What America's Richest Ski Town's Handling of COVID-19 Says About the Country
https://time.com/5934985/jackson-hole-covid-19/
NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
-
Bubba
- Site Admin
- Posts: 26939
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
- Location: Where the climate suits my clothes
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"
Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald
"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald
"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
Just got back from taking my wife for the COVID vaccine. They gave her the J&J vaccine, so in two weeks she's good to go. One dose, one possible spate of reaction. I go there Wednesday. Will see what vaccine I get.
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
Just got my vaccination. I also got the J&J vax. Will be 77% in two weeks, and 85% after four weeks. J&J also included data on one variant which may explain the lower efficacy, as the other two never tested against the variants. So two weeks and I have my "Freedom" from people who think we need to hunker down and quarantine and all that.
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dont- ... r-BB1eKEnL
Good article on what to expect in the vaccinated crowds.
Good article on what to expect in the vaccinated crowds.
-
Bubba
- Site Admin
- Posts: 26939
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
- Location: Where the climate suits my clothes
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
A little bit about biased media coverage of Covid-19 in comments from the NY Times' David Leonhardt in his "Morning" column today.
From "The Morning"
NY Times
By David Leonhardt
Good morning. The U.S. media is offering a different picture of Covid-19 from science journals or the international media, a study finds.
Is bad news the only kind?
Bruce Sacerdote, an economics professor at Dartmouth College, noticed something last year about the Covid-19 television coverage that he was watching on CNN and PBS. It almost always seemed negative, regardless of what was he seeing in the data or hearing from scientists he knew.
When Covid cases were rising in the U.S., the news coverage emphasized the increase. When cases were falling, the coverage instead focused on those places where cases were rising. And when vaccine research began showing positive results, the coverage downplayed it, as far as Sacerdote could tell.
But he was not sure whether his perception was correct. To check, he began working with two other researchers, building a database of Covid coverage from every major network, CNN, Fox News, Politico, The New York Times and hundreds of other sources, in the U.S. and overseas. The researchers then analyzed it with a social-science technique that classifies language as positive, neutral or negative.
The results showed that Sacerdote’s instinct had been right — and not just because the pandemic has been mostly a grim story.
The U.S. media is an outlier
The coverage by U.S. publications with a national audience has been much more negative than coverage by any other source that the researchers analyzed, including scientific journals, major international publications and regional U.S. media. “The most well-read U.S. media are outliers in terms of their negativity,” Molly Cook, a co-author of the study, told me.
About 87 percent of Covid coverage in national U.S. media last year was negative. The share was 51 percent in international media, 53 percent in U.S. regional media and 64 percent in scientific journals.
Notably, the coverage was negative in both U.S. media outlets with liberal audiences (like MSNBC) and those with conservative audiences (like Fox News).
Sacerdote is careful to emphasize that he does not think journalists usually report falsehoods. The issue is which facts they emphasize. Still, the new study — which the National Bureau of Economic Research has published as a working paper, titled, “Why is all Covid-19 news bad news?” — calls for some self-reflection from those of us in the media.
If we’re constantly telling a negative story, we are not giving our audience the most accurate portrait of reality. We are shading it. We are doing a good job telling you why Covid cases are rising in some places and how the vaccines are imperfect — but not such a good job explaining why cases are falling elsewhere or how the vaccines save lives. Perhaps most important, we are not being clear about which Covid developments are truly alarming.
As Ranjan Sehgal, another co-author, told me, “The media is painting a picture that is a little bit different from what the scientists are saying.”
Why the bad-news bias?
The researchers say they are not sure what explains their findings, but they do have a leading contender: The U.S. media is giving the audience what it wants.
When the researchers examined which stories were the most read or the most shared on Facebook, they tended to be the most negative stories. To put it another way, the stories that people choose to read skew even more negative than the stories that media organizations choose to publish. “Human beings, particularly consumers of major media, like negativity in their stories,” Sacerdote said. “We think the major media are responding to consumer demand.”
That idea is consistent with the patterns in the data, Sacerdote added: It makes sense that national publications have better instincts about reaching a large audience than, say, science journals. And overseas, some of the most influential English-language media organizations — like the BBC — have long received government funding, potentially making them less focused on consumer demand.
All of that sounds plausible to me, but I don’t think it is the full explanation. I have worked in media for nearly three decades, and I think you might be surprised by how little time journalists spend talking about audience size. We care about it, obviously, but most journalists I know care much more about other factors, like doing work that has an impact.
In the modern era of journalism — dating roughly to the Vietnam War and Watergate — we tend to equate impact with asking tough questions and exposing problems. There are some good reasons for that. We are inundated by politicians, business executives, movie stars and others trying to portray themselves in the best light. Our job is to cut through the self-promotion and find the truth. If we don’t tell you the bad news, you may never hear it.
Sometimes, though, our healthy skepticism can turn into reflexive cynicism, and we end up telling something less than the complete story. I am grateful to Sacerdote, Cook and Sehgal for doing to us journalists what we normally do to others — holding up a mirror to our work and giving us a chance to do better.
From "The Morning"
NY Times
By David Leonhardt
Good morning. The U.S. media is offering a different picture of Covid-19 from science journals or the international media, a study finds.
Is bad news the only kind?
Bruce Sacerdote, an economics professor at Dartmouth College, noticed something last year about the Covid-19 television coverage that he was watching on CNN and PBS. It almost always seemed negative, regardless of what was he seeing in the data or hearing from scientists he knew.
When Covid cases were rising in the U.S., the news coverage emphasized the increase. When cases were falling, the coverage instead focused on those places where cases were rising. And when vaccine research began showing positive results, the coverage downplayed it, as far as Sacerdote could tell.
But he was not sure whether his perception was correct. To check, he began working with two other researchers, building a database of Covid coverage from every major network, CNN, Fox News, Politico, The New York Times and hundreds of other sources, in the U.S. and overseas. The researchers then analyzed it with a social-science technique that classifies language as positive, neutral or negative.
The results showed that Sacerdote’s instinct had been right — and not just because the pandemic has been mostly a grim story.
The U.S. media is an outlier
The coverage by U.S. publications with a national audience has been much more negative than coverage by any other source that the researchers analyzed, including scientific journals, major international publications and regional U.S. media. “The most well-read U.S. media are outliers in terms of their negativity,” Molly Cook, a co-author of the study, told me.
About 87 percent of Covid coverage in national U.S. media last year was negative. The share was 51 percent in international media, 53 percent in U.S. regional media and 64 percent in scientific journals.
Notably, the coverage was negative in both U.S. media outlets with liberal audiences (like MSNBC) and those with conservative audiences (like Fox News).
Sacerdote is careful to emphasize that he does not think journalists usually report falsehoods. The issue is which facts they emphasize. Still, the new study — which the National Bureau of Economic Research has published as a working paper, titled, “Why is all Covid-19 news bad news?” — calls for some self-reflection from those of us in the media.
If we’re constantly telling a negative story, we are not giving our audience the most accurate portrait of reality. We are shading it. We are doing a good job telling you why Covid cases are rising in some places and how the vaccines are imperfect — but not such a good job explaining why cases are falling elsewhere or how the vaccines save lives. Perhaps most important, we are not being clear about which Covid developments are truly alarming.
As Ranjan Sehgal, another co-author, told me, “The media is painting a picture that is a little bit different from what the scientists are saying.”
Why the bad-news bias?
The researchers say they are not sure what explains their findings, but they do have a leading contender: The U.S. media is giving the audience what it wants.
When the researchers examined which stories were the most read or the most shared on Facebook, they tended to be the most negative stories. To put it another way, the stories that people choose to read skew even more negative than the stories that media organizations choose to publish. “Human beings, particularly consumers of major media, like negativity in their stories,” Sacerdote said. “We think the major media are responding to consumer demand.”
That idea is consistent with the patterns in the data, Sacerdote added: It makes sense that national publications have better instincts about reaching a large audience than, say, science journals. And overseas, some of the most influential English-language media organizations — like the BBC — have long received government funding, potentially making them less focused on consumer demand.
All of that sounds plausible to me, but I don’t think it is the full explanation. I have worked in media for nearly three decades, and I think you might be surprised by how little time journalists spend talking about audience size. We care about it, obviously, but most journalists I know care much more about other factors, like doing work that has an impact.
In the modern era of journalism — dating roughly to the Vietnam War and Watergate — we tend to equate impact with asking tough questions and exposing problems. There are some good reasons for that. We are inundated by politicians, business executives, movie stars and others trying to portray themselves in the best light. Our job is to cut through the self-promotion and find the truth. If we don’t tell you the bad news, you may never hear it.
Sometimes, though, our healthy skepticism can turn into reflexive cynicism, and we end up telling something less than the complete story. I am grateful to Sacerdote, Cook and Sehgal for doing to us journalists what we normally do to others — holding up a mirror to our work and giving us a chance to do better.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"
Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald
"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald
"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
-
XtremeJibber2001
- Signature Poster
- Posts: 20189
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
- Location: New York
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
Good on Rutgers taking the lead ...
Rutgers requiring students to be vaccinated for fall semester
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rutgers-wi ... -semester/
Rutgers requiring students to be vaccinated for fall semester
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rutgers-wi ... -semester/
-
easyrider16
- Post Office
- Posts: 4719
- Joined: Nov 10th, '19, 15:56
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
I would imagine there would be some real liability if vaccinations aren't required by private entities like schools and workplaces. I mean this thing can kill you, and defending wrongful death suits is expensive. It wouldn't surprise me if insurance companies started telling businesses that they won't insure them unless they require employees to be vaccinated. In some places they may deal with it by saying, get vaccinated or you have to wear a mask at all times.
On the bright side, more and more people in the U.S. are overcoming their fears of being vaccinated. I think the latest polls show something like 70% willing to be vaccinated. It needs to be higher still, but I think people are coming around as the evidence that the vaccines are safe is becoming undeniable.
On the bright side, more and more people in the U.S. are overcoming their fears of being vaccinated. I think the latest polls show something like 70% willing to be vaccinated. It needs to be higher still, but I think people are coming around as the evidence that the vaccines are safe is becoming undeniable.
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
No vaccinations required for my employees. I made significant investments last year to keep them socially distant. I didn't apply for any government handouts. Covid is a well crafted excuse to make people comply with the socialist left. I didn't receive the last two hand outs. I guess they figured out I wasn't a creepy Biden supporter. VOODOO ECONOMICS! I'm happy to see NH businesses that got the pay check protection have to pay it back. If you turned a profit you can pay it back.easyrider16 wrote: ↑Mar 26th, '21, 05:56 I would imagine there would be some real liability if vaccinations aren't required by private entities like schools and workplaces. I mean this thing can kill you, and defending wrongful death suits is expensive. It wouldn't surprise me if insurance companies started telling businesses that they won't insure them unless they require employees to be vaccinated. In some places they may deal with it by saying, get vaccinated or you have to wear a mask at all times.
On the bright side, more and more people in the U.S. are overcoming their fears of being vaccinated. I think the latest polls show something like 70% willing to be vaccinated. It needs to be higher still, but I think people are coming around as the evidence that the vaccines are safe is becoming undeniable.
-
easyrider16
- Post Office
- Posts: 4719
- Joined: Nov 10th, '19, 15:56
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
This mentality is precisely the reason that many of us are so frustrated with Republicans in general right now, and it is definitely why Republicans lost the house, senate, and Presidency in the last election.
-
XtremeJibber2001
- Signature Poster
- Posts: 20189
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
- Location: New York
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
Never mind the lockdowns, etc. came during the time when a Republican was POTUS.easyrider16 wrote: ↑Mar 29th, '21, 06:54This mentality is precisely the reason that many of us are so frustrated with Republicans in general right now, and it is definitely why Republicans lost the house, senate, and Presidency in the last election.
-
easyrider16
- Post Office
- Posts: 4719
- Joined: Nov 10th, '19, 15:56
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
The absurdity of it is that private companies started shutting down before any government in the U.S. told them to. It all started with the NBA for crying out loud, and then government followed suit. But the problem is the people who believe this conspiracy stuff aren't basing their belief on anything like facts or reason, so it's very difficult to convince them otherwise.
-
XtremeJibber2001
- Signature Poster
- Posts: 20189
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
- Location: New York
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
Birx, coming out too late ($02), basically saying she was threatened by the Trump admin for telling the truth about the pandemic. Wild.easyrider16 wrote: ↑Mar 29th, '21, 07:24 The absurdity of it is that private companies started shutting down before any government in the U.S. told them to. It all started with the NBA for crying out loud, and then government followed suit. But the problem is the people who believe this conspiracy stuff aren't basing their belief on anything like facts or reason, so it's very difficult to convince them otherwise.
-
easyrider16
- Post Office
- Posts: 4719
- Joined: Nov 10th, '19, 15:56
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
Did she say she was threatened? According to this summation of the interview, when asked if she was threatened, she said it was a very uncomfortable call. Even if he just yelled at her for a few minutes, it still seems inappropriate for the POTUS to come down on an underling like that for telling the truth.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/28/politics ... index.html
Pretty clear what was going on. Trump saw this crisis as a threat to his re-election, he had no idea how to handle it, and he panicked. He fell back on his old habits of denying the existence of any problem, pushing some big projects in which he could embellish his own role (Operation Warp Speed, ventilators, stimulus, etc.), and then came down hard on anyone who offered any kind of public criticism. In the end the American people judged him for his failures and gave him the boot by overwhelming numbers. That will be his legacy.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/28/politics ... index.html
Pretty clear what was going on. Trump saw this crisis as a threat to his re-election, he had no idea how to handle it, and he panicked. He fell back on his old habits of denying the existence of any problem, pushing some big projects in which he could embellish his own role (Operation Warp Speed, ventilators, stimulus, etc.), and then came down hard on anyone who offered any kind of public criticism. In the end the American people judged him for his failures and gave him the boot by overwhelming numbers. That will be his legacy.
-
XtremeJibber2001
- Signature Poster
- Posts: 20189
- Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
- Location: New York
Re: NSR: Corona Virus - You Can Start Panicking Now
I thought Birx answer was garbage. It was a direct question and should have a direct answer. Since the answer wasn't no ... I read it as yes or at least a 'kind of'.easyrider16 wrote: ↑Mar 29th, '21, 08:15 Did she say she was threatened? According to this summation of the interview, when asked if she was threatened, she said it was a very uncomfortable call. Even if he just yelled at her for a few minutes, it still seems inappropriate for the POTUS to come down on an underling like that for telling the truth.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/28/politics ... index.html
Pretty clear what was going on. Trump saw this crisis as a threat to his re-election, he had no idea how to handle it, and he panicked. He fell back on his old habits of denying the existence of any problem, pushing some big projects in which he could embellish his own role (Operation Warp Speed, ventilators, stimulus, etc.), and then came down hard on anyone who offered any kind of public criticism. In the end the American people judged him for his failures and gave him the boot by overwhelming numbers. That will be his legacy.