4 ms·

My takeaway is that "news" from commercial outlets like MarketWatch (the publisher here) largely is not fact-based. Compare to reports in February about waves

My takeaway is that "news" from commercial outlets like MarketWatch (the publisher here) largely is not fact-based. Compare to reports in February about waves of anti-Asia discrimination, correspondeding to a major and ill-advised Democratic information initiative. I don't know if Twitter has bots or how they tilt. What I do know is post-coronavirus commerical "news" outlets have lost my trust, as has much of the political establishment, red or blue.

mch82 6y ago
What about COVID-19 coverage led you to your conclusion? Can you please share examples of specific news reports that we’re non-factual?
- drtillberg 6y ago
  For example, MarketWatch has been pushing articles for months about discrimination relative to public health measures to generate a narrative critical of the U.S. travel ban earlier this year affecting flights to and from China.[1] Closer to home, you can look to the steady diet of fear-based public health reporting that the "news" outlet finally has explicitly disclaimed as non-factual (but always was defective) -- "Due to the rapidly changing nature of the coronavirus public health crisis, some of the recommendations included in this article may eventually become out-of-date."[2]. It's ok to be wrong, but the "news" consistently has been "wrong" in a manner that has generated support for particular political policies, even particlar drugs have become political lightning rods whose efficacy is not being investigated or reported in a fair and reliable manner.[3] One can explain this, and explain that, but when the sum result is being locked inside for months on end, unemployed, blocked from major life events with a media wrongly cheeleading those policies with wrong and unsupported information, this leads to a loss of trust. I'm not saying the media outlets are on a lark; I'm saying they haven't done their jobs of reporting facts outside the filter of propaganda and political bias which has infected so much policy dialog. [1] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-chinese-allowed-racism-and-fear-are-now-spreading-along-with-the-coronavirus-2020-01-29 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-chinese-allowed-racism-... [2] https://www.boston.com/culture/lifestyle/2020/04/16/is-it-safe-to-run-outside-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic https://www.boston.com/culture/lifestyle/2020/04/16/is-it-sa... [3] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/may/28/questions-raised-over-hydroxychloroquine-study-which-caused-who-to-halt-trials-for-covid-19 https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/may/28/questions-ra...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
    > Closer to home, you can look to the steady diet of fear-based public health reporting that the "news" outlet finally has explicitly disclaimed as non-factual (but always was defective) -- "Due to the rapidly changing nature of the coronavirus public health crisis, some of the recommendations included in this article may eventually become out-of-date."[2]. Well, let's see. > steady diet of fear-based public health reporting There's a pandemic on with a nontrivial death rate. A little fear's deserved. > that the "news" outlet I believe these are called scare quotes. > finally has explicitly disclaimed as non-factual where is this disclaim? > (but always was defective) You have certainty on your side apparently. Now the quote about stuff getting out of date, well, what do you expect? Speak to god if you want utter certainty, not scientists. Seriously, what makes you think eternally correct information drops fully formed into anyone's lap. If you want to live in a world without science, aka the middle ages, I urge you to do so, so those of us left behind with the internet, antibiotics, human rights, a stable civil society, non-agricultural jobs, and education, can suffer alone.

mch82 6y ago

What about COVID-19 coverage led you to your conclusion? Can you please share examples of specific news reports that we’re non-factual?

drtillberg 6y ago
For example, MarketWatch has been pushing articles for months about discrimination relative to public health measures to generate a narrative critical of the U.S. travel ban earlier this year affecting flights to and from China.[1] Closer to home, you can look to the steady diet of fear-based public health reporting that the "news" outlet finally has explicitly disclaimed as non-factual (but always was defective) -- "Due to the rapidly changing nature of the coronavirus public health crisis, some of the recommendations included in this article may eventually become out-of-date."[2]. It's ok to be wrong, but the "news" consistently has been "wrong" in a manner that has generated support for particular political policies, even particlar drugs have become political lightning rods whose efficacy is not being investigated or reported in a fair and reliable manner.[3] One can explain this, and explain that, but when the sum result is being locked inside for months on end, unemployed, blocked from major life events with a media wrongly cheeleading those policies with wrong and unsupported information, this leads to a loss of trust. I'm not saying the media outlets are on a lark; I'm saying they haven't done their jobs of reporting facts outside the filter of propaganda and political bias which has infected so much policy dialog. [1] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-chinese-allowed-racism-and-fear-are-now-spreading-along-with-the-coronavirus-2020-01-29 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-chinese-allowed-racism-... [2] https://www.boston.com/culture/lifestyle/2020/04/16/is-it-safe-to-run-outside-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic https://www.boston.com/culture/lifestyle/2020/04/16/is-it-sa... [3] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/may/28/questions-raised-over-hydroxychloroquine-study-which-caused-who-to-halt-trials-for-covid-19 https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/may/28/questions-ra...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  > Closer to home, you can look to the steady diet of fear-based public health reporting that the "news" outlet finally has explicitly disclaimed as non-factual (but always was defective) -- "Due to the rapidly changing nature of the coronavirus public health crisis, some of the recommendations included in this article may eventually become out-of-date."[2]. Well, let's see. > steady diet of fear-based public health reporting There's a pandemic on with a nontrivial death rate. A little fear's deserved. > that the "news" outlet I believe these are called scare quotes. > finally has explicitly disclaimed as non-factual where is this disclaim? > (but always was defective) You have certainty on your side apparently. Now the quote about stuff getting out of date, well, what do you expect? Speak to god if you want utter certainty, not scientists. Seriously, what makes you think eternally correct information drops fully formed into anyone's lap. If you want to live in a world without science, aka the middle ages, I urge you to do so, so those of us left behind with the internet, antibiotics, human rights, a stable civil society, non-agricultural jobs, and education, can suffer alone.