3 ms·

> So what was the correct policy exactly? Here's one easy one: Don't use medical jargon in news/media. For example, they shouldn't have called it a "novel co

by Izkata 3y ago

> So what was the correct policy exactly? Here's one easy one: Don't use medical jargon in news/media. For example, they shouldn't have called it a "novel coronavirus". It means something specific and totally different in a medical context as it does to the layperson, and I expect it was a huge part of the overreaction.

lazide 3y ago
Novel coronavirus isn’t medical jargon though? Or at least not very much? It was indeed novel, and it was indeed a coronavirus. They could have called it a ‘SARS novel variant 2019’ if they wanted to really stir up shit right? Unless the CDC gave everyone talking points they had to stick to (and somehow enforced it, aka China) it’s also not in the gov’ts power to tell the press how they should present things. There were a lot of mistakes, but that we can see them instead of being shot for noticing them is a pretty big plus - and definitely better than how a lot of places handled it!
- Izkata 3y ago
  "Novel coronavirus" in a medical context means "no one has immunity to this particular coronavirus". "Novel coronavirus" to the layperson means "this is a totally new virus and we don't know anything about how it's going to act", so all previous knowledge about coronaviruses was thrown out and relearned over the past three years.
  - dent9876543 3y ago
    Even after all this time, I didn’t realise the distinction. I thought it was based in the “China created it” vs. “came from bats” arguments, i.e., man made (and this novel; of at least partial descent that our immune system had never before encountered), versus natural. Wow. Learn something new each day.
- dent9876543 3y ago
  > not in the gov’ts power to tell the press how they should present things. Is that really people’s understanding? Governments the world over made it their business to control what what put out — through the MSM, and many other channels. Many outlets were cautious of breaching the rules. In many cases, control was hands off — through peer pressure, if you will — but there were many well-publicised cases of direct intervention (for example, but it’s only one example, see the Twitter Files).
  - lazide 3y ago
    Feel free to prefix 'In the US' to statements like that I make, since this forum is US centric. In other places, yes the gov't sends the press what they are allowed to say and if they deviate they'll be shot. No one (even the US) ignores the press entirely, especially when foreign actors are actively trying to manipulate the press. It's the degree of independent that matters though.

by Izkata 3y ago

lazide 3y ago

Novel coronavirus isn’t medical jargon though? Or at least not very much? It was indeed novel, and it was indeed a coronavirus. They could have called it a ‘SARS novel variant 2019’ if they wanted to really stir up shit right? Unless the CDC gave everyone talking points they had to stick to (and somehow enforced it, aka China) it’s also not in the gov’ts power to tell the press how they should present things. There were a lot of mistakes, but that we can see them instead of being shot for noticing them is a pretty big plus - and definitely better than how a lot of places handled it!

Izkata 3y ago
"Novel coronavirus" in a medical context means "no one has immunity to this particular coronavirus". "Novel coronavirus" to the layperson means "this is a totally new virus and we don't know anything about how it's going to act", so all previous knowledge about coronaviruses was thrown out and relearned over the past three years.
- dent9876543 3y ago
  Even after all this time, I didn’t realise the distinction. I thought it was based in the “China created it” vs. “came from bats” arguments, i.e., man made (and this novel; of at least partial descent that our immune system had never before encountered), versus natural. Wow. Learn something new each day.
dent9876543 3y ago
> not in the gov’ts power to tell the press how they should present things. Is that really people’s understanding? Governments the world over made it their business to control what what put out — through the MSM, and many other channels. Many outlets were cautious of breaching the rules. In many cases, control was hands off — through peer pressure, if you will — but there were many well-publicised cases of direct intervention (for example, but it’s only one example, see the Twitter Files).
- lazide 3y ago
  Feel free to prefix 'In the US' to statements like that I make, since this forum is US centric. In other places, yes the gov't sends the press what they are allowed to say and if they deviate they'll be shot. No one (even the US) ignores the press entirely, especially when foreign actors are actively trying to manipulate the press. It's the degree of independent that matters though.