Covid-19

[Wideleft]

34 minutes ago, CodyT said:

After having some time to articulate my thoughts I think it comes out something like this.

Where I think a lot of " anti vaxxers " and even myself fall of is because of complete lack of truck in government, and main stream media. I don't trust fox, cnn, msnbc, or any major news network anymore than I trust a poster on here. Right or wrong I just don't buy what they are selling. I know an agenda is being pushed. 

 

Regarding the dreaded media - you need to ask yourself why every successful dictator crushed the media first in order to maintain control. It is not the media's fault that you can't tell fact from fiction.  Research the principles of journalism and which organizations adhere to them.  Pay attention to which organizations post retractions and corrections - that will help guide you to the reliable ones.  Read.  Avoiding the news is not going to make you any smarter.  Avoid it if it makes you happy, but then stay clear of discussion if you're too sensitive for criticism.

Finally, know the difference between an opinion column and a news story.  Recognize which editorialists back their information with facts rather than simple assertion.  The truth can be painful and difficult, but it is necessary.

[HardCoreBlue]

11 hours ago, CodyT said:

Why do you do this? 

It's hard to respect your point of view when you consistently ( over years of reading your posts ) belittle people. You're kind of an internet bully. If someone disagrees with you at any degree you call people crazies or stupid or whatever.

It's an old shtick.

For the record, I'm a left wing Bernie Sanders supporter. I came here to ask a question about the vaccine for clarity from some on here who seem to be quite knowledgeable and it's just like, **** what's the use, if you bring up the slightest resistance your **** on.

I'm not pro Vax or anti vax, my views have swayed both ways at times, but they say the anti vaxxers are the antaganizers, but on this site I mostly see the opposite.

My question was in reference to when the vaccine first came out were governments pushing this as a solution to stopping the virus from spreading? Is that true?

And if it is, is it actually? I know that it lessens the symptoms but I haven't seen anything that provides proof that it stops the virus from passing over to others.

Not spewing mis information, just curious.

Looking back is their anyone on this site that originally viewed all of the governments steps and actions acceptable, but now feel maybe things were pushed too far?

Ie: vaccine passports, job loss, total stop in economy.

I don't know how dangerous the virus is and I don't clame to. The amount of deaths recorded says it is quite deadly. The other flip of the coin is that a lot of covid deaths are from very old people and people with pre existing conditions. Is their truth to this?

NOT that it makes it okay to lose people senselessly, I'm just asking. 

It's a shame that I feel I have to tip tow around questions because if you don't you're a "crazy"

I welcome Brandon's views, your views, whoevers.  Chances are the best answer is somewhere in the middle 

Great, glad you accept all views.

Most of us here do if it is an actual view with some critical thinking, curiosities, facts, healthy skepticism ext etc added to it. 

What frustrates me with this 'listen to all views and if you don't you're in an echo chamber and you're mean and defensive' is this legitimate approach it's being abused by some imo.

For example very simply, when a 'view, perspective, another side' comes in hot (i.e., gaslighting, passive aggressive etc) on this board void of facts, critical thinking and its rightfully called out (yes sometimes it can be called out bluntly by some - that's a whole other issue to chat about) the default response is you all live in an echo chamber, you all are defensive, mean, belittling, can't we just all get along, wow what is wrong with you all'.

What are we to do with absurdity because simply words forming in one's head that are typed into an post doesn't make it a view, another side, a perspective until other things are added, like thinking it thru, informing yourself, identify your gaps etc etc.

[Wideleft]

Somewhat related:

[HardCoreBlue]

41 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

Somewhat related:

This is way better put than I attempted to do. Thanks for sharing. 

[TrueBlue4ever]

I always remember Jon Stewart’s final Daily Show and his closing monologue about the prevalence of bull **** in the world and how to recognize it. A not-very-veiled attack on modern media and politics. If you can read it in Stewart’s voice and cadence it works better:

”Bullshit is everywhere.

There is very little that you will encounter in life that has not been, in some way, infused with bullshit; not all of it bad. The general day-to-day organic free-range bullshit is often necessary, or, at the very least, innocuous: "Oh, what a beautiful baby! I'm sure it'll grow into that head!" That kind of bullshit, in many ways, provides important social contract fertilizer, which keeps people from making each other cry all day. But then, there's the more pernicious bullshit; the premediated, institutional bullshit designed to obscure and distract. Designed by whom? The bullshit-ocracy. It comes in three basic flavours:

1. Making bad things sound like good things. "Organic, all-natural cupcakes", because "Factory-made sugar oatmeal balls" doesn't sell. "Patriot Act", because "Are-you-scared-enough-to-let-me-look-at-all-your-phone-records? Act" doesn't sell. So, whenever something's been titled "Freedom, Family, Fairness and Health America", take a good, long sniff. Chances are it's been manufactured in a facility that may contain traces of bullshit.

2. Hiding the bad things under mountains of bullshit. Complexity. "You know, I would love to download Drizzy's latest Meek Mill diss, but I'm not really interested right now in reading Tolstoy's iTunes agreement. So, I'll just click "Agree", even if it grants Apple prima nocta with my spouse!" Here's another one: simply put, "Banks shouldn't be able to bet your pension money on red" Bullshitly put it's, "Hey, a handful of billionaires can't buy our elections, right? Of course not. They can only pour unlimited, anonymous cash into a 501(c)4 if 50% is devoted to Issue Education, otherwise they'd have to 501(c)6 it, or funnel it openly through a non-campaign coordinating Super PAC, with a quarter- I think they're asleep now, we can sneak out!"

And finally, the bullshit of infinite possibility. These bullshitters cover their unwillingness to act under the guise of unending inquiry. "We can't do anything, because we don't yet know everything." "We cannot take action on climate change until everyone in the world agrees gay marriage vaccines won't cause our children to marry goats who are gonna come for our guns"

But the good news is this: bullshitters have gotten pretty lazy, and their work is easily detected, and looking for it is kind of a pleasant way to pass the time, like an “I spy” of bullshit. So I say to you tonight, friends, the best defence against bullshit is vigilance. So, if you smell something, say something.”

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by TrueBlue4ever

[blue_gold_84]

10 hours ago, Brandon said:

...in real life he suffers from an extreme amount of ignorance and lacks the social skills and maturity so he isn't able to use an open mind and think before he speaks.

Hey may find a few supporters on here but in the real world I can't imagine people not pushing back on his stubborn takes.  

The irony dripping from this comment is as palpable as the glaring and utter lack of self-awareness.

Anecdotes and personal experiences being feebly passed off as evidence of anything is laughable, too.

1 hour ago, CodyT said:

....a complete lack of truck in government, and main stream media. I don't trust fox, cnn, msnbc, or any major news network anymore than I trust a poster on here. Right or wrong I just don't buy what they are selling. I know an agenda is being pushed. 

Again this is just how I see it personally, not based on fact or fiction. If I don't trust the government or the media or any of the propaganda they spew, how am I supposed to trust the experts, scientists and health officials they bring on to tell me to get the vaccine. It is serious to put something into your body, especially when you lack confidence in the information being provided to you.

I thought the way the media and federal government set out to make vaccine hesitant people to be racists, disillusioned, crazy stupid people to be a major turn off to me. A vaccine passport to identify the "outsiders" was a major turn off to me.

What we've done here is create an us vs them mentality. The wealthiest people in the world have grown wealthier while the middle and lower class have struggled. We should be looking for solutions as a team through a very very complex issue instead of fighting amongst each other.

I do see that there are a lot of ignorant stubborn people who refuse to move on their stance or hear others concerns at all. A lot of this comes from the loud anti vaxxers. I see it happening with the vaccinated also. It just creates hostility and gets everyone defensive

The media and many governments fumbled the message(s) many times since the pandemic began, but how does that differ from anything else with regard to news, world events, etc. since the dawn of the 24-hour news cycle, internet, and social media? Being bombarded by information constantly can be exhausting but it's not insurmountably challenging to sift through the garbage and figure out what's factual in order to be informed and use critical thinking. 

A cloudy or unclear message does not equate to propaganda. Propaganda is generally defined as information of a misleading, inaccurate, and/or biased nature with the express purpose of influencing or persuading an audience of a particular view, often misrepresenting facts or ignoring them altogether. It also uses loaded language to elicit emotional responses rather than rational or objective ones.
For example: "vaccination can less the severity of symptoms of a novel virus." vs. "vaccines contain dead babies and will work with 5G towers to exterminate people."
It's pretty easy to see which one is propaganda.

And as far as vaccines go, the facts have been quite clear for many years now and the COVID-19 vaccines are no different. The only "agenda" being pushed to get vaccinated during a global health crisis is protect oneself and others. Is trying to save lives really an agenda, though?

"Vaccine hesitant" individuals should've just talked to their physician or any self-respecting doctor or medical professional, as doing so would've allayed their concern and informed them of the facts. Being hesitant of proven scientific facts doesn't make rational sense. It's like saying one is seatbelt hesitant because car accidents injure or kill people.

And let's be honest here: the us vs. them mentality has been around much, much longer than this pandemic. But that's a much broader issue related to wealth disparity and socioeconomic inequality that has hampered humanity for ages.

The tolerance paradox applies here. Intolerant or ignorant views should not be tolerated.

[Wideleft]

8 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

This is way better put than I attempted to do. Thanks for sharing. 

Your "attempt" was more than solid.

[Brandon]

4 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

The irony dripping from this comment is as palpable as the glaring and utter lack of self-awareness.

Anecdotes and personal experiences being feebly passed off as evidence of anything is laughable, too.

I'm glad you proved my point that he could find a few supporters who are also out of touch from reality and will once gladly look at your facts of where in Canada we have lockdowns, social distancing restrictions,  restaurant closures, and evidence that everyone is still wearing masks.   Until you can do so take the L and move on.   

[Noeller]

oi oi oi oi.....I really want to try and stay out of this, because it's honestly  just so silly. 97% of people around here more-or-less agree on the same things.....but the 3% come in here and tell us we're all wrong. I get a big chuckle, as well, because I suppose I'm part of the "Lame Stream Media", that tries to sit right dead centre, but I admit I can see how people on the Right can see Middle as Left. 

All I was saying was that I was surprised to see someone come in here with a take that was so opposite of what MOST people on here believe in....

[blue_gold_84]

Just now, Brandon said:

I'm glad you proved my point that he could find a few supporters who are also out of touch from reality and will once gladly look at your facts of where in Canada we have lockdowns, social distancing restrictions,  restaurant closures, and evidence that everyone is still wearing masks.   Until you can do so take the L and move on.   

The term is "out of touch with reality," you deluded ghoul. With.

[Brandon]

Just now, blue_gold_84 said:

The term is "out of touch with reality," you deluded ghoul. With.

 

Still waiting on that evidence,  deflecting because I made a mistake in a saying seems like someone can't prove me wrong.    Wouldn't it be so easy to show me evidence such as the CFL season being cancelled due to COVID or NHL Jets games where the crowd has no one sitting within 6 feet of each other and all wearing masks,  restaurants being unable to have sit down customers?    Boy my argument would look so foolish if you could prove it wrong with solid facts.       Until you can then I will gladly accept that you admit that I am correct and that you were wrong.  

5 minutes ago, Noeller said:

oi oi oi oi.....I really want to try and stay out of this, because it's honestly  just so silly. 97% of people around here more-or-less agree on the same things.....but the 3% come in here and tell us we're all wrong.

I will disagree and say that 97% of people on here do not think people who are religious are stupid.     I'm not even religious at all and I most definitely respect people if they have faith.       

[Wideleft]

7 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I'm glad you proved my point that he could find a few supporters who are also out of touch from reality and will once gladly look at your facts of where in Canada we have lockdowns, social distancing restrictions,  restaurant closures, and evidence that everyone is still wearing masks.   Until you can do so take the L and move on.   

Someone is confusing "we've moved on" with "governments responsible for public health have totally abdicated responsibility and accountability".  

Again with the "I see it with my eyes, therefore it's true and right." rather than "What am I seeing with my eyes, and why?"

That is the difference between our commenting.

[blue_gold_84]

You've made many mistakes in this thread and others.

But at least you have a child cosplaying as an adult down pat.

[Wideleft]

 

So given a proper governmental COVID response that was guided by experts, not only did New Zealand protect its citizens from COVID, but other "excess mortal deaths".

[Wideleft]

16 minutes ago, Noeller said:

oi oi oi oi.....I really want to try and stay out of this, because it's honestly  just so silly. 97% of people around here more-or-less agree on the same things.....but the 3% come in here and tell us we're all wrong. I get a big chuckle, as well, because I suppose I'm part of the "Lame Stream Media", that tries to sit right dead centre, but I admit I can see how people on the Right can see Middle as Left. 

All I was saying was that I was surprised to see someone come in here with a take that was so opposite of what MOST people on here believe in....

Was your initial response a little rude?  Sure was.  

Do we sometimes need to be harsh with people minimizing a deadly health crisis or spreading misinformation about it?

[Tracker]

10 minutes ago, Brandon said:

 

Still waiting on that evidence,  deflecting because I made a mistake in a saying seems like someone can't prove me wrong.    Wouldn't it be so easy to show me evidence such as the CFL season being cancelled due to COVID or NHL Jets games where the crowd has no one sitting within 6 feet of each other and all wearing masks,  restaurants being unable to have sit down customers?    Boy my argument would look so foolish if you could prove it wrong with solid facts.       Until you can then I will gladly accept that you admit that I am correct and that you were wrong.  

I will disagree and say that 97% of people on here do not think people who are religious are stupid.     I'm not even religious at all and I most definitely respect people if they have faith.       

Not all "faith" dogma is helpful or even benign. Sometimes intolerance and despotism is disguised as articles of faith- recent case in point is the recent Flyer captain's refusal to wear an LGBT symbol during the morning skate because his Russian Orthodox church calls being gay a mortal sin with a death penalty. The Southern Baptist churches in the US supported white supremacy and religious intolerance for decades and many still do. In South Africa, the Dutch Reformed Church (Calvinist) openly supported de facto slavery and white supremacy. And there is no need to bring up Wahabist Islam.

[HardCoreBlue]

3 minutes ago, Tracker said:

Not all "faith" dogma is helpful or even benign. Sometimes intolerance and despotism is disguised as articles of faith- recent case in point is the recent Flyer captain's refusal to wear an LGBT symbol during the morning skate because his Russian Orthodox church calls being gay a mortal sin with a death penalty. The Southern Baptist churches in the US supported white supremacy and religious intolerance for decades and many still do. In South Africa, the Dutch Reformed Church (Calvinist) openly supported de facto slavery and white supremacy. And there is no need to bring up Wahabist Islam.

I would also add simply holding a 'religious' belief or any belief for that matter and my freedom, my individual right to share my beliefs with others so I can counter things like equality, anti racism, inclusivity, tolerance etc does not shield me from criticism when people counter my counter.

Nor can I use the consequences of me sharing these beliefs to gaslight away, trigger away others by completely abusing to my advantage concepts like tolerance, many sides to this issue, inclusivity, respect, having an open mind etc etc for nefarious reasons.   

Freedom of uninformed and not well thought thru speech, freedom of holding outdated and regressive beliefs does not mean freedom from consequences when sharing these outdated and regressive beliefs.

We are all to be held to that standard no matter who we are and no matter what we look like.

[JCon]

Faith means believing without evidence. Makes people feel good and validates their opinions. Just because lots of people share the same ignorance doesn't mean everyone has to or that it's correct. 

[CodyT]

3 hours ago, HardCoreBlue said:

Great, glad you accept all views.

Most of us here do if it is an actual view with some critical thinking, curiosities, facts, healthy skepticism ext etc added to it. 

What frustrates me with this 'listen to all views and if you don't you're in an echo chamber and you're mean and defensive' is this legitimate approach it's being abused by some imo.

For example very simply, when a 'view, perspective, another side' comes in hot (i.e., gaslighting, passive aggressive etc) on this board void of facts, critical thinking and its rightfully called out (yes sometimes it can be called out bluntly by some - that's a whole other issue to chat about) the default response is you all live in an echo chamber, you all are defensive, mean, belittling, can't we just all get along, wow what is wrong with you all'.

What are we to do with absurdity because simply words forming in one's head that are typed into an post doesn't make it a view, another side, a perspective until other things are added, like thinking it thru, informing yourself, identify your gaps etc etc.

Maybe you're right. I don't think I'm void of critical thinking but have trouble cementing my opinion only because I think there is crucial validities on both sides. I'm not trying to gas light anybody. Merely trying to get a better scope. 

Also whether your fact/opinion is right or wrong, how does degrading someone else bring them any closer to your side? I can understand walking away from someone who is so far out in the strasphere, but why bother with the insults? It's petty and beneath you, or anyone else.

It just creates a further divide. 

To me the media conversation is less about covid itself but the fallacies I've seen with other subject matter of years and years

Edited January 20, 2023 by CodyT

[CodyT]

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

The irony dripping from this comment is as palpable as the glaring and utter lack of self-awareness.

Anecdotes and personal experiences being feebly passed off as evidence of anything is laughable, too.

The media and many governments fumbled the message(s) many times since the pandemic began, but how does that differ from anything else with regard to news, world events, etc. since the dawn of the 24-hour news cycle, internet, and social media? Being bombarded by information constantly can be exhausting but it's not insurmountably challenging to sift through the garbage and figure out what's factual in order to be informed and use critical thinking. 

It's disappointing  that this Is the case. My point is that it doesn't differ at all, hence the apprehension. You're right you can find some truth on both fox and cnn, but you really have to read between the lines. The fact that we know that the media outlets are bought and sold to promote any agenda that best suits the buyers needs. This isn't a shocking discovery. You know it, I know it. 

A cloudy or unclear message does not equate to propaganda. Propaganda is generally defined as information of a misleading, inaccurate, and/or biased nature with the express purpose of influencing or persuading an audience of a particular view, often misrepresenting facts or ignoring them altogether. It also uses loaded language to elicit emotional responses rather than rational or objective ones.
For example: "vaccination can less the severity of symptoms of a novel virus." vs. "vaccines contain dead babies and will work with 5G towers to exterminate people."
It's pretty easy to see which one is propaganda.

 

And as far as vaccines go, the facts have been quite clear for many years now and the COVID-19 vaccines are no different. The only "agenda" being pushed to get vaccinated during a global health crisis is protect oneself and others. Is trying to save lives really an agenda, though?

Good point

"Vaccine hesitant" individuals should've just talked to their physician or any self-respecting doctor or medical professional, as doing so would've allayed their concern and informed them of the facts. Being hesitant of proven scientific facts doesn't make rational sense. It's like saying one is seatbelt hesitant because car accidents injure or kill people.

Good point

And let's be honest here: the us vs. them mentality has been around much, much longer than this pandemic. But that's a much broader issue related to wealth disparity and socioeconomic inequality that has hampered humanity for ages.

This is my biggest problem. The media will divide us on social, economical, political views all for profit. Propaganda for example, would be weapons of mass destruction. Garner support for war causes, for wealth causes, etc etc. Some people critize the media too harshly and some not enough.

 

 

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

 

 

[CodyT]

3 hours ago, Wideleft said:

Regarding the dreaded media - you need to ask yourself why every successful dictator crushed the media first in order to maintain control. It is not the media's fault that you can't tell fact from fiction.  Research the principles of journalism and which organizations adhere to them.  Pay attention to which organizations post retractions and corrections - that will help guide you to the reliable ones.  Read.  Avoiding the news is not going to make you any smarter.  Avoid it if it makes you happy, but then stay clear of discussion if you're too sensitive for criticism.

Finally, know the difference between an opinion column and a news story.  Recognize which editorialists back their information with facts rather than simple assertion.  The truth can be painful and difficult, but it is necessary.

Lol.  I'm not too sensitive for criticism, it's actually welcomed. I listen to the news every day. I understand journalistic standards but if you don't think there arent extreme slants on certain topics and opinions reported as fact, then we may be far apart.

Tucker Carlson and fox recently had to call his show "entertainment" in court.

I'm all ears though, who is a trusted network for you? Where do you get your information from?

Edited January 20, 2023 by CodyT

[Tracker]

5 minutes ago, CodyT said:

Lol.  I'm not too sensitive for criticism, it's actually welcomed. I listen to the news every day. I understand journalistic standards but if you don't think there arent extreme slants on certain topics and opinions reported as fact, then we may be far apart.

Tucker Carlson and fox recently had to call his show "entertainment" in court.

I'm all ears though, who is a trusted network for you? Where do you get your information from?

CBC, BBC, Al-Jazeera and various websites which have a proven history of accurate reporting and predicting.

[MOBomberFan]

3 minutes ago, CodyT said:

Where do you get your information from?

AP News, Reuters, Al-Jazeera are generally solid, VICE is getting bigger and better by the day, The Guardian is generally in the centre but does lean more left than right. News agencies with an agenda or political slant will take reports directly from AP and Reuters, run it through their spin machines, and present the identical story garnished with their own slant. We used to take media literacy in high school and were tasked with finding articles using neutral language and articles that had a slant... going direct to Reuters or AP was the only way to do it.

[Wideleft]

1 minute ago, CodyT said:

Lol.  I'm not too sensitive for criticism, it's actually welcomed. I listen to the news every day. I understand journalistic standards but if you don't think there arent extreme slants on certain topics and opinions reported as fact, then we may be far apart.

Tucker Carlson and fox recently had to call his show "entertainment" in court.

I'm all ears though, who is a trusted network for you? Where do you get your information from?

I like that you asked about information rather than news, because there is a difference.  My information sources are wide and varied.  I subscribe to the Winnipeg Free Press and Washington Post.  I read articles from The Guardian, ProPublica (for long-form journalism), NPR and CBC online and whichever other reliable sources twitter points me to. 

I watch as many documentaries and shows about history as I can.  I also watch shows like Finding Your Roots that aren't documentaries, but are really helpful in illustrating history from a personal perspective.  I'm a sucker for Nova, Nature, American Experience and Frontline on PBS.  

Since I've started working from home, I flip between CBC NewsWorld and MSNBC depending on the time of day if I want to catch up on the news in a different way.  I'll watch the National if something big is happening.  I watch CBC news at 6 less regularly than I used to - I used to catch it every day.

I have a Sirius subscription and spend most of my time in the car listening to NPR and CBC Radio One.

I read non-fiction exclusively - currently reading The Far Land, which is not only about the Mutiny on the Bounty, but what has happened to Pitcairn Island and mutineer descendants since they landed.  The Future Is Now: Solving the Climate Crisis With Today's Technologies is below that on the stack with Too Dumb For Democracy below that.

I will read any magazine in any waiting room if it has an interesting article.  It's like a thirst for me.

[JCon]

Along with others mentioned, the Freep. 

 

Editorials and commentary are very hit and miss. Doesn't matter the source. They tend to publish opinions that meet the owners expectations or they try to provide "balance" by allowing unsupported claims without pushback. 

 

I'm not certain but it feels like editing skills have diminished. It's probably just a result of cuts over the years.