captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight: the crisis continues. shelling in eastern ukraine sparks dire warnings that russia could be concocting a pretext for invading the country in the coming days. then, the state of the pandemic. we ask dr. anthony fauci about the uncertain future of covid-19 amid changing public health guidelines. >> if we implement the known interventions, it will be much more likely that we will get back to normal. >> woodruff: and, officers on trial. the other former police officers involved in the killing of george floyd are cross-examined about whether they should have intervened. all that and more, on tonight's

pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> fidelity wealth management. >> consumer cellular. >> bnsf railway. >> the kendeda fund. committed to advancing restorative justice and meaningful work through investments in transformative leaders and ideas. more at kendedafund.org.

>> carnegie corporation of new york. supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security. at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: and individuals. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: war in ukraine could come within days, president biden said today, as artillery hit a kindergarten in eastern ukraine, and a tense standoff between the west and

russia came to a point in the united nations security council. more than 150,000 russian troops remain massed tonight on the borders of ukraine. nick schifrin again starts our coverage. >> schifrin: near the line of contact between the ukrainian military and russian-backed separatists, this morning a shell pierced the wall of a kindergarten classroom, that on tuesday, had been full of five- year-olds and their teachers. this morning, they fled from what the ukrainian government called separatist shelling. the u.s. fears a russian attack like this could be the first shot fired in a wider war that's about to start. >> we have reason to believe that they are engaged in a false-flag operation to have an excuse to gon. >> is your sense that this is going to happenow? >> yes. not-- my sense is this will happen within the next several days >> schifrin: secretary of state antony blinken made a last- minute visit to new york to reveal new intelligence about a possible russian pretext. >> it could be a fabricated, so-

called terrorist bombing inside russia, the invented discovery of a mass grave, a staged drone strike against civilians, or a fake-- even a real attack using chemical weapons. russia may describe this event as ethnic cleansing or genocide. >> schifrin: indeed, ahead of the meeting, russia delivered to the security council what it called a “joint project” with the news channel rt about “war crimes” in eastern ukraine. rt, formerly known as russia today, has already been publishing stories about british-trained “saboteurs” planning attacks, and american mercenaries preparing a“ provocation using chemical weapons.” deputy foreign affairs minister sergey vershinin blamed today's violencen ukraine. >> people for many years have been subject to shelling by the ukrainian army, and that has continued today. >>chifrin: but u.s. officials say it's the russian army that continues shelling, in massive exercises in belarus. russia says it's withdrawing

some troops, but senior u.s. officials say the number of russian troops increased by 7,000, and are poised for invasion. british intelligence even tweeted what it called rsia's“ possible axis of invasion” on seven fronts. >> saddam hussein and his regime have made no effort-- no effort-- to disarm as required. >> schifrin: and 19 years after one of blinken's predecessors gave a speech based on false intelligence, blinken embraced the comparison. >> i'm mindful that some have called into question our information, recalling previous instances where intelligence ultimately did not bear out. but let me be clear, i am here today not to start a war, but to prevent one. >> schifrin: preventing the war requires diplomacy. in moscow, u.s. ambassador john sullivan visited the foreign ministry to receive a new russian document that said,“ we welcome the readiness of the united stas for appropriate consultations,” a reference to

u.s. offers to discuss arms control, military exercises, and missile deployments. but the document added, “this work cannot replace the settlement of key problems.” that's a reference to russian demands already rejected, that nato “refrain from any further enlargement,” including ukraine "roll back to before nato expanded in the late 1990s to former soviet satellites and states," and "pledge not to deploy missiles near russia's borders." moscow also acknowledged today that last week, iticked out deputy u.s. chief of mission bart gorman, the embassy's number two. but this morning, foreign minister sergey lavrov said there's still room for diplomacy. >> ( translated ): we will continue talks on all aspects of our proposals. >> schifrin: and for more, we're joined by victoria nuland, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. victoria nuland, welcome back to the newshour. president biden today said that russia could launch, quote, "within the next several days." what are you seeing that

leads to that conclusion? >> nick, as my secretary said at the united nations today, we are seeing russian forces not moving back from the front, but, in fact, moving forward, and more foces coming in every day. we're seeing them moving into ready positions. we are seeing set units at the ready. we're seeing large amounts of aviation, large amounts of naval power surrounding ukraine. and we are starting to see the kinds of re pretext that the secretary was warning about today, including the bombing of the kindergarten, unbelievable, by russia-backed separatists today. >> reporter: on the number of pretexts that the secretary of state listed that we heard in our piece, one caught our eye. he said that russia could use chemical weapons as a pretext for war. what is your evidence for that? >> well, these are the kinds of things that russia is predicting that the ukrainians would do.

and this is a tried and true russia technique: accuse the other guy of doing exactly what you, yourself, are planning to do. now, whether they would actually be as brutal as to use chemical weapons or just make it look like the chemical weapons had been used, that is one of the pretext that we want to warn the world about because it is in their playbook, and we could see it in the next couple of days. >> reporter: and r.t.has been talking about chemical weapons. but i think you've gotten this question before, and it is important to ask: why should we trust u.s. intelligence when, of course, it has been wrong in the past? many russian ukrainian experts who i talked to doubt that putin would benefit or even be able to occupy ukraine and conduct a regime change. >> well, nick, as you know, we've been warning pmin november. we started warning when there were 50,000 troops around ukraine's borders. and then our warnings got

stronger when there were 100,000 troops around ukraine's borders. and then when they moved 30,000 troops through belarus, we warned again. now we're up to 150,000 troops, including very high-tech weapons, and these special forces, and so we are depending, obviously, on our intelligence, but it is being borne out by what we're seeing on the ground, unfortunately. >> reporter: spesnat, russian special operations the forces that we've seen in ukraine in the past. to put a point on this, we do hear that the russians say they're going to end exercises in the black sea and in belarus in the next few days. is that the critical moment? is that when you're fearing that shows russian troops won't actually use those exercises and instead will be used for an invasion? >> absolutely, nick. as secretary blinken said, they have everything in theater ready to go. if they want to prove to

the world it is not their intention, they can see unequivocally they have no intention of invading ukraine, and they can begin pulling back those forces, ose aircraft, those ships, and come to the diplomatic table. >> reporter: on the diplomatic table, are there off-ramps. russia delivered a letter, and is it an opening for diplomacy, and is it a chance to meet secretary blinken, as he invited him to do next week. >> we have not yet had a response to secretary blinken's offer to mystery lavrov to meet anywhere of his choosing in europe next week. we hope he will cepted that. there is grounds both in the u.s. proposal and in the russian proposal for us to work seriously on arms control, on military de-confliction, on restraints. the russians, in fact, in their document today said

that they wanted to talk about some of these things, particularly intermediate-range nuclear weapons and short-range nuclear weapons and missile defenses. so let's come to the diplomatic table and talk, and let's pull back forces from ukraine. >> reporter: it is hard to read some of these messages. they are mixed. while the letter did say they wanted to talk about those topis, at the same time, it said that the u.s. had not responded to positively the core demand about nato's future and ukraine's future. bottom line, do you believe that letter is an opening to dip dip or not? >> nick, ibelieve that the united states and our allies have to take every possible opening we can to try to get the russians to the table and try to avert a war that will be incredibly bloody for ukraine and russia, incredibly dangerous for europe and for peace and security around the world, and would draw new

dividing lindsay that we lines e haven't seen since i was young and you were even younger. as you said at the beginning of your segment, a lot of russia's unacceptable depends remain, but ipt doesn't mean we shouldn't try talking and closing the gaps. but they have to de-escalate ph they're if they'e serious about diplomacy and not war. >> reporter: london and the u.s. have been aggressive about releasing russian military plans. do you believe that can make putin sweat, change his calculus? because there is not a lot of history about putin changing his behavior after being clled out? >> as you know, nick, putin loves the element of surprise. that's what he was able to achieve when he jumped into crimea in 2014, and some of his other moves the last time we saw him escalate in ukraine. so what we've tried to do

here is not only remove from his tool kit the element of surprise, make sure that the ukrainians and our allies and partners are ready, but also that the international community sees this bag of dirty tricks that he and the kremlin have used so often and recognizes them. today's example was a prime one. when the kindergarten was hit, with those awful pictures, definitely based on the trajectory of the missiles by russian proxies in the donbas, they were unable to succeed in gaining traction that this came from the ukrainians because we had prepared people. so we will continue to do that, and, unfortunately, we believe that our intelligence is being borne out here. but there is still time for diplomacy. that is our message today. >> reporter: victoria nuland, thank you very much. >> thank you, nick. ♪♪

>> woodruff: in the day's other news, new worries about war in ukraine sent wall street looking for cover. the dow jones industrial average lost 622 points-- 1.8%-- to close at 34,312. the nasdaq fell 407 points-- that's nearly 3%. the s&p 500 slid 94-- that's down 2%. california will shift its approach to covid-19 from "pandemic" to "endemic"-- still a threat, but considered manageable. governor gavin newsom announced the move today, the first by any state. it emphasizes prevention and quick response, but leaves various emergency orders intact. meanwhile, researchers at the university of washington estimated 73% of americans are now immune to the omicron variant. we'll talk to dr. anthony fauci about the pandemic, after the news summary. busloads of canadian police began arriving in downtown ottawa today, as hundreds of

truckers braced for a crackdown. they he been protesting against covid restrictions for nearly three weeks. today, work crews put up fences outside parliament, and the city's police chief warned that authorities won't wait much longer to make their move. >> we've been bolstering our resources, developing clear plans, and preparing to take action. the action is imminent. to those engaged in the unlawful protests, if you want to leave under your own terms, now is the time to do it. >> woodruff: most of the truckers insisted again they won't be moved, but as night fell, police arrested one of the protest organizers. in brazil, the death toll reached 113 today in flooding and mudslides near rio de janeiro, after 10 inches of rain fell in three hours. tuesday's storm swept away homes and cars in the city of petropolis. more than 115 people are still missing. authorities fear many were buried in the mud.

back in this country, florida has joined states moving to ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. the republican-controlled state house approved it early today-- with no exceptions for rape or incest. the bill now goes to the state senate. the bill is modeled after a mississippi law that's now before the u.s. supreme court. hundreds of people gathered in minneapolis today to remember amir locke. the 22-year-old black man was shot and killed by police serving a no-knock warrant earlier this month. the reverend al sharpton told mourners today that locke was not guilty of anything except "being young and black in america." and, relatives rejected the official response to the killing. >> we don't want to continue to hear about being a police officer-- "it's a difficult job. you have to make split decisions. you fear for your life."

you are not drafted into the police department. you chose that profession. and if you think being a police officer is a difficult profession, try being a black man. >> woodruff: locke was killed as police hunted a homicide suspect-- but it turned out he was not the man they were looking for. a new york state judge has ordered former president trump to answer questions under oath in a probe of his business practices. he has been subpoenaed by the state attorney general. today's order also applies to donald trump, jr. and ivanka trump, the former president's two eldest children. the ruling is almost certain to be appealed. the supreme court of oregon barred former "new york times" columnist nicholas kristof today from running for governor. the court found he has not lived in the state forhe required three years. kristof called it "very disappointing." at the winter olympics, russian teenager kamila valieva failed

to medal in women's individual figure skating, as a doping scandal swirls around her. the 15-year-old fell twice in her free skate, and finished fourth. her teammates won gold and silver. in women's hockey, canada beat the u.s. 3-2, and took home the gold medal. and, american mikaela shiffrin was disqualified for the third time this olymcs, after skiing off-course in the alpine combined. and, guinness world records has declared a behemoth strawberry as the heaviest ever recorded. the fruit was grown on a farm in central israel, and tipped the scales at more than ten ounces. it took a year for guinness to confirm the berry's claim to fame. edible. still to come on the newshour: what still to come on the newshour: what a minnesota trial says about police officers' responsibility to intervene. conspiracy theories run rampant in the online personal wellness

community. a new book on the civil rights legend constance baker motley. plus, much more. >> woodruff: the very worst of covid-19's omicron surge appears to be behind us. the world health organization reported that infections are down globally. in the u.s., new cases are down by more than 60% in the last two weeks. a number of states and cities are lifting masking requirements. but, the w.h.o. and many others are still warning of letti down our guard too soon. in the last week, there were more than 70,000 deaths globally. in the u.s., more than 2,100 deaths a day. we look at where we stand with dr. anthony fauci. he is the chief medical advisor to the president. i spoke with him a short time ago.

>> woodruff: dr. fauci, welcome back to the newshour. let me begin by asking you where we are as a country with regard to covid-19? there is a new modeling study ot today that says something like three-quarters of the country is protected by the vaccine or having been infected with covid. and then other statistics say only half of eligible americans have been vaccinated and boosted. if people want to understand how safe we should feel, are we overestimating that? >> doctor: i'm not so sure if it is an over or under estimation, judy. i think it is the reality if you look at where we are right now, clearly there is a shot d decriment with a little bit less of a lagging or more of a lagging with deaths. but every day, when you

look at the data, and you do weekly averages, you're seeing the cases and the hospitalizations go down. that is very good news. however, when you look at the c.d.c. map of high and substantial activity, it is still really mostly red or orange, which means that it is right up there where there is a lot of activity. the good news, judy, is we're going in the right direction. there is no doubt about it. getting to your original question, when you look at what people are referring to as the degree of immunity in the community, that means a combination of people who have been vaccinated, as well as those who have been infected and recovered. the only confounding issue with that is the durability of protection. and when you have variants like omicron, which can invade the immunity, the number of people who are

so-called zero positive, which means they've either been infected or they've been vaccinated, sometimes can be misleading with regard to the vulnerability. because you can get infected, recover, be protected for a while, and then your immunity wanes. you get vaccinated, and we already know that after a while, you're immunity wanes and you need to get boostered. >> woodruff: there are several things i want to ask you about, dr. fauci. one is, as you know, mask mandates around the country, they seem to be dropping like flies. we're almost at a point where the vast majority of states will have dropped mask mandates, but at the same time, the c.d.c. is saying to americans it is too soon to take off the mask, citing the kind of evidence you were quoting just a moment ago. americans, franklyare confused and wondering how can you leave this decision up to individual

americans when the guidance they're getting is conflicting? >> doctor: well, i think what it is, judy, is a reflection of the need and the understandable need for people to get back to some form of normality. all of the stresses and all of those things that go into people just being so tired of this. that's totally understandable. what the c.d.c. is doing is giving you the data as it exists and the recommendation bas on where we are now. the thing that is important is that many of those locations are likely, in some respects, anticipating what is going to happen. >> woodruff: but you can understand why people are confused at this point. the signals are different. >> doctor: yeah, of course. what there is -- and i hope that this helps to explain it, judy -- there is a public health recommendation that is a

broad recommendation. clearly the implementation of those is always left to the local level, what the conditions on the ground are locally, what the community can and cannot tolerate. so you have to understand the recommendations that the c.d.c. made are based on the science, the epidemiology, of what they're observing. that doesn't mean that is going to apply absolutely to every single different location in a different way. and that's why they always say they make the recommendation, but the ultimate decision is at the level of the local authorities. >> woodruff: which is, again, putting a lot on people's shoulders to follow all of this, as much athey want to do it. let me ask you about boosters, dr. fauci. new information came out not too many days ago from the c.d.c. that there appears to be a waning of protection from the boosters after four months

or so. so people are asking: do we need to think about the next booster? when? six month? five months? what is the best guidance? >> doctor: you have to look at where we are now, judy, and where we might be a couple of months from now. where we are now, if you look at the waning, there is no doubt there is substantial waning when it comes to what is called symptomatically recognizable disease. but if you look at severe disease as reflected by hospitalization, at four to five months, you still see about a 78% protection overall against hospitalization. and in the world of vaccination, that's pretty good. and that's the reason why the c.d.c. is saying if you have an immune compromised person, cancer, chemotherapy, transplant, what have you, get your fourth shot now.

if you're in the general population of immunocompetent people, you're pretty good now. and we, meaning the c.d.c. with their large cohorts, are following the due redurability of that protection. if it goes down over the next couple of months, they will modify the recommendation of when and who should get now the fourth shot. but in general for the population level, 78% is pretty good. it likely will go down some time. we don't know for sure. we're hoping it will hold tight up there. but if it does go down, i think you can expect some modification of the recommendation. >> woodruff: part of the reason i'm asking is because you do hear from people who are so-called immunocompromised, and there are millions who fall in that category, and they're wondering, what about us? what about me? and the connection with that, dr. fauci, people who had the johnson &

johnson vaccine, something like 16 million americans, they've had the shot, they've had the booster, but they've been told that is not as much protection as those who received the mrna vaccine. some are saying we've been left out and forgotten. >> doctor: that is understandable because that kind of word is going around. but if you look at the recent data and studies that have looked at the durability of protection, it was that one shot of j & j would be equivalent to the two-shot regiment of mrna. if you give a third shot boost, which is what the j & j are concerned about, they get either another shot of j & j, or a mixed matched boost with an mrna. they already have recommendations to do that. so it is not that that is not available. if you look at the data, the level of protection

against a j & j person who gets either another j & j or an mrna is right up there as good as someone who gets three mrnas. so people who have gotten j & j, it is understandable there may be some confusion, but they're pretty well protected. if they get the second j & j or an mrna after the j & j original. >> woodruff: that may well be reassuring for them. i want to ask you, dr. fauci, about children under the age of five. as you know, the f.d.a. had originally sent the signal we were close to approving the lower-dose vaccine for children under five, and then they turned around and said, no, we need more time. we want more studying done. you're hearing from a number of parents of young children who feel that the rug was pulled out from underneath them. they thought it was going to happen, it is not happening. they're told it is soon, but they don't know when. did the government let

these families and these children down? >> doctor: no, no, judy. not at all, not even close. let me explain why: when you get an approval from the f.d.a., which is the gold standard for efficacy and safety determination, when they originally thought when the studies were done by the company that this was going to be a two-dose vaccine for the children. it became very clear that across the board, from children from six months over and above up to five years, that it did not meet the efficacy standard that they thought. so it now is a three-dose vaccine. there is no doubt about the safety. so parents should not be concerned about safety. what is coming on now are data what the third dose does. so it isn't that anyone was let down because the f.d.a., and then ultimately with the c.d.c., with their

advisory committee on immunization practices and the recommendation -- they will be receiving the data, at least according to what we heard from pfizer, somewhere around april they'll be getting the data to the f.d.a., who will look at it. and if it is affective, they will then give an e.u.a. for its use. but you don't want to do that until you are sure it is safe and affective. we know it is safe now. we're gointo get information as to whether it is affective. so it isn't really a question, judy, of anyone being let down. you want to make sure that when you recommend a vaccine for your chd, you want to make sure is safe and it works. >> woodruff: and, finally, dr. fauci, for all of the americans who are listening to you, watching you, who want to know when is my life going to get back to something like normal, what are you saying to them right now? >> doctor: we're saying it is going in the right direction, judy.

but as you know, we're dealing with a very formidable virus. if we keep going in this direction, there are things that we can do to make it much more likely that we will get back to some degree of normality. and it is something that i've said over and over ain. we know the vaccines work. we know that when the immunity wanes, the boosters work. we know that masks, particularly high-quality masks, work. we know when you test someone and find out they're infected, if you keep them out of circulation, they don't infect anyone else. if we implement the known interventions, it will be much more likely that we will get back to normal. and that when those cases keep coming down and down, provided we don't get surprised by another variant -- and i have to be perfectly honest wit

you, judy, that is possible. you can't walk away from that possibility. we hope it doesn't happen. we can help it from not happening by getting more people vaccinated. >> woodruff: dr. anthony fauci, we thank you so much for joining us. >> doctor: my pleasure, judy. good to be with you, as always. ♪♪ >> woodruff: this is the foth week of the trial of three former officers who were on duty with derek chauvin when he murdered george floyd in 2020. the officers are on trial for their role in his death, and over questions about what they should have done at the time. william brangham focuses on those questions. >> brangham: judy, these three former police officers-- tou thao, thomas lane, and j. alexander kueng-- are charged with violating george floyd's civil rights. thao and kueng are charged with failing to intervene.

all three are charged with failing to provide proper medical care. for more on this, and broader issues of police behavior, i'm joined by christy lopez. she oversaw investigations of police departments at the department of justice from 2010 to 2017. she now teaches courses on policing at georgetown university law center, and co-directs their innovative police program. christy lopez, very good to have you on the newshour. we all watched that nine-plus minutes of video of derek chauvin kneeling on george floyd's neck. but, we also watched those three other officers who were on scene, and what they did and did not do in that moment, at at trial, what have those men been explaining about their behavior that day? >> they seem to be taking two tacks. one is to emphasize the hierarchy of the situation-- at they were in the presence of a superior officer, and i

they believed they should defer to that officer. and the other tack is that they seem to be saying that they were not trained in a way that would have informed them that they should be intervening. >> brangham: what does the law generally say about officer's responsibility to intervene when something is being done that's unlawful? >> there's been a duty to intervene for over 50 years. it makes it very clear that where an officer knows, or should know that someone's constitutional rights are being violated, and has the opportunity to intervene, the officer has a responsibility to take reasonable steps to intervene. and it doesn't matter. it's specific. there's an explicit case in the 8th circt, where this trial is being held, that says it doesn't matter if the officer against whom you need to intervene is a superior. it doesn't matter, you know, any lack of training is not a defense to that. you are supposed-- you have a responsible-- a responsibility to intervene, regardless.

>> brangham: that that rule certainly makes sense, but we've seen this in so many workplaces, in the clergy and medicine and corporations. but in policing in particular, this sort of quasi-military hierarchical organization, th's a very difficult stream to swim against, it seems, for junior officers to say to a senior officer, hey, what you're doing is wrong. >> yeah, that's such an important point. every industry, every field, every walk of life, we all find it hard to intervene. but there are specific, what we call "inhibitors to intervention," that are particular to policing, and one of those inhibitors is the hierarchy of a largely paramilitary organization, right? the other is one of the insularity, and this sort of sense that you have to have each other's backs. both of those can be really powerful inhibitors. and it's really important to make sure that all of us understand that they're going to confront those and teach them how to overcome those. >> brangham: i mean, the officers at trial here, one of them, i know his lawyer said, "yeah, they were given some training on how to intervene, but it was sort of perfunctory. a powerpoint slide or two. it wasn't real training with

scenarios and role-playing." does that training exist, and does it actually work to change this culture? >> yeah. well, i first want to note that on the one hand, that there's-- there's-- that's no excuse. no one needed training to know that there was a grievous harm that was happening here, and they had quite a long time to be able to intervene. so i don't want to be seen as saying that a lack of a particular type of training excuses the behavior of the officers on the scene. at the same time, i think it's also true that we know that there is tining. the able project, which we r right here at georgetown law, is seeking to educate officers regarding the inhibitors, to-- to intervention, and actually helping them develop the skills to intervene. and our belief is that-- and this is based on research that we've done in other places, and in our experience in new orleans with the naral's department, that when you do teach these skills, officers can learn and will be more likely to intervene and prevent harm. there's a great example from

sunrise, florida, of an officer intervening, and we have no reason to believe that this officer has any training and in intervention. but that officer, it's a female officer. she steps in before a superior officer is about to pepper-spray a handcuffed iividual in the back of a squad-- a squad car. and again, she steps up. she pulls him away. the way she is repaid for her good behavior by that officer? he grabs her by the neck. again, there's no reason to think that she needed or had any particular training, and there is every reason to believe that there are officers who do this sort of intervention every day. at the same time, when you watch that video, you can see this is a hard situation. this shows how difficult intervention is, and why we need to make sure we prepare officers to know how to intervene in those sorts of circumstances. >> brangham: i know that you have called this particular trial "unprecedented," and i know there was a lot of talk about, that chauvin's conviction for murder might change police culture. do you think if any of these men are found guilty of failing to

intervene, that that will change culture in a meaningful way? >> i think that we often make too much of the potential for criminal trials to change police culture. but i think here, this-- this particular criminal trial might have the potential to do just that, even more so then derek chauvin's criminal trial. and that's because this is again the very first federal criminal trial of an officer for failing to intervene against a superior officer. and that sends a very powerful message to police agencies and to police officers, that when you're a police officer, you are given an extraordinary responsibility, extraordinary power, and with that comes an extraordinary responsibility to step in and prevent harm, no matter which of your colleagues is causing that harm. >> brangham: all right. christy lopez of georgetown university law school. thank you so much for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> woodruff: tonight, we examine

a social media phenomenon that's having a real-wod impact: some influencers in wellness communities are using their platform to promote conspiracy theories. stephanie sy takes a closer look at how one mother was pulled into this world of disinformation, and how she got out. >> sy: in her home yoga studio in topanga canyon, west of los angeles, seane corn can breathe deeply, and tune out the noise. but when she logs on to her instagram, it's impossible to avoid it. a yoga instructor for nearly 30 years, corn has more than 100,000 instagram followers. but, a few years ago, she began noticing a dark change in tone on her social media. >> i started to receive a lot of information from my friends, just via text, online, sending me all this propaganda: pizzagate, drinking the blood of

children... >> sy: the look of the posts blended in with the other content on her feed. >> they'd be beautifully curated-- the font, the colors, the layout, the photography. >> sy: corn saw that those carefully-curated facades were being used to peddle conspiracy theories about the covid vaccine and q-anon, the belief that child sex traffickers and pedophiles have infiltrated the government and that president trump was sent to stop them. what's more, q-anon's online recruiters were specifically co-opting yoga language. you bring up this yogic idea of "i can't be free unless my community is free," because q-anon's mottos "where we go one, we go all." >> mm-hmm. when i first heard that statement, it caught me in my throat. they also talk about the "great awakening" and the

"great reset." language like this is also very much in alignment with spiritual principles. we are here to wake up. >> sy: and this was other yoga teachers and wellness influencers? >> yeah. >> sy: was it the majority of them? >> if i was just to look at my tight-knit group of colleagues, 50-50. >> sy: 50% of your inner circle of wellness teachers and influencers believe that donald trump was sent here for cosmic good. >> i would have to say. >> sy: derek beres is a co-host of the podcast "conspirituality," which examines why the wellness industry is such fertile ground for counter-narratives. >> the intersection between the new age and the right-wing conspiratorial thinking, i believe, is rooted in individualism. america is an individualist

culture. everything we produce and promote is all about the sovereignty of the self, and sovereignty is one of those words that crosses over between those two communities. >> sy: and it intensified during the pandemic. >> so you start looking on instagram, and then there's your favorite yoga instructor talking about child sex trafficking and 5g causing cancer, and the vaccine that's coming is going to give you cancer, or is going to kill you. and some people looked in horrorbut some people were like, wait a second-- i'm going to go this route and explore this and "do my research." >> sy: that phrase, "do your own research," is rampant on anti-vaccine forums, as well as q-anon spaces. the "research" often leads people to what the center for countering digital hate calls the "disinformation dozen," responsible for some 65% of all vaccine disinformation spread online. they've reached tens of millions of users. >> hi, this is dr. mercola, helping you take control of your health. >> sy: they include dr. joseph mercola, who peddles dietary

supplements to his 3.6 million followers, and has claimed that hydrogen peroxide can cure covid-19; sherri tenpenny, an osteopath physician who claims that wearing a mask has negative health effects; and sayer ji, who runs a popular alternative health website and shares false claims, like that the pfizer vaccine has killed more elderly people than covid-19. heather simpn spent years under the influence of the disinformation dozen. she recalls how she was drawn in. >> i kind of looked into the wellness community when i was trying to get pregnant, and it was like, ads started popping up for anti-vaccine issues. it was, like, one in the same: look up wellness stuff, anti-vax stuff pops up. >> sy: simpson soon found herself watching videos about the dangers of vaccines, and approached her doctor. >> he looked at me and he was like, "you're not one of those

crazy anti-vaxxers, are you?" all of the, i feel, gaslighting by the medical community, and then them just brushing me away, like, it was completely opposite from what i would find on the internet with the holistic world. they welcomed me. >> sy: conspiracy theories gain traction when people lose trust in institutions. alternative theories take root, espoused by authentic and relatable fluencers masquerading as truth tellers, says researcher stephanie baker. >> really, what's at play here, rather than social media being the cause of this kind of anti-vaccine sentiment, is that actually, social media creates the conditions for these trust relationships, and for intimacy to be fostered to a different degree. we've got to move away from saying "misinformation is an

information problem," to really seeing it as a relationship problem. >> sy: baker has examined how social media influencers may manipulate mothers like simpson. >> what we found is that a lot of that content was dedicated to actually, specifically targeting mothers, and trying to encourage them to refuse vaccination. really playing on this idea that a mother's intuition is superior to the abstract, professional knowledge. >> sy: mother heather simpson soon became an influencer herself. >> looking back, i feel like i got reported enough for misinformation that facebook could have, and perhaps should have taken that stuff down. but it was racking up soany comments, and just, user engagement that, why would they? >> sy: she had discovered the magic formula that makes so many wellness influencers rich: social media algorhms are known to push more provocative content, because it increases engagement. great for the social media companies, and for people selling false promises...

>> almost everyone in the wellness community that i knew was involved in a multi-level marketing company. a lot of them are stay-at-home moms or single moms. some are making $20,000 a month, some are making $100,000, and so narally, i fell into that, and so i sold a product that claimed basically to detox your body. >> sy: at the time, simpson saw the scheme as a way gain financial freedom from her husband, whom she's now separated from. >> i was so desperate to be independent, and i was just doing anything i could just to be independent and be strong for my daughter and get out there, get out of there. >> sy: simpson eventually grew disillusioned with the wellness community. it increased during the

pandemic, and simpson decided to publicly denounce the persona she'd cultivated. >> i realized, if you're not 100% brainwashed, you're not-- yeah, you are the enemy. and then covid hit the next month, and they changed their tune to "don't mask me. i have freedom." and i was like, why not just wear a mask? like, it could save an entire life! >> sy: she's now not only fully vaccinated, she now runs a group encouraging others to get the covid vaccine. seane corn is also fighting against the tide of conspiracy theories that have gripped her yoga community, but it hasn't been easy to take a stand. when she posted a statement against q-anon, the backlash came quick. >> the vitriol was intense. the messages that i received privately were definitely violent threats. >> sy: her tactic for helping fellow yogis find their way back from the conspiracy brink goes back to a basic yogic principle, engaging the student in their own healing. >> i want to ask questions. like, tell me more. why do you believe that? and then see if we can get to the root cause. the root is always going to come down to fear. >> sy: it's a process, she says, and like the practice of yoga, a slow one. for the pbs newshour, i'm

stephanie sy. >> woodruff: as president biden prepares to nominate the first black woman to the supreme court, it's worth revisiting another historic first. nicole ellis has more. >> reporter: constance baker motley was the first black woman appointed to the federal judiciary. her career is punctuated by several historic firsts in her work as a fearsome civil rights litigator, who alongside thurgood marshall changed the lives of millions in the jim crow south. but a lot of people don't know who she is. harvard law professor timoko brown nagin hopes to change that in her new book, "civil rights queen." tomiko, thank you for joining me. constance was one of the best litigators of her time. she was also the first black woman to argue before the supreme court. what do you think are some of the most important things about

her legacy? >> yes. well, the first thing is to know that she was there in the thick of the civil rights movement alongside thurgood marshall, mr. civil rights. she was a civil rights queen and had tremendous impact as a lawyer, helping on brown vs. board of education and a range of cases that really changed the legal architecture of this country, ranging from the higher education cases to cases involving the right to counsel and civil protest. her legacy is tremendous, including because after she had made history as a civil rights lawyer, she was in new york city politics and then appointed to the bench. >> reporter: let's dive into some of those big cases she worked on, because she wrote the original complaint in brown v. board of education, and she argued several historic school desegregation cases. for example, in this audio clip that i'll play, she's at the supreme court defending black students who were arrested during a sit-in protest at

white lunch counters in alabama. let's take a listen. >> but i didn't get, and i still don't quite, your >> reporter: why do you think she was so successful in arguing these cases? >> i love hearing that-- that video. she is successful because she knows exactly what she's talking about. she makes a point of saying that the n.a.a.c.p. was able to win

so many cases because of their experience. they were prepared. she knew the law backwards and forwards. in addition, she was steel so calm under pressure, which is something that thurgood marshall and charles hamilton houston taught her, and she just had a fantastic delivery. and of course, justice was on the side of the civil rights movement, and the supreme court during the '50s and '60s became aware of that. >> reporter: just like the name of your book, those skills and that legal prowess made constance baker motley the civil rights queen of her time. but we do not hear about her in history books. why don't we know who she is? >> that's right. well, as i argue in my book, the absence of her name on the lips of every american, unlike with respect to thurgood marshall and martin luther king jr., is in part because historical significance and leadership are

coded male. we don't think of women as leaders in the way that they deserve. and so, it's not surprising, ultimately, that motley is-- has been relatively overlooked in the literature. >> reporter: how do we contextualize motley's career and those setbacks that she experienced as a black person and as a woman, as we look ahead to biden's forthcoming nomination? >> well, i do think motley's experience has something to say to today. first of all, she was highly qualified, with vast experiences in the federal courts at the trial level, the appellate level and the supreme court. she argued, and won nine of ten cases at the court. and yet, when she was nominated, there were those who said that her experience was too narrow, that she might not be able to handle the financial cases that came before the prestigious

trial court in manhattan. and so, she had to run the gantlet before she ultimately was seated on the court, and it's going to be the same for whoever is nominated by president biden. >> reporter: forany, your book will be a first introduction to constance baker motley. what do you hope readers take away from this biography and her incredible life? because many people are unaware of her contributions to the civil rights movement. >> i want to correct the historical record, adding constance baker motley to the pantheon of great american leaders. i want readers to see the value of looking at the civil rights movement through the lens of gender and through the eyes of a woman because of enduring issues around gender equity today. and finally, i want them to consider the imperfect fit between individual success and group advancement, whether it's constance baker motley or

barack obama, or whoever is nominated by president biden. freedom is a constant struggle and everyone has to contribute. >> reporter: tomiko brown nagin, thank you for joining us here at the newshour. >> thank you for having me. >> woodruff: so important to see these stories being told. and on the newshour online, the discrimination suit against former miami the discrimination lawsuit that former miami dolphins coach brian flores has brought against the n.f.l. is raising questions about the league's requirement that teams interview minority job candidates. we explore how the so-called rooney rule is used, and whether it is effective. that's at www.pbs.org/newshour. and that is the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. joins online, and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, please stay safe, and we'll see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

>> for 25 years, consumer cellular has been offering no-contract wireless plans, designed to help people do more of what they like. our u.s.-based customer service am can help find a plan that fits you. to learn more, visit www.consumercellular.tv. >> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the frontlines of social change worldwide. >> bnsf railway. >> fidelity wealth management. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and friends of the newshour. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs

station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

. ♪ hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour & co." here's what's coming up. large-scale refugee crises accompany any conflict, whether europe, the middle east, or afghanistan. i speak with international rescue committee president david miliband about the human cost. and prince andrew goes from denial tsettlement, acknowledging that his accuser virginia guiffre suffered as a victim of abuse. i ask what this means for the royal family and for victims' rights. then -- >> in the end, tough decisions during a pandemic need to be made by politicians. >> as denmark becomes the first european country to lift all covid restrictions, walter isaacson speaks to government adviser michael bang