Return to Transcripts main page


S&P 500 Erases Losses from Pandemic, Nasdaq Hits Record High; World Health Organization: Asymptomatic Spread of Coronavirus is "Very Rare"; Funeral Service for George Floyd to Be Held in Houston Soon. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired June 9, 2020 - 07:30   ET



JOHN BERMAN, CO-ANCHOR, NEW DAY: Now, the loss to the community had tighten the community in Houston, and I think the frustration of trying to educate and successfully educating young men and still having them be at risk after. Our thanks to the coach. So, this question, what can white people do to end racism? We'll discuss next.


ALISYN CAMEROTA, CO-ANCHOR, NEW DAY: These past two weeks have been a time of soul-searching and self-reflection for a lot of white people, many of us wondering how we can help fight racism without accidentally being insensitive or sounding clueless in the process. Joining us now is Tim Wise; he's the anti-racism educator and author of "Colorblind: The Rise of Post-Racial Politics and the Retreat from Racial Equity". Tim, great to have you here. It's really helpful --


CAMEROTA: Because you are steeped in the study of this stuff in a way that most of us are not --

WISE: Sure --

CAMEROTA: And so many white people -- you know, I have some white friends -- so many white people are wondering what to do right now, and they feel like they can't do anything right. And you have some helpful tips.


So, let's just dive into some of the things that you're suggesting white people do right now. Number one, play a supporting role. What does that look like?

WISE: Well, I mean, this culture has sort of trained those of us who are white to be the leaders and in charge of things. And when it comes to something like fighting racism where, you know, black and brown folks have the most to lose, I think it's important that we subordinate some of that ego and that need to control things to the people who are actually on the front lines. So it's important to follow people of color's leadership in this

moment. Now, that's not always easy to do or easy to know who to follow because obviously not all folks of color agree with one another. But when you see a movement like this, similar to the civil rights struggle in the '50s and '60s and into the early '70s, what you saw were white allies working in solidarity, but working with black leadership and really following their lead in terms of the strategy and the tactics.

So, I think that's the first thing we need to do is sort of realize that this is a moment to do a lot more listening than talking, and a lot more following than leading, generally speaking.

CAMEROTA: OK, the next thing you say is challenge other white people about racism. How do we do that?

WISE: Right. This is the part where I think white folks can really step up and take something of a -- not leadership role, but a more active role. You know, the reality is white Americans have been trained not to hear truth from black and brown peoples. If we were willing to listen to black folks historically and people of color currently, we wouldn't be in this mess.

So what we can do as white folks, if we see the problem that we can -- I think, most of us are certainly seeing now. We have the opportunity to talk to family, to friends, to colleagues, to neighbors, to challenge their conditioning by letting them know what we see. You know, people who are white and have other white folks in their lives, those folks will listen to us precisely because it's us so we can leverage that privilege, if you will, that access to actually challenge the conditioning that both the person we're talking to and ourselves, the conditioning that we both were given growing up.

And that means telling the kinds of stories that we need to tell, and challenging people's perception so they know that it's not just black people who see the problem, and it's not just, you know, people of color who see the problem, that we do as well.

CAMEROTA: I mean, and obviously, one of the challenges is to do that in a non-combative way. You know, this is such a hot topic and people can get so heated that to challenge someone, you know, you sort of have to pick your places. And when you -- just to build on what you just said -- your third point is, talk about what we see and why? Can you give us just an example?

WISE: Yes, I mean, I think it's important that we don't just hit people with the academic analysis and a bunch of studies and facts. We know from the research that, you know, you can give someone facts and evidence all day long, and if they have a reason not to accept your facts, they'll just double-down on their denial. But I think what we can do is tell the personal narrative, the stories about how we came to see things the way that we see them, you know.

We have stories behind it. There's a reason white folks who are in the streets right now are in the streets right now, and it's not because they took a critical theory class, and it's not because they read a really great book and said, oh, my gosh, I should join the movement. It's because they had some personal narrative, some personal story that connects them to the movement and to the work. I certainly know that's true for me.

And so, when I talk to people -- you know, if I'm talking about policing, I will tell stories about all the stuff that I got away with as a young person, whether it's going on to construction sites like Ahmaud Arbery, even though I was going there to smoke weed, to drink under age, to do things I'm very glad there was no camera evidence for, right -- knowing that I was not going to be hunted, never even thinking that I would be tracked down and shot in the street or arrested.

Telling stories about my own drug use, underage drinking, fake ID, manufacture, I literally ran a fake ID mill for about a year and a half when I was a teenager. Never worrying. I showed a fake ID to a cop once, knowing that it was horribly made fake ID, and he wasn't going to take me to jail. So, telling those stories to other white folks about all the stuff we got away with, never worrying about the consequences will trigger in them similar stories because we all have those stories.

And to me, that's much more effective than all of the data and all of the statistics that we could offer them.

CAMEROTA: And then, Tim, what about the sort of ceremonial shows that we're seeing from say members of Congress, of you know, we stand with you or we kneel with you? Yesterday, there were these congressional Democrats. They wore, as you can see, this traditional African cloth around their necks. They took a knee to show solidarity with George Floyd. Is this effective or what are your thoughts?

WISE: I mean, I think it's largely performative, you know? I think, really, the test is, are these folks going to push for legislation that's going to go beyond simple reform, and let's do better training and let's have body cams. And you know, they want to pass a bill that says ban choke-holds.


Well, the problem is police departments are defining choke-holds however they want. Eric Garner was choked out on the streets of Staten Island, but they said, well, it's not really a choke-hold because a choke-hold pressures your wind pipe and all he did was compress the carotid artery, right? So, that's clearly not enough. We're going to need to have policies that move in a fundamentally different direction when it comes to public safety.

That is to say, moving money from traditional law enforcement into community-base programs run by people in the community that can actually keep people safe, say as opposed to this over-militarized policing, which is keeping nobody safe and is leading to the kinds of injustices that we see on the streets of our country.

CAMEROTA: Tim Wise, so helpful to talk to you again. You've written "Colorblind" and "Dear White America", we really appreciate getting your perspective.

WISE: Thank you so much.

CAMEROTA: If you look at the stock market, you would not know that we are in the throes of a pandemic. Christine Romans is going to explain next.



BERMAN: So, believe it or not, U.S. stock markets back in positive territory for the year. As of this morning, they've erased all the huge losses from the pandemic, this, even though there's been a recession, even though there's been historic job losses, it's time for "CNN BUSINESS" with chief business correspondent and "EARLY START" anchor Christine Romans. It seems like there's a bit of a disconnect here, maybe a historic disconnect.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: It's really remarkable, John. The stock market barreling ahead, the S&P 500 has erased all the losses from the coronavirus pandemic. It's up 40 percent from the low set in March. The Dow is back above 27,000, the Nasdaq, John, hit a record high, look at that, it's up almost 11 percent this year. Tech stocks never faltered.

The so-called FANG stocks, look at those, look at Amazon, 36 percent gain this year. So how can that be? Such pain for main street, but Wall Street recovered. Well, there are signs the economy is improving. It's bad, but getting better from a very low level. Airlines are adding flights, Vegas casinos are open. You have phase one, and in some cases, phase two reopenings in parts of the country.

There is what economists are calling hidden hiring, some of these early jobs lost are coming back, maybe because of the PPP. There is epic and record stimulus from Congress and the Fed, and maybe speculators could be goosing this, too, which of course means trouble when they bail out. At the same time, the official arbiter of booms and busts has declared the coronavirus recession began in February, it's here. The longest expansion in history is over.

The economy created 5 percent in the first quarter, probably many times worse than that in the second quarter. It's so rare, John, to have a recession officially declared so quickly. The NBER, the arbiters of booms and busts says that, you know, it was just so big and sharp, the magnitude of it meant that they had to come out and say we are in a recession. So, we're in a recession but the stock market clearly looking way ahead of that to a V-shaped recovery.

BERMAN: Yes, Wall Street is not main street.

ROMANS: It's not.

BERMAN: And it does not mean that people are not suffering because they are. Christine Romans, thank you very much. So, a startling statement from the W.H.O on coronavirus that there's really no evidence of serious spread from asymptomatic people. Wait, what? This is the opposite of what we've been told. So, what's going on here? That's next.



BERMAN: Some major questions this morning after a scientist at the World Health Organization said that coronavirus spread by people with no symptoms appears to be very rare. This is the opposite of what the CDC has been warning Americans about for months. Joining me now is Dr. Michael Osterholm; he is the director of the Center for Infectious Disease, Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. Doctor, thanks so much for being with us. Let me play the sound from the scientist of the W.H.O.


MARIA VAN KERKHOVE, TECHNICAL LEAD FOR CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: It still appears to be rare that an asymptomatic individual actually transmits onwards.


BERMAN: Rare that an asymptomatic person transmit coronavirus. This is not a small issue. This is a major issue. One of the most major issues facing public health officials in this pandemic, whether or not asymptomatic people can spread the virus, and we've been told they can and have and are. So what's going on here?

MICHAEL OSTERHOLM, DIRECTOR OF CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASE RESEARCH, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: Well, first of all, what you're seeing is science and public policy being hashed out in the media, which is the last place we want to do that. We should be a scientist working together to find out what the answers are. I will say that there are I think far too many people who are self-ascribed experts in this area who have very definite answers, and they get on shows like this and say that we need much larger dose of humility among the experts.

What W.H.O. said yesterday which I don't agree was necessarily the best venue to do that is in studies of contact-tracing where they have a case, they find their contacts, they then test those contacts, and when those contacts themselves don't have symptoms they still look at the contexts of those contacts and they're just not seeing transmission.

That is a very important observation, and at the same time, it doesn't mean that asymptomatic people can't transmit because we surely have cases of that. What we're just not sure of, how much do they transmit to others, and that's a question we as scientists must work out and stop telling the world we know what that means because we don't.

BERMAN: And there may be another element of this also, and it's unclear because she didn't really delve into it that much more. She may be talking about people who never exhibit symptoms, who are asymptomatic forever which is different than pre-symptomatic people. There are people who show no symptoms today, may spread it today or tomorrow. But next week, will be symptomatic.

OSTERHOLM: You're absolutely right about that. And I think that's where we get into this terminology, what's asymptomatic, pre- symptomatic. You and I coming down with the symptoms tomorrow or the next day very well may transmit today. We have examples of that too. So that early transmission is important and I don't want to diminish that.

I think the challenge is that people who report that a large percentage of people may be asymptomatic, and they're not transmitting the whole purpose of that statement by W.H.O, yes or save, we're going to do contact-tracing continue to focus on those who are clinically ill because they tend to spread the most.

I think we still have a lot to learn about this, and again, I come back to the message over and over again, we need a lot more humility in our discipline right now because we're telling people things that we think are right, and we should do that but we need to give them the data to support it and not be surprised that we're going to find new findings like those.

BERMAN: But you know, just very quickly, you don't think people should change their behavior based on the statement from the W.H.O yesterday?

OSTERHOLM: Oh, I wish we'd change our behavior. I'll tell you that right now. I'm concerned about the transmission potential we're seeing as we come back out of this lockdown, as we reopen the economy. We've kind of gone from about two miles an hour to 200 miles an hour, and look at what's happening right now.


We right in this country today, we have 22 states where cases are increasing, we have 23 states where they're going down. We don't quite know what's going on right now. And so we're going to need to monitor this very closely to see if as we do come back together and pretend that nothing happened, whether it's in the economy, whether it's in public health-related issues, we've got a challenge on our hands, and we need to follow very carefully.

BERMAN: Sir, you've consistently said we're in the second inning of a nine-inning game in terms of this pandemic. What's it been like for you to see the protests, the thousands of people on the streets during the second inning of this pandemic? What's it like to hear the president and his team saying they want to have rallies again now in the second inning of this pandemic?

OSTERHOLM: Well, you know, you're right on the mark with that. First of all, let me just say people accuse me of having the longest second- inning in record -- in baseball, and I have for the last two months in second inning because we're still waiting to see is this going to be a first wave? Which we should know within the next weeks whether this is going to have a quiet Summer, waves like we would see with influenza or a first wave lasting 3 months would give way to several months of no cases, and then a huge -- a late Summer-Fall wave. We don't know that yet.

But I think your point about the crowds and so forth with the protests are very important. We don't know what that's going to mean yet. Again, I've seen people espouse it's going to mean this or that. When you're outdoors, we know that the virus dissipates much quicker into the air, the risk of exposure may be much less.

On the other hand in 1918, we know that a war-bound parades, there were spikes in cases that occurred even with those outdoor activities. When you add in the tear gas and the smoke and the coughing and the yelling, all air slicing events were people who are more likely to transmit, then you put people in jails, you put them in holding vehicles until you get them processed. Again, the kinds of events that might spread the virus.

So, I'm like many, I don't know for -- we won't know for the next week or two, did these events really increase the number of cases?

BERMAN: I know California is going to open some movie theaters under severe restrictions very shortly. And on that subject, "The New York Times" has put out a survey to a number of scientists, I believe you are one of them, asking people when they would be comfortable -- scientists, when they would be comfortable doing certain activities.

And the majority of people who answered "The New York Times", I think we have this graphic, said that they would not be comfortable going to a sporting event, a concert or a play, 64 percent, until a year from now, more than a year until you go to a sporting event, a concert or a play. So let me put this to you, if you lived in California, even if they open movie theaters, would you be comfortable going to a movie theater next week?

OSTERHOLM: Yes, I think what you're raising is a very important point, and let me just make one editorial comment. Just because there are a bunch of scientists, that means nothing to me. If I were to say college professors, I could look at somebody in American literature and somebody in physics, and if I want to ask them about some physical equation, I'd go to the physicist, if I wanted to know about literature, I'd go to the professor in literature.

The point being is just because they answered it doesn't mean it's right. I think we all are people first, professionals second. And many people are basically sharing what their sense of their own personal security is. Right now, we have to acknowledge if you're a high-risk person for a -- having a serious illness or dying, I still think you have the primary responsibility to protect yourself.

If you're in crowds, if you're close to other people, indoors, you are putting yourself at risk for a life-threatening disease. Now, does that mean that others can't go out or shouldn't go out if they're not in a high-risk category? That's up to them. I mean, we make choices every day, but we're not telling I think people enough that they need to protect themselves if they're at risk of a serious illness.

BERMAN: Professor, a pleasure to speak with you, thanks so much for your help this morning. OSTERHOLM: Thank you.


OSTERHOLM: Thank you very much.

BERMAN: NEW DAY continues right now.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A somber homecoming for George Floyd in Houston.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you all, we will get justice! We will get it!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We need to make sure that every single person in our community feels safe. But we have a crisis of confidence in our police department.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Disbanding the police, it doesn't make any sense. It's an invitation to chaos.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Overall new cases are up in 22 states.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Social justice protesters feeling even more concerned about the continued spread of the pandemic.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mass group settings like that are extremely difficult to contact-trace.


CAMEROTA: Good morning everyone, welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. This morning in Houston, a private funeral for George Floyd. Though his death has led to such a widespread response from the public. Thousands came to pay their respects to Floyd and his family at the final memorial yesterday.

Many waiting in line for hours in nearly 100 degree temperatures. Last night, hundreds more gathered at a candlelight vigil at Floyd's high school. In a few hours, members of Congress will attend Floyd's funeral as well as boxing great Floyd Mayweather who reportedly is paying for the service.