No, it doesn't say that the NYT article was based on the work of the Working Group. It would have significantly clarified the post to say whether the NYT articl

No, it doesn't say that the NYT article was based on the work of the Working Group. It would have significantly clarified the post to say whether the NYT article writer did or did not use the memo to help inform the article. It does say that someone "suggested that I leverage a news organization." And that "This implied a publication deadline of Thursday." Thursday happens to be the day that the NYT published their article, but it was also the day that Dr. Cowen put a blurb on Marginal Revolution. Isn't it odd that the most critical piece of information in the article is left out? I wonder why someone worried about the fallout of an article wouldn't specify the most important piece of information that the article might contain? > Saying that the white paper led to the NYT article which led to Japan's lockdown is incredibly western/English-centric and ignorant of the actual forces at play inside the country in their native language, press, public opinion, and organizations. You're totally right here. Good thing that Patrick did not write or imply this. I'm very glad that its just HN commenters that think this.