COVID-19 (artist formerly known as Wuhan strain novel Corona virus)

I dont have to cite anything when giving my opinion on a message board. Why get so worked up if you disagree. Just disagree.

The media during this pandemic cant be compared to anything weve seen or dealt with the last 150 years, from access to bad information to fake news and misleading headlines. Thats like, my opinion man. If you think this is normal and media is unbiased, good on you.

 

Any one else, I would talk about media back in the late 19th century and early 20th century. But what is the point? You throw out 150 years based on nothing, and to you that makes it an opinion equal to any based on facts.

 

OK.

 

People couldnt click on a link and get a headline about a virus or world o meter inaccurate death count and fake death rate numbers as they do today.
Dont be so closeminded

 

You only have to go back 19 years to 9/11.

 

Your opinion vs someone else's argument (evidence based opinion) creates an unequal conversation.

You're basically saying "don't talk to me, because I won't talk at your level."

 

And 2003 for the daily Iraq war death count.

 

You just made that up. What evidence are you citing that says the headline wasnt a covid based decision with alterior motives? You dont have one.
And please show me evidence of internet access to millions via clicks on links during past pandemics.
Dont talk about evidence based when you are giving no evidence

 

The evidence is the fact that the headline was accurate. As agreed by you, when you misread the body of the article.

I've already demonstrated this evidence to you.

 

We disagree on the motive. You believe its just informative news. I believe intentions were different and the headline was for scaring people into clicking it. Its a difference of opinion and it shouldnt be that big of a deal

 

It isn't a big deal. It's just a very psychologically weak mentality to think that everything is out to get someone.

That's the disagreement, not the motive, but the mental state of the those that believe everything is out to get them.

There is a healthiness to skepticism. There is a psychosis to being skeptical of everything. And it's called paranoia.

 

paranoia about everything out to get me...
Ok. Not accurate but feel free. Ill take skeptical over propping the media as fair and unbiased and refusing to admit their role the last few months.

 

Who is propping "the media" as "fair and unbiased?"

We're talking about THIS article, and specifically, YOUR reaction to it.

Stop equating one thing with "all" things.

The media is absolutely biased. They are corporations. That doesn't mean that everything is misleading.

Hell, this is one of those situations where they were actually factual.

 

If we are talking about this article and my reaction to it (reaction is about the headline and intent, not the article substance), and you tell me to stop equating one thing with all things, dont equate my opinion about this particular headline with all things as you just did when you posted i had paranoia about everything. You are doing what you are directing me not to do.

 

I'm not using this one particular headline to make my paranoia equation. I'm using all of your posts, where even Norris questioned what you "trust," just a few days ago. I've got pages and pages and pages of posts of yours that I can point to.

Can you do the same, with me, and media, to the point where I'm .. "propping the media as fair and unbiased and refusing to admit their role the last few months" ?

Because I really don't think you can. Maybe. But I don't think so. So I'm giving two arguments, here.

1. That you are paranoid when it comes to trust levels with any media.
2. I'm only saying THIS article does not appear to be fear mongering. Not that fear mongering by the media never happens.

So, to reiterate, and tag the arguments:

We're talking about THIS article (argument #2) and YOUR reaction (argument #1) to it.

Stop equating one thing with all things means: Stop thinking that because I don't think that this article is fear mongering, that I don't believe all articles aren't. There are examples of fear mongering. This doesn't seem to be one. It's factual. It's the same type of shit I argued with TennTradition about like a week ago.

 

Look for the positives in life. If we get this curve up in some states without a great increase in deaths then the flattening will happen soon. Get it out of the way now instead of Late August.

 

But for the most part I agree that the Media sucks these days.

 

It'd be nice. I still don't see it. But I'm hoping.

 

This tweet is bizarre on so many levels. The thing that, as a mathematics major, I find truly bizarre is the "For the 1/100th time..."


Wha?