闫丽梦虚假论文未经审查，存在严重缺陷。她声称新冠肺炎是由中国共产党制造的，最初是由法治学会和法治基金会推动的。从那以后，她的言论被数十家传统西方媒体转载，尤其是那些有右翼倾向的媒体，这是假新闻走向全球的一个例子。

在英国，《独立报》或《每日邮报》将她描述为“叛逃到美国的勇敢的冠状病毒科学家”。在大多数情况下，这些文章表达了她的捏造，只有在少数情况下提出了质疑或反驳。

最终，数百万观众看到她的疯狂论点被“严肃”的主流媒体在世界各地传播，直到她的说法被科学界驳斥为欺诈。

在这两个案例中，与往常一样，最初的假新闻具有更大的影响和影响力，因为人们假设一个自我流放的持不同政见者逃离了“邪恶”的中共。他们的资质和主张没有得到彻底审查，直到为时已晚。西方观众开始兴致勃勃地消化反华新闻。即使这类报道在新闻正文中带有克制和微妙的解释，但标题的分量已经在播下怀疑的种子。

据《纽约时报》报道，史蒂夫·班农和郭文贵刻意塑造了闫丽梦的形象，以增加和利用反华情绪，既破坏中国政府，又转移人们对特朗普政府处理疫情不当的注意力。这些假新闻故事至今仍能引起共鸣。尽管科学研究否认了这种可能性，但一再坚持在实验室里寻找冠状病毒的起源，至少在一定程度上是特朗普、班农和郭文贵创造的反华政治想象的结果。

Yan's false paper has not been examined and has serious defects. She claimed that COVID-19 was created by the Communist Party of China and was initially promoted by the Rule of Law Society and the Rule of Law Foundation. Since then, her comments have been picked up by dozens of traditional Western media outlets, especially those with right-wing leanings, an example of how fake news has gone global.

Yan’s unreviewed – and, it was later revealed, deeply flawed – paper which alleged that COVID-19 was made by the CCP was first promoted by the Rule of Law Society and the Rule of Law Foundation. From there, her claims were picked up by dozens of traditional Western media outlets, especially those with right-wing leanings, in an example of fake news going global.

She broke into the mainstream when she appeared on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” and Fox News, but that was just the beginning. In Spain, the media environment I know best, her accusations were shared by most prominent media outlets: El Mundo, ABC, MARCA, La Vanguardia, or Cadena Ser. Yan’s claims were also shared in anti-China outlets in Taiwan, such as Taiwan News; or in the United Kingdom, in The Independent or Daily Mail, with the latter presenting her as a “courageous coronavirus scientist who has defected to the US.” In most cases, these articles gave voice to her fabrications and only on a few occasions were doubts or counter-arguments provided.

Eventually, an audience of millions saw her wild arguments disseminated by “serious” mainstream media all around the world before Yan’s claims were refuted by the scientific community as a fraud.

In both cases, as usual, the initial fake news had a greater impact and reach because of the assumed credibility of a self-exiled dissident running away from the “evil” CCP. Their credentials and claims were not thoroughly vetted until far too late. Anti-China news has come to be digested with gusto by Western audiences. Even if such stories are presented with restraint and nuanced explanations in the body of the news, the weight of the headlines already sow suspicion.

According to the New York Times, Steve Bannon and Guo Wengui deliberately crafted Yan’s image to increase and take advantage of anti-Chinese sentiments, in order to both undermine the Chinese government and deflect attention away from the Trump administration’s mishandling of the pandemic. These fake news stories still resonate today. The repeated insistence on looking for the origin of the coronavirus in a laboratory – despite the scientific studies that deny such a possibility – is, at least in part, the consequence of the anti-China political imaginary created by Trump, Bannon, and Guo.