Talk:Executive Order 13991

Biden's apparent violation of order hours later; subsequent questions of hypocrisy

When Biden and family were filmed on federal property with their masks off just hours after he signed an order requiring masks, questions were raised about what appeared to be hypocritical behavior. Obviously this is both WP:DUE and properly cited—when politicians appear not to be following their own orders, naturally it is noted by the press, the public, and opposing politicians. An IP editor using a single purpose account WP:BLANKED the section without any explanation, in blatant disregard for policy—the fact that the user is clearly familiar with Wikipedia terminology and yet this is their first and only edit seems to suggest a WP:SOCKPUPPET in addition to WP:VANDALISM and makes it exceedingly challenging to AGF. In any case, I am undoing the reversion and look forward to substantive and productive discussion here on the Talk page. Thanks! Elle Kpyros (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

The section is not in a Neutral point of view and I have removed it again. All it is is a bunch of nonsense from Fox News and Republicans and should not be included in this article. Your accusations that the IP editor is sockpuppet are baseless and you should AGF. JayJay^{What did I do?} 05:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@JayJay: I strove to be as neutral and factual in reporting the information as possible—so rather than simply blanking the section, it would be helpful to me if you could explain what you mean by "All it [sic] is a bunch of nonsense from Fox News and Republicans and should not be included" and perhaps make constructive suggestions to bring it more into line with a NPOV. Much of the instant criticism may be coming from conservatives, but that doesn't make it "nonsense" anymore than is criticism of a Republican president from left-wing sources. Are you proposing that any criticism or questions from Republicans that have been reported on by Fox News should be censored from Wikipedia? It strikes me that when a politician appears to violate their own orders, it's of interest—and in this case, the apparent violation was reported in RS. As to the IP SPA, I did AGF and allowed that I found it difficult to do so. Elle Kpyros (talk) 06:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

What I mean by nonsense is that it is faux outrage and a bad-faith argument by conservatives and conservative media. According to Snopes they found that Biden did not violate his own mask mandate because the CDC allows exceptions to the recommendation of wearing masks. To quote from Snopes it says "The CDC’s mask guidelines encourage mask use in most instances, but the agency also notes a number of exceptions to that rule. For instance, mask use is more important when a person is indoors, as opposed to outdoors. In the video above, Biden is outdoors. The CDC also notes that masks are more important when a person is in a crowded room. In the video above, Biden is largely by himself, standing next to one person who appears to be an appropriate 6 feet away." The mask mandate also places the responsibility of enforcing rules related to mask use on the heads of various federal agencies, since the National Park Service oversees the Lincoln Memorial and at the time of the video, the NPS had not implemented such rules. It is also not from a neutral point of view because no other sources, besides Fox News, are reporting that Biden violated his own mask mandate and it is conservatives opinion he violated his own mandate. Biden and his family were also wearing a mask during the performance but took them off to take a picture for a brief minute. Because it is clearly a bad-faith argument it should not be included in the article. In addition, the article revolves around the White House press briefing questioning. Reporters ask questions and criticize the White House all the time, that is the role of the press and simply WP:NOTNEWS. JayJay^{What did I do?} 06:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@JayJay: A few things—but first, I hope you're not calling my editing "clearly a bad-faith argument"—and if you are, I would ask kindly that you retract that statement; I should hope it's clear that I am editing in good faith here. In response:

• If what you and Snopes write is true—that the EO actually doesn't require wearing masks on Federal property—then doesn't this article, which claims it "requires mask wearing on all Federal Lands and in all Federal Buildings" need correction?
• The question of who enforces the law is separate from what the law states and whether it has been violated in the abstract—no one is suggesting the Parks Service is going to prosecute Biden, but that's irrelevant to the question of whether he violated the law.
• Your claim that "NPS had not implemented such rules" indicates a misunderstanding—the order applies to all federal property. An agency may make exceptions to the law, but they must be written—and it would be a bureaucratic record if the Parks Service promulgated any exception in the hours following Biden's signing of the order. Snopes says they'll update the article, but until then, there's certainly no evidence that Biden or his family members were covered by an exception.
• Are you saying that, because the job of reporters is to question government, articles about what was said in a press conference must be censored from Wikipedia, because it's not a newspaper? That seems an indefensible standard.
• It's a mistake to approach this from a narrow legal perspective. I didn't claim in Wikivoice that Biden had violated the law—nor do many of the articles questioning whether his actions were hypocritical. Many said, in effect, that he "appeared to have violated" the order, which is certainly true—Biden's EO was broadly reported to require masks on all federal property, and he was on federal property maskless. This doesn't mean claims that he was hypocritical or sending an inconsistent message "false" in any reasonable sense of the word.
• That this issue has now been reported on by some dozen RS—and even a "fact check" by Snopes—surely makes it WP:DUE, yes?

I hadn't seen the Snopes article, and appreciate the link. Having read it, I can see that the section should be rewritten to include the differences of opinion as to whether Biden technically violated the EO or not—but certainly the controversy is worth mentioning. Thanks! Elle Kpyros (talk) 17:06, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Elle Kpyros: I am not suggesting your editing is bad-faith, I'm suggesting the argument that Biden violated his own mask mandate is bad-faith to quote from Snopes.

• In regards to that the EO does not require wearing masks on federal property, read the executive order. The executive order in section 2 from WikiSource states "The heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall immediately take action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to require compliance with CDC guidelines with respect to wearing masks, maintaining physical distance, and other public health measures by: on-duty or on-site Federal employees; on-site Federal contractors; and all persons in Federal buildings or on Federal lands." I believe that should be included and clarified because the burden of implementing the mask mandate is on the heads of federal agencies.
• It is also not a law it is executive order and again NPS had not implemented the executive order at the time the photo was taken. The mandate is reliant on the CDC guidelines which has exceptions, not NPS making exceptions to Biden and his family.
• I am not suggesting I believe in censorship and that certain press reports should be censored by Wikipedia, nowhere did I suggest that. I am simply saying that an article about a press briefing line of questioning is WP:NOTNEWS and more Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill than anything because such press conferences are widely reported all the time.

To reiterate, he was outside with his family when the picture was taken for a minute. It would be a different story and hypocritical if Biden was with complete strangers, maskless in a crowded room after he signed the EO. JayJay^{What did I do?} 17:54, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm all for you updating the article to more accurately describe the EO. But again, I think you're getting stuck on the straw man of a narrow legal technicality. To be clear: I did not write, nor am I suggesting that the article should say Biden violated the law—what's WP:DUE is the fact that he was accused (falsely according to Snopes) of doing so by appearing maskless on federal property right after signing the order. What I am suggesting is that the issue—which has generated a great deal of reportage at this point—be included in the article. Your assertion that the section is simply based on "an article about a press briefing" is untrue—although by way of example I'd point out that this is exactly that and obviously WP:DUE. The widespread allegations of Biden's hypocrisy, even if false, are indisputably among the most newsworthy elements regarding the EO, and thus ought to be included. I absolutely agree that it needs to be updated given the Snopes article, but am unclear why you're so dead-set against including information so widely reported about the article subject. While your personal opinion may be that it's run-of-the-mill, obviously numerous RS have found it worthy of extensive coverage—and that, I'm sure you'll agree, is our standard for inclusion here. Elle Kpyros (talk) 18:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

There are no parallels between Nixon's press conference and this one because this one is simply not a controversy and not newsworthy. Rather it is an attempt to make this a controversy, not by you, but by conservative pundits and conservative media. By writing that Biden is hypocritical of his own mandate and being accused of violating his own mandate gives the idea he did violate the mandate which he did not. There is no extensive coverage of this so-called controversy and has had no lasting effect either. JayJay^{What did I do?} 01:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

There definitely should be a "Response" section that includes properly phrased info on Joe Biden's numerous maskless incidents on federal property. It's not just the Lincoln memorial. It's also during his White House speeches. Also, the "100 Days" is a lie, as Biden has stated that he wants to force masking for at least 365 days. I don't find it fair for Wikipedia to merely parrot left-wing news such as CNN and MSNBC. I also am not partial to FOX or any single news outlet. It's good to look at all sides, find what is worth reporting on, and include it in the article. The states (Texas, Florida, etc.) that oppose Biden's forced masking might also be worth mentioning. --LABcrabs (talk) 08:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)