Perhaps in hindsight, the gate-keeping function of the 'old media' was overall useful.
It was only those that could mobilize resources that enjoyed regular access to popular media. Most editors and publishers emphasized coherent writing, fact checking and civil behaviour.
Unfortunately, the education system tends not to teach critical thinking skills until university and even then not all university students are exposed to it.
Yes, the "letters to the editor" wasn't literally everything that anyone wanted to post. Having an editor is a good thing, although those not chosen might claim bias/politics/racism/etc. And not always incorrectly.
And, there's no money in critical thinking (generally). Attention getting -> clicks -> advertiser dollars -> profit!
Nowhere in there was a mention of quality.
This is all that same crap, just with the internet to magnify it.
Perhaps in hindsight, the gate-keeping function of the 'old media' was overall useful.
It was only those that could mobilize resources that enjoyed regular access to popular media. Most editors and publishers emphasized coherent writing, fact checking and civil behaviour.
Unfortunately, the education system tends not to teach critical thinking skills until university and even then not all university students are exposed to it.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Jan 4, 2023 - 8:32am
cc_rider wrote:
And that's the crux of the issue. I would clarify it down to 'social media', but that's nitpicking.
Birtherism, gun control, critical race theory, great replacement theory, gun control, abortion, Christian nationalism, antisemitism, the deep state...
The subject matter changes, but the modus operandi does not. The medium really has become the message.
c.
It has become infinitely easier to find âsupportâ for oneâs preexisting belief.
Instead of culling facts/evidence and reaching a conclusion based on those facts/evidence, more and more people seemingly go out searching for anything they believe supports the conclusion they already have reached. Then they demand that those who disagree with that conclusion prove it is not âpossible,â thereby switching the burden of proof in a manner that often is tantamount to demanding that those who disagree prove a negative. Couple all that with the allegations of a large and sinister conspiracy and we indeed have arrived at the crux of the problem.
This is all that same crap, just with the internet to magnify it.
And that's the crux of the issue. I would clarify it down to 'social media', but that's nitpicking.
Birtherism, gun control, critical race theory, great replacement theory, gun control, abortion, Christian nationalism, antisemitism, the deep state...
The subject matter changes, but the modus operandi does not. The medium really has become the message.
c.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Jan 4, 2023 - 8:00am
Predictably, we are seeing statements that the collapse of Damar Hamlin on the field Monday night could be attributable to Covid vaccines.
âIt just really fits in with the narrative that was already circulating that any collapse of a person may be vaccine related, no matter lack of evidence,â said Jack Gregory, health editor of NewsGuard, a company that analyzes misinformation.
In keeping with football jargon, I would react by saying, simply: Câmon, man!
It sounds like you are letting yourself lash out at everyone official who was trying to hold shit together due to anger at your personal situation. And in doing so you are uncritically accepting all the bullshit spewed by anti-government, anti-vax influencers who have absolutely no basis for their assertions.
The anti-government thing has some merit, but it's not because of some great thinker's plan. It's because the leader was an idiot. Trying to contend that the pandemic spread because of some intention (other than laziness or ignorance) is trying to give it more credit than it deserves, by a long shot.
This guy bungled it, and his supporters are trying to make it look like his massive incompetence wasn't the real cause.
Same guy, still here, Dave. Notice I wrote figuratively?
Older, yip.
Perhaps smarting still from watching the business I built turn to ashes and dust because of 'Rona nonsense lockdowns.
Still stunned that people I always assumed to be smart and self-aware enough to understand personal sovereignty turned out to be ordinary simple sheeple.
Concerned that if people are not held to account for the nonsense of the past few years they will feel emboldened to repeat the process.
Still determined to rather die on my feet than live on my knees.
But basically the same guy, still here, and missing some of the people that I also believed to be motivated by love and not fear, but weren't.
Basically the same bloke, but not zigackly.
We grow and change and learn.
Sorry about your business. Pandemics suck.
But it is bizarre that you are running down the anti-vax rat-hole when it is the very thing that could have saved so much grief if it had been available straight-away and if people would actually achieve a high level of vaccination so that the health system didn't fall apart. Australia was very heavy-handed on getting people to vaccinate and achieved very high levels of at least the first round. Bottom line - it worked in spite of the marginal levels of health care staffing at the best of times. And you know what? More lives were saved, or at least deaths postponed than were lost to the vaccine. Like probably under a dozen people died due to reactions to the vaccine. It's like seat belts. There are certain extremely rare instances where wearing a seat belt could contribute to a death but they are totally overwhelmed by the instances where it saves your arse.
It sounds like you are letting yourself lash out at everyone official who was trying to hold shit together due to anger at your personal situation. And in doing so you are uncritically accepting all the bullshit spewed by anti-government, anti-vax influencers who have absolutely no basis for their assertions.
Yes to all, but also noting that you've conflated three different organizations (governmental) and a corporate conglomerate. All with different goals and agendas. The FDA is tasked with making sure stuff we ingest is safe, so they wanted to delay but faced political pressure to issue an emergency authorization. The CDC is tasked with limiting the spread of disease - notably different than being sure people don't get sick or suffer side effects from treatments. The DOJ is law enforcement - an even more political version. And Pharma - well we are the only country with pharmaceutical advertisement on TV.
You can blame people for all kinds of issues, here. But it was an unknown situation developing quickly and impacting literally billions of people.
The FDA and CDC for the most part are just looking for the most possible good, which often will put them at odds with the individual. This is pretty much to be expected in a society like ours. The DOJ and collective pharma entities, unfortunately, have far too much political/profit incentive - which ironically also is largely bad for most individuals, but not a certain few well connected individuals. The larger problem to me is that a whole lot of people think they are in the club, or that they will be granted access / privilege to the club when the time comes. But the club is really closed. If you aren't in, you aren't getting in. It doesn't matter how much harm you wish on everyone else.
Thanks. Yes, I seemingly lumped politicians, gov agencies and regulators togetherâ¦but only from the perspective of gov related entities acting to promote a vaccine. A vaccine, from what I know, which significantly protected the population. So I can forgive for the extra marketing. And as you imply, to an extent their hands are tied from providing complete disclosure, and must hedge to the interest of the population.
So very very tired of lookie-loos who get their knowledge from YouTube thinking that they "understand" how the gradual understanding of a new infection, its epidemiology, its possible treatments, and the science behind how those treatments work - with the new speed bumps of intentional misinformation from our enemies, intentional misinformation from trolls, hysterical misinformation from paranoiacs, and confused laypeople not sure - out of all those sources - to listen to.
When you see non-science people telling you that scientists with legit backgrounds don't understand the problem, and you should do something else, that should tell you something about the veracity of those people. Listening to them - even engaging with that crap - is a waste of your life.
I went through ALL this before with HIV: awareness there was something new, an attempt at defining it (what gives Kaposi's sarcoma or Mycobacterium avii to gay men - but not gay women, Haitians, drug abusers, and hemophiliacs?), and then figuring out its spread (is it in your cough? your sweat?), and then how to treat it - while young and previously healthy people all around you are dying rapidly from it. While there's a sociopolitical push to not talk about it because it's not affecting, you know, everyone. You know, maybe it's a plague from God. Maybe they deserve it.
This is all that same crap, just with the internet to magnify it.
I canât recall one person who was vaccinated who wasnât at least a bit nervous about getting the shot. Most if not all vaccines, pharmaceuticals â¦carry some risk. But the risk from the very real dangers of COVID outweighed that risk. And thatâs why I got the first two, and a booster.
Did gov, CDC and pharma downplay the personal risks, and perhaps oversell the shot? Seems like the answer is yes, but their job is more about protecting the masses, than specifically the individual.
Can we trust pharma completely? No. Their job is to create and promote the sale of drugs. And although pharma has in the aggregate done much more good than harm, sometimes they do act to the detriment of society (see the opioid crisis, and the role of the FDA and DOJ).
So, a certain level of push back from the public is fair, to help keep things honest. But there is the fine line, and balance that must be maintained.
Yes to all, but also noting that you've conflated three different organizations (governmental) and a corporate conglomerate. All with different goals and agendas. The FDA is tasked with making sure stuff we ingest is safe, so they wanted to delay but faced political pressure to issue an emergency authorization. The CDC is tasked with limiting the spread of disease - notably different than being sure people don't get sick or suffer side effects from treatments. The DOJ is law enforcement - an even more political version. And Pharma - well we are the only country with pharmaceutical advertisement on TV.
You can blame people for all kinds of issues, here. But it was an unknown situation developing quickly and impacting literally billions of people.
The FDA and CDC for the most part are just looking for the most possible good, which often will put them at odds with the individual. This is pretty much to be expected in a society like ours. The DOJ and collective pharma entities, unfortunately, have far too much political/profit incentive - which ironically also is largely bad for most individuals, but not a certain few well connected individuals. The larger problem to me is that a whole lot of people think they are in the club, or that they will be granted access / privilege to the club when the time comes. But the club is really closed. If you aren't in, you aren't getting in. It doesn't matter how much harm you wish on everyone else.
I canât recall one person who was vaccinated who wasnât at least a bit nervous about getting the shot. Most if not all vaccines, pharmaceuticals â¦carry some risk. But the risk from the very real dangers of COVID outweighed that risk. And thatâs why I got the first two, and a booster.
Did gov, CDC and pharma downplay the personal risks, and perhaps oversell the shot? Seems like the answer is yes, but their job is more about protecting the masses, than specifically the individual.
Can we trust pharma completely? No. Their job is to create and promote the sale of drugs. And although pharma has in the aggregate done much more good than harm, sometimes they do act to the detriment of society (see the opioid crisis, and the role of the FDA and DOJ).
So, a certain level of push back from the public is fair, to help keep things honest. But there is the fine line, and balance that must be maintained.
Same guy, still here, Dave. Notice I wrote figuratively?
Older, yip.
Perhaps smarting still from watching the business I built turn to ashes and dust because of 'Rona nonsense lockdowns.
Still stunned that people I always assumed to be smart and self-aware enough to understand personal sovereignty turned out to be ordinary simple sheeple.
Concerned that if people are not held to account for the nonsense of the past few years they will feel emboldened to repeat the process.
Still determined to rather die on my feet than live on my knees.
But basically the same guy, still here, and missing some of the people that I also believed to be motivated by love and not fear, but weren't.
Basically the same bloke, but not zigackly.
We grow and change and learn.
Sorry about your troubles. Like Dave, I've wondered why the change and reactiveness in the new persona. Maybe take a beat though - a deep breath or two. You're here calling for violence against people you know only through media. You've also had some other harsh reactions to fairly normal (if still bothersome) inputs from the world. Sure we all change and grow as we age, I'd like to think I do. But my core values are still there. If that same bloke is in you, may he find some peace and tolerance, and find his way back up on that horse.
Wow. WTF happened to the guy who used to go by Wallace Hartley; a man motivated by love, not fear?
Same guy, still here, Dave. Notice I wrote figuratively?
Older, yip.
Perhaps smarting still from watching the business I built turn to ashes and dust because of 'Rona nonsense lockdowns.
Still stunned that people I always assumed to be smart and self-aware enough to understand personal sovereignty turned out to be ordinary simple sheeple.
Concerned that if people are not held to account for the nonsense of the past few years they will feel emboldened to repeat the process.
Still determined to rather die on my feet than live on my knees.
But basically the same guy, still here, and missing some of the people that I also believed to be motivated by love and not fear, but weren't.
Basically the same bloke, but not zigackly.
We grow and change and learn.
Holding people to account is crucial - this must never happen again and, IMHO, the way we make sure it never happens again is by figuratively putting the Fauci's, Gates', Tedros', and others against a wall and shooting them in the head.
Dead.
I know of 2 families torn apart by divorce over the 'vax issue, and I think Tim Robbins, though genuinely contrite, is also getting out ahead of the game that is surely to come.
Everything from the purveyors of those crappy though colourful little graphs that present links to absolutely no data at all, to those responsible for the death and case number tickers on TV screens based off of horrendously inaccurate PCR testing protocols, and including those responsible for the supression of therapeutics...all must be held accountable.
And it seems to have begun in Florida where de Santis has requested a grand jury investigation be carried out into who did what to whom in Florida through the Coof season of mass formation psychosis.
There must be consequences.
Bold 1&2: Yet you don't advocate holding the anti-vax people to account who have spread verifiable lies and unverifiable claims. These are the people who tore families apart. Of course there is no proof of long-term safety of a new vaccine because it is new. But there is plenty of evidence of the vaccine safety compared to the risks of the disease. And we now have millions or billions of people who have been vaccinated that show the overall safety for several years.
Bold 3: de Santis is the one who hid the numbers of covid cases in his state and fired employees for publishing them. If he truly wanted to know what happened he wouldn't have suppressed the data needed to figure it out. He is the first one the grand jury should investigate.
Advocating violence is the very last action anyone should be demanding. Invites the very worst response from "the state", adding justification to tyrannical responses.
An irrelevant tin-foil-hat forced perspective. It's inappropriate in society, period, no matter how paranoid you are about The Man watching you (unless that Man is William).
William/BillG (don't know which gets your automated attention), this kind of violent hyperbole - which we've seen can trigger some to action - strikes me as inappropriate.
Advocating violence is the very last action anyone should be demanding. Invites the very worst response from "the state", adding justification to tyrannical responses.
Holding people to account is crucial - this must never happen again and, IMHO, the way we make sure it never happens again is by figuratively putting the Fauci's, Gates', Tedros', and others against a wall and shooting them in the head.
Dead.
I know of 2 families torn apart by divorce over the 'vax issue, and I think Tim Robbins, though genuinely contrite, is also getting out ahead of the game that is surely to come.
Everything from the purveyors of those crappy though colourful little graphs that present links to absolutely no data at all, to those responsible for the death and case number tickers on TV screens based off of horrendously inaccurate PCR testing protocols, and including those responsible for the supression of therapeutics...all must be held accountable.
And it seems to have begun in Florida where de Santis has requested a grand jury investigation be carried out into who did what to whom in Florida through the Coof season of mass formation psychosis.
There must be consequences.
William/BillG (don't know which gets your automated attention), this kind of violent hyperbole - which we've seen can trigger some to action - strikes me as inappropriate.
I'm with you on Tim's overall take, and found he came across as humble, after he confessed to holding a strong position he'd osmosed from the MSM. I spent 7 years in the pharma testing industry, and jumped on the 'vaccinate' bandwagon for the couple of months. After noting the shaky certitude of the UK's Chief Medical Officer - his body language wasn't supportive of his "safe and effective" statements in the Autumn of 2020 - I really started pay attention to dissident voices, eg Dr Robert Malone. This seed was supported in its growth by my knowing a little bit of the "perp sheet" of the likes of Pfizer, amongst other major pharma providers. So as a consequence of not "toeing the party line" at home (ie. England, UK) I've said goodbye to family and friends as a consequence of holding my line to what I consider as "right and true". That is, the Truth. That as the facts on the origins of SARS-Cov-2 build, of governments' collusion with big pharma, big tech, and their ties to the WEF, holding our representatives to account is more vital than ever.
Holding people to account is crucial - this must never happen again and, IMHO, the way we make sure it never happens again is by figuratively putting the Fauci's, Gates', Tedros', and others against a wall and shooting them in the head.
Dead.
I know of 2 families torn apart by divorce over the 'vax issue, and I think Tim Robbins, though genuinely contrite, is also getting out ahead of the game that is surely to come.
Everything from the purveyors of those crappy though colourful little graphs that present links to absolutely no data at all, to those responsible for the death and case number tickers on TV screens based off of horrendously inaccurate PCR testing protocols, and including those responsible for the supression of therapeutics...all must be held accountable.
And it seems to have begun in Florida where de Santis has requested a grand jury investigation be carried out into who did what to whom in Florida through the Coof season of mass formation psychosis.
