Ghoulishly Mocking the Dead: Michael Hiltzik (L.A. Times)

Remembering What They Said About the Unvaccinated

Michael Hiltzik, columnist, Los Angeles Times.

We haven’t forgotten what they said about the unvaccinated. This post is the first in a long series on prominent people - including writers, actors, politicians, and even bio-ethicists(!) - who argued that the unvaccinated should lose their jobs, be segregated from the rest of society, be denied medical care, or, in the case of Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times, argued that we should mock the deaths of those who died of COVID.

Mocking Anti-Vaxxers' COVID Deaths is Ghoulish

Even as Omicron rapidly infected vaccinated and unvaccinated alike, Hiltzik penned a January 10, 2022 column titled “Mocking Anti-Vaxxers' COVID Deaths is Ghoulish, Yes - But Necessary.” However, the URL for the column suggests that the original title may have been “Why Shouldn't We Dance on the Graves of Anti-Vaxxers?” (https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-01-10/why-shouldnt-we-dance-on-the-graves-of-anti-vaxxers).

Ghoulishly, the column was published featuring a photo of Orange County Deputy DA, Kelly Ernby, who was unvaccinated and had recently died of COVID. Indeed, Hiltzik argues that the unvaccinated, like Ernby, whom he equates with “anti-vaxxers,” deserve to die of COVID-19:

[T]hose who have deliberately flouted sober medical advice by refusing a vaccine known to reduce the risk of serious disease from the virus, including the risk to others, and end up in the hospital or the grave can be viewed as receiving their just deserts.

HIltzik’s January, 2022 column arguing that we should mock the unvaccinated dead.

Hiltzik goes on to argue that the unvaccinated, especially those who oppose vaccine mandates, should be mocked and denied sympathy in order to teach others a lesson:

It may be not a little ghoulish to celebrate or exult in the deaths of vaccine opponents. And it may be proper to express sympathy and solicitude to those they leave behind.

But mockery is not necessarily the wrong reaction to those who publicly mocked anti-COVID measures and encouraged others to follow suit, before they perished of the disease the dangers of which they belittled.

Nor is it wrong to deny them our sympathy and solicitude, or to make sure it’s known when their deaths are marked that they had stood fast against measures that might have protected themselves and others from the fate they succumbed to.

There may be no other way to make sure that the lessons of these teachable moments are heard.

Hiltzik the Anti-Vaxxer in 2020

Ironically, before the 2020 election, Hiltzik was himself a kind of anti-vaxxer. In a column from September, 2020, Hiltzik alerted his readers to the potential dangers of the COVID-19 vaccines:

Here’s a more judicious counsel about how you should be reacting to the [Trump] administration’s push for rapid approval of a vaccine: Be afraid. Be very afraid.

This same column also highlights a Stat poll showing that over 70% of Americans believed that “the vaccine approval process was driven more by politics than science.” The following day Hiltzik tweeted a link to his column, saying that “Trump's plotting for a pre-election vaccine will kill people.”

Hiltzik Unrepentant

In the wake of the public discussion stemming from Emily Oster's October 31, 2022 “Pandemic Amnesty” column in the Atlantic, users on Twitter recalled Hiltzik's “Mocking anti-vaxxers' COVID deaths” column, citing it as an example of the excessive rhetoric surrounding Covid vaccines. However, Hiltzik defended his January 10, 2022 column, telling Twitter users to “read the column before criticizing it” lest they “come off as illiterate.”

Of course, people had read the column, and they rightly found its rhetoric and arguments repulsive. It is astounding that someone like Hiltzik could be a partisan anti-vaxxer in 2020, mock the unvaccinated dead just a few months later, and then remain unrepentant in late 2022 when publicly called out for his viciousness. People like Hiltzik deserve no amnesty, and it is good that members of the public remember what they said and what they did.

What Is Required for “Amnesty”?

What should be required for someone like Hiltzik to be granted amnesty, anyway? A sincere apology? An explicit admission of having been wrong? Resigning from the position from which you mocked the dead and advocated punishments for the unvaccinated? Tell us in the comments!