There's a sort of meta-tomfoolery/reverse-psychology going on in the linked post. For "media", he picks a fringe/conspiracy-theory-ish outlet and the first sup

There's a sort of meta-tomfoolery/reverse-psychology going on in the linked post. For "media", he picks a fringe/conspiracy-theory-ish outlet and the first supposedly technically-maybe-true-but-hum-hum-lacks-context story is about a topic which the author can handwave away with some sensible sounding suppositions. More reputable outlets have reported on the same and related issues in ways that are harder to explain away. For example... "Fresh probe into spike in newborn baby deaths in Scotland" https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-61448963 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-61448963 "Investigation into spikes in newborn baby deaths in Scotland" https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-63097142 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-63097142 "NHS logging baby deaths as stillbirths ‘to avoid scrutiny’" https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/16/nhs-logging-baby-deaths-stillbirths-avoid-scrutiny/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/16/nhs-logging-baby...