3 ms·
That’s not what happened. The media’s responsibility was to accurately communicate that information. Instead what they did was “Lololol horsey drugs! You silly
by imgabe 5y ago
That’s not what happened. The media’s responsibility was to accurately communicate that information. Instead what they did was “Lololol horsey drugs! You silly horse people” which was false, and caused the people they needed to convince to dismiss them.
- ceejayoz 5y agoThere were substantial numbers of substantive articles about ivermectin, human trials, potential and cautions, etc. For a good example, here's NPR discussing it with an even tone that doesn't match your assertions at all: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/09/19/1038369557/ivermectin-anti-vaccine-movement-culture-wars https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/09/19/1038369... Or here's the NYT using pretty clear wording like "forms of the drug meant for horses": https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/30/health/covid-ivermectin-prescriptions.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/30/health/covid-ivermectin-p... There were also some less serious outlets discussing the fact that people were self-prescribing by going to veterinary sources without much context to them. These ones, due to the somewhat funny nature of the concept, tended to go more viral. Doesn't mean the more substantive articles didn't exist.