4 ms·

A more interesting question would be, "Why does the US have such low confidence in the media institutions ceaselessly promoting vaccination?"

LimaBearz 5y ago
I don’t have cable so I’m sorry but can you explain that to me? The only thing I’ve seen a lot of is personalities or people whose others might respect come out and verbally push for it, I haven’t seen anyone carelessly promoting it, it’s quite safe to take. A lot of questions I’ve seen asked, have been asked and answered. Those that chose not take the vaccine seem to be suffering from seeing only what they want to be seeing, no? What exactly is “carelessly promoting” mean in this context. Edit: ah OP edited his post, s/carelessly/ceaselessly/
- aww_dang 5y ago
  https://www.lexico.com/definition/ceaselessly https://www.lexico.com/definition/ceaselessly ADVERB Continuously and without end. ‘a former policeman who has campaigned ceaselessly on his daughter's behalf’
pjc50 5y ago
Well, half the media has spent years systematically destroying trust in government as a concept, so it's perhaps not surprising?
- JohnWhigham 5y ago
  destroying trust in government as a concept I despise all mainstream media, but if there's any one entity to chiefly blame for that, it's the federal government itself.
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    If you live your life as an American citizen or resident, you have the federal government to blame for the exceptionally high quality of life you lead. Perhaps it's because I'm informed and educated, but besides the DoD, I have nothing but good things to say about the current state of the executive and judicial branches, as well as federal agencies. For a taste of the alternative, book airfare to Haiti, Somalia, or Venezuela.
    - walkedaway 5y ago
      > you have the federal government to blame for the exceptionally high quality of life you lead If you were truly informed and educated as you claim you would know that our founding fathers had the foresight to anticipate the badness of government as a necessary evil (their words). We enjoy the high quality of life due to our constitution which enable the freedoms and sacrifice of Americans before us, despite the government's interference along the way.
- EricE 5y ago
  The media has spent years systematically destroying trust in itself. They have no one but themselves to blame for their trust being at an all time low. Mostly peaceful protest being the most egregious gaslighting in decades - Bagdad Bob would at least blush with that one
- aww_dang 5y ago
  Are there no legitimate criticisms of government largess? Has the media not been complicit in terrible debacles which we now know of, such as selling false pretenses for war? If you want to take that (partisan?) tack, you might turn it around and observe that both halves of the media take their turns being in opposition.
  - pjc50 5y ago
    I noticed that the anti-government line from the right didn't stop when they got into power. This NYT headline sums it up quite nicely: "Trump, Head of Government, Leans Into Antigovernment Message" https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronav... They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself.
    - krapp 5y ago
      >They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself. Nothing in that article describes Trump or the Republican Party speaking against the "concept of government itself." That would make them anarchists, which clearly they are not. The article points out numerous pro-government positions by Trump and implies that his position on the legitimate purpose and scope of government, rather than being founded on a rigid anti-government ideological core, is entirely transactional. The same guy who supported political protests against vaccination procedures and his opponent's election was shouting "LAW AND ORDER" from Twitter and sending troops into Portland... to crack down on political protesters. And as far as the Republicans themselves go, the party is famously pro-military, pro-police, pro hardline stances on drug enforcement and immigration, and pro Constitution. The only form of government they consistently oppose are social programs (with the exceptions of agricultural subsidies and the GI bill), spending related to arts and sciences, public education and anything else they consider "leftist" (or more simply, anything their political opponents support.)
    - aww_dang 5y ago
      Yes, and as you recall the NYT and other partisan sources spent much of his administration alleging that he was a Russian agent. They also claimed he didn't win the election legitimately. Before that, there was a similar theory advanced that Obama wasn't a citizen. Your point is a partisan one and you use a partisan source to back it up. All while ignoring similar behavior from the opposing side. Both sides criticize and question the legitimacy of government when in opposition. The point stands. Separate from the partisan nonsense, it is possible that government overreaches. There are legitimate criticisms of government largess. However, blanketly categorizing these criticisms as anti-government is also nonsense. Especially if it is in pursuit of a nakedly partisan point.
makomk 5y ago
The US media reporting on vaccination has been pretty garbage to be honest. For example, I notice the New York Times was complaining the other day about people refusing to get a vaccine even though they'd caught Covid - rationally speaking, someone who's already been infected is going to get much less benefit from vaccination (maybe even none?) and is at higher risk from side effects, their logic was completely backwards and they hadn't even noticed because how the media talks about vaccination mostly seems to be about ideology over all else. I also remember complaints about someone thinking they didn't need the vaccine because they always wore a mask when leaving the house; gee, maybe that has something to do with the articles last year actively pushing the idea that masks were more effective than vaccines would be? Which the media has of course quietly forgotten.
EricE 5y ago
Indeed. Also getting a vaccine is a serious medical procedure, and acting like it's not a big deal is not helpful long term. I'm in no rush because I'm not in a high risk group, I don't go out that much and I have had allergic reactions to vaccines in the past due to preservatives used and getting reliable information about these vaccines operating under emergency authorization is harder than it would otherwise be for my doctor. Ingredients used can vary by batch - no thanks; I'll wait until things stabilize more. I'm not opposed to taking the vaccine - I personally have no reason to rush into it. If my situation changes and it makes more sense to get the poke then I will do it. Acting like anyone choosing to think independently is akin to committing murder as some politicals have espoused is beyond irresponsible and does more to further sow seeds of distrust.

LimaBearz 5y ago

I don’t have cable so I’m sorry but can you explain that to me? The only thing I’ve seen a lot of is personalities or people whose others might respect come out and verbally push for it, I haven’t seen anyone carelessly promoting it, it’s quite safe to take. A lot of questions I’ve seen asked, have been asked and answered. Those that chose not take the vaccine seem to be suffering from seeing only what they want to be seeing, no? What exactly is “carelessly promoting” mean in this context. Edit: ah OP edited his post, s/carelessly/ceaselessly/

aww_dang 5y ago
https://www.lexico.com/definition/ceaselessly https://www.lexico.com/definition/ceaselessly ADVERB Continuously and without end. ‘a former policeman who has campaigned ceaselessly on his daughter's behalf’

pjc50 5y ago

Well, half the media has spent years systematically destroying trust in government as a concept, so it's perhaps not surprising?

JohnWhigham 5y ago
destroying trust in government as a concept I despise all mainstream media, but if there's any one entity to chiefly blame for that, it's the federal government itself.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  If you live your life as an American citizen or resident, you have the federal government to blame for the exceptionally high quality of life you lead. Perhaps it's because I'm informed and educated, but besides the DoD, I have nothing but good things to say about the current state of the executive and judicial branches, as well as federal agencies. For a taste of the alternative, book airfare to Haiti, Somalia, or Venezuela.
  - walkedaway 5y ago
    > you have the federal government to blame for the exceptionally high quality of life you lead If you were truly informed and educated as you claim you would know that our founding fathers had the foresight to anticipate the badness of government as a necessary evil (their words). We enjoy the high quality of life due to our constitution which enable the freedoms and sacrifice of Americans before us, despite the government's interference along the way.
EricE 5y ago
The media has spent years systematically destroying trust in itself. They have no one but themselves to blame for their trust being at an all time low. Mostly peaceful protest being the most egregious gaslighting in decades - Bagdad Bob would at least blush with that one
aww_dang 5y ago
Are there no legitimate criticisms of government largess? Has the media not been complicit in terrible debacles which we now know of, such as selling false pretenses for war? If you want to take that (partisan?) tack, you might turn it around and observe that both halves of the media take their turns being in opposition.
- pjc50 5y ago
  I noticed that the anti-government line from the right didn't stop when they got into power. This NYT headline sums it up quite nicely: "Trump, Head of Government, Leans Into Antigovernment Message" https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronav... They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself.
  - krapp 5y ago
    >They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself. Nothing in that article describes Trump or the Republican Party speaking against the "concept of government itself." That would make them anarchists, which clearly they are not. The article points out numerous pro-government positions by Trump and implies that his position on the legitimate purpose and scope of government, rather than being founded on a rigid anti-government ideological core, is entirely transactional. The same guy who supported political protests against vaccination procedures and his opponent's election was shouting "LAW AND ORDER" from Twitter and sending troops into Portland... to crack down on political protesters. And as far as the Republicans themselves go, the party is famously pro-military, pro-police, pro hardline stances on drug enforcement and immigration, and pro Constitution. The only form of government they consistently oppose are social programs (with the exceptions of agricultural subsidies and the GI bill), spending related to arts and sciences, public education and anything else they consider "leftist" (or more simply, anything their political opponents support.)
  - aww_dang 5y ago
    Yes, and as you recall the NYT and other partisan sources spent much of his administration alleging that he was a Russian agent. They also claimed he didn't win the election legitimately. Before that, there was a similar theory advanced that Obama wasn't a citizen. Your point is a partisan one and you use a partisan source to back it up. All while ignoring similar behavior from the opposing side. Both sides criticize and question the legitimacy of government when in opposition. The point stands. Separate from the partisan nonsense, it is possible that government overreaches. There are legitimate criticisms of government largess. However, blanketly categorizing these criticisms as anti-government is also nonsense. Especially if it is in pursuit of a nakedly partisan point.

makomk 5y ago

The US media reporting on vaccination has been pretty garbage to be honest. For example, I notice the New York Times was complaining the other day about people refusing to get a vaccine even though they'd caught Covid - rationally speaking, someone who's already been infected is going to get much less benefit from vaccination (maybe even none?) and is at higher risk from side effects, their logic was completely backwards and they hadn't even noticed because how the media talks about vaccination mostly seems to be about ideology over all else. I also remember complaints about someone thinking they didn't need the vaccine because they always wore a mask when leaving the house; gee, maybe that has something to do with the articles last year actively pushing the idea that masks were more effective than vaccines would be? Which the media has of course quietly forgotten.

EricE 5y ago

Indeed. Also getting a vaccine is a serious medical procedure, and acting like it's not a big deal is not helpful long term. I'm in no rush because I'm not in a high risk group, I don't go out that much and I have had allergic reactions to vaccines in the past due to preservatives used and getting reliable information about these vaccines operating under emergency authorization is harder than it would otherwise be for my doctor. Ingredients used can vary by batch - no thanks; I'll wait until things stabilize more. I'm not opposed to taking the vaccine - I personally have no reason to rush into it. If my situation changes and it makes more sense to get the poke then I will do it. Acting like anyone choosing to think independently is akin to committing murder as some politicals have espoused is beyond irresponsible and does more to further sow seeds of distrust.