não parou, como constaram por exemplo no dia 23, em que houve 17 movimentos aéreos. Mas isso significa uma redução na sua actividade tão forte que o efeito é notório nos gráficos e tabelas que resultaram deste trabalho. Que para o dirigente da Zero Francisco Ferreira, mostra “que é impossível cumprir a legislação em Lisboa com o aeroporto em funcionamento normal” e que “a sua relocalização tem de ser equacionada no médio prazo”.

74 dbA

é o valor de exposição Lden, ponderado para 24 horas (cobrindo os períodos diurno, entardecer e nocturno) verificado em 2019. Em 2020 esse valor cai para 62 dBA, abaixo, portanto, do limite legal, estabelecido em 65 dBA

A medição foi contínua entre as 16 horas do dia 22 e as 15 horas do dia 24 de Abril. No ano passado tinha decorrido entre 4 e 6 de Julho. Na comparação dos dois períodos constatou-se uma a diferença de 12 dBA relativamente aos indicadores Lden (média ponderada, para 24h, da exposição ao ruído nos períodos diurno, entardecer e noite) e Ln (exposição no período nocturno). “Considerando que uma variação de 10 dB no nível sonoro corresponde tipicamente a uma sensação do dobro em termos de sensação auditiva, a diferença de 12 dBA verificada está claramente acima dessa diferença”, assinala a Zero.

A Associação lembra ainda que se “deve também ter em conta que a escala de decibel é logarítmica e a intensidade sonora duplica a cada 3 dBA. Em Julho de 2019, o Lden, que não pode ultrapassar para a zona em causa (zona mista / zona próxima de infra-estrutura aeroportuária) os 65 dBA, assumiu um valor de 74 dBA, em clara ultrapassagem do valor limite legal (mais 9 dBA), o mesmo tendo acontecido relativamente ao Ln (correspondente ao período nocturno) que na altura ultrapassou o valor legal em 11 dBA.

71,5 dBA

foi o valor de exposição diurna máximo registado nos três dias de medição Julho de 2019. Este mês, esse valor não ultrapassou os 61,2 dBA.

E o que isto permite concluir. Para a Zero duas coisas importantes. A primeira é de que de nada vale fazer mapas de ruído e planos de acção que não tenham em conta o tráfego aéreo. Mexer nas ruas e circulação automóvel terá algum efeito marginal, mas o grande problema, insiste Francisco Ferreira, vem de cima. E se “não se pode mudar um aeroporto de lugar de um dia para o outro”, admite, estes dados deveriam levar o Governo a reflectir sobre o impacto, no bem-estar e na saúde da população afecta, do actual projecto de expansão da Portela e prolongamento da sua actividade por mais quatro décadas, se avançar, como pretende o executivo, a construção de uma infra-estrutura complementar no Montijo.

54 dBA

foi o valor de exposição registado nos dois períodos nocturnos da medição feita este mês. A lei estabelece um limite de 55 dBA neste período de descanso, mas na medição do ano passado esse valor foi sempre ultrapassado, e muito, fixando-se nos 66 dBA

“Não quero defender aqui outras soluções, mas julgo que é óbvio que se tornará insustentável manter este modelo por 40 anos”, insiste Francisco Ferreira.

Bloco quer agendar lei para nacionalizar a TAP

COVID-19

Bloco quer agendar lei para nacionalizar a TAP

No mesmo dia em que o Governo anunciou uma “intervenção de larga escala” para salvar a TAP, o Bloco entregou um diploma no qual propõe a nacionalização da companhia aérea.

Liliana Borges

Liliana Borges 29 de Abril de 2020, 19:53

https://www.publico.pt/2020/04/29/politica/noticia/bloco-quer-agendar-lei-nacionalizar-tap-1914476

Os bloquistas aproveitaram o diploma para criticar a gestão privada da TAP

O Bloco de Esquerda (BE) quer agendar, com urgência, um projecto de lei para a nacionalização da transportadora aérea TAP. O diploma deu entrada esta quarta-feira, horas depois de o ministro das Infra-estruturas e da Habitação, Pedro Nuno Santos, ter anunciado uma “intervenção em larga escala” por parte do Estado na companhia aérea. Os bloquistas irão levar o diploma à próxima conferência de líderes, agendada para a próxima quarta-feira.

No final de Março, o BE já tinha questionado o Governo sobre a estratégia do executivo para salvar a companhia aérea. Também o PCP já tinha demonstrado a sua preocupação com a situação da TAP e “a queda abrupta do número de viagens e o encerramento de espaços aéreos”. A 29 de Março, os comunistas apelaram à intervenção do Estado, defendendo a necessidade do país ter uma companhia aérea nacional.

No diploma entregue esta quarta-feira, os bloquistas lembram que sempre se opuseram à privatização de uma empresa “estratégica para o país” e recorda que “foi crítico do processo de 2015 que levou o Estado a obter 50%” do seu capital, uma vez que deixou a gestão executiva “completamente refém da gestão privada”.

De acordo com o BE, a gestão da TAP “tem-se revelado má, não só para os interesses do Estado como para milhares de trabalhadores”, o que piorou só a crise sanitária e financeira trazida pela pandemia covid-19.

“Na TAP, a situação enquadra-se neste cenário difícil, mas as decisões tomadas pela actual administração estão longe de ser inovadoras: despedimentos e recurso a layoff, pedidos de ajuda ao Estado e financiamento privado com garantias públicas”, critica o BE.

Os bloquistas acusam os accionistas privados de todos os dias clamarem por ajudas estatais, das mais diversas formas “que resultam sempre no mesmo: garantias públicas para investimento privado, mas sem aumento de poder do Estado”.

“Os accionistas privados têm-se esforçado nas últimas semanas para dar a imagem de que foi a gestão privada que valorizou a TAP, mas esquecem-se sempre de referir as queixas de inúmeros clientes, os conflitos laborais que têm vindo a criar ou o corte de relações com o Estado por decisões incompreensíveis como a atribuição de prémios a alguns administradores apesar dos prejuízos nos últimos dois anos”, aproveita para apontar o BE.

​"O próprio Governo admite que tem todas as opções em cima da mesa e admite uma maior participação do Estado no capital da empresa e na sua gestão”, notam os bloquistas. “Havendo a necessidade de intervenção do Estado e de dinheiros públicos, isso só pode ser feito com a gestão também pública”, lê-se no comunicado.

Na audição parlamentar na Comissão de Economia e Obras Públicas desta quarta-feira, Pedro Nuno Santos afirmou que a intervenção será de uma “elevadíssima dimensão” o que quer dizer que o modelo a que “tem de ser muito bem maturado, de acordo com os interesses do Estado soberano, e do país, e não dos interesses accionistas de uma empresa que se não for intervencionada acabará por falir”.

No entanto, os bloquistas não ficaram satisfeitos com as respostas e afirmam que apesar de o Governo (pela voz do primeiro-ministro, ministro das Finanças, ministro da Economia e ministro das Infra-estruturas) não descartar a hipótese de nacionalização, “não concretizaram nenhuma proposta, relegando para uma futura decisão negociada com os accionistas privados”, lê-se no diploma.

tp.ocilbup@segrob.anailil

Trump v Fox News: why the president is furious at the conservative network

Trump v Fox News: why the president is furious at the conservative network

The president attacked Fox News and accused it of being ‘fed Democratic talking points’ – possibly over to a string of anti-Trump ads due to run on the network

Adam Gabbatt

@adamgabbatt

Wed 29 Apr 2020 10.30 BSTLast modified on Wed 29 Apr 2020 10.31 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/29/fox-news-trump-democratic-talking-points

Donald Trump’s longtime close relationship with Fox News, like so many other unions in the time of lockdown, is beginning to buckle under pressure, with an increasingly sensitive president furious at the conservative media channel.

Trump has attacked the conservative channel in recent days, accusing the usually uncritical network of being “fed Democratic talking points”, with some observers suggesting his ire may have been caused in part by a string of anti-Trump ads due to run on Fox News this week.

The breakdown between president and news channel was laid bare in a string of tweets from Trump on Sunday evening. Trump has occasionally criticized Fox News in recent months, but this attack went further, as Trump declared he wants “an alternative now”.

“[Fox News] just doesn’t get what’s happening! They are being fed Democrat talking points, and they play them without hesitation or research,” he tweeted.

“They forgot that Fake News @CNN & MSDNC [a term Trump has used for MSNBC] wouldn’t let @FoxNews participate, even a little bit, in the poor ratings Democrat Debates.”

Trump president continued his criticism by attacking prominent Fox News personalities including the Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, before concluding: “The people who are watching @FoxNews, in record numbers (thank you President Trump), are angry. They want an alternative now. So do I!”

Trump did not give a specific reason for his upset, but it could be linked to a critical advert a group of anti-Trump Republicans are running on Fox News this week. Republicans for the Rule of Law, a group opposed to the president, paid for an ad spot during Fox & Friends – one of Trump’s favorite shows – which highlights his response to the coronavirus.

“50,000 people have died,” reads capitalized text at the start of the advert.

“This is our president.”

The advert then cuts to Trump musing about the potential ability of “very powerful light” in curing coronavirus. The advert ends with the words “Unfit, unwell, unacceptable” appearing on screen.

Despite Trump’s objections and insults, Fox News has remained largely supportive of his administration and performance during the coronavirus outbreak.

After Trump suggested the possibility of injecting coronavirus patients with disinfectant, Fox News’ website billed the ensuing criticism as a matter of “twisted words”. Hosts Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity have praised Trump’s performance, with the latter suggesting: “New York would be dead without Donald Trump’s help.”

The Trump-Fox fracture comes as the profile of One America News Network (OANN), a news outlet which has repeatedly pushed conspiracy theories and is regarded as even more rightwing than Fox News, continues to rise. In early April the then White House press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, personally invited an OANN reporter to a coronavirus briefing. The same reporter has been called on repeatedly by Trump to ask questions – frequently questions that tee Trump up to praise his own performance – at the briefings.

On Monday it was reported that Fox News had also cut ties with Diamond and Silk, two outspoken Trump supporters who have peddled misinformation about the coronavirus. The booting of the influential pair, whose loyalty has won repeated praise from Trump, is unlikely to have pleased the president.

If the Trump-Fox News rift proves to be permanent, it could have a substantial impact on Trump’s public statements, given he has repeatedly been guided by Fox News on his reactions to crises and policies. As recently as mid-April, Trump tweeted messages of support for anti-stay-at-home protesters just two minutes after Fox News ran a favorable segment on the protests.