[mikkergp]

1. They only covered a week.

2. I think the notion of "X didn't cover something" is heavily biased, maybe not in this case where they're looking at data, but I have a very news-angry friend who sends me stuff like that all the time like 15 minutes after I read about it on the NYTimes. Maybe it's not on the front page, maybe it's not "what people are talking about" but it's often there, but people want other people not just to cover it but for it to have an impact and for people to be mad about it. Lab leak is a great example I think of something everyone is made that "never got covered" but of course it got covered. At different times, to different degrees, with different angles and emphasis, but just search google for "lab leak NYTimes" and it's there all over the place. Is it as in-depth as people want it to be? Probably not, and that's where you get into conspiracy realm, because there's no actual data to follow as to why, just speculation.