3 ms·

What isn't really apparent to me from this article is WHY Saudi Arabia, or China for that matter, would even want to censor this.

by ginko 13y ago

cnorgate 13y ago
It's a prisoner's dilemma. All countries are better off if everyone shares information, but there is a huge incentive to 'cheat' in this agreement. News of an outbreak in a given country will have a substantial, negative economic impact. At the very least, tourism and trade will suffer. It's not unreasonable that other countries will quarantine and outright block off ties with the affected country. Back in 2003 with SARS, Toronto Canada took a substantial hit in tourism dollars, so much so that the Rolling Stones stepped in to host a charity concert to help the city out... Chinese tourism was likely affected worse. As a politician or public health official, crying wolf early or raising the alarm of a potential outbreak will certainly have a negative financial impact... what's not known is how serious a given outbreak might be. So in short, they are weighing a known, substantial cost (lost tourism) against an unknown and unquantifiable benefit (avoiding an outbreak)... being the political worms they are that got them into office in the first place, they will most likely take the route that provides the least direct blow-back to them, which is sadly the route of hiding the outbreak.
jpatokal 13y ago
Because if it leaks out that they have a new, lethal, incurable and contagious disease, they'll be treated like they have the plague. (See where the metaphor comes from?) I moved to Singapore in 2003, when the SARS epidemic was raging. (IIRC, the last death in Singapore was the day I arrived.) People back home thought I was crazy, the usually crowded city-state's streets were rattlingly empty, restaurants had desperately promotions ($1/plate sushi etc) and the five-star hotel I'd been booked into at an already low rate bumped me to an apartment suite. Of course, I was far more at risk of dying in a traffic accident, but "plague!" is one of those risk factors like "terrorism!" that makes people's hindbrains gibber in fear and discount all rational risk analysis.
- icambron 13y ago
  The risk for SARS was massively overblown, but, unlike terrorism, entire populations really have been decimated by plagues.

What isn't really apparent to me from this article is WHY Saudi Arabia, or China for that matter, would even want to censor this.

by ginko 13y ago

What isn't really apparent to me from this article is WHY Saudi Arabia, or China for that matter, would even want to censor this.

cnorgate 13y ago

It's a prisoner's dilemma. All countries are better off if everyone shares information, but there is a huge incentive to 'cheat' in this agreement. News of an outbreak in a given country will have a substantial, negative economic impact. At the very least, tourism and trade will suffer. It's not unreasonable that other countries will quarantine and outright block off ties with the affected country. Back in 2003 with SARS, Toronto Canada took a substantial hit in tourism dollars, so much so that the Rolling Stones stepped in to host a charity concert to help the city out... Chinese tourism was likely affected worse. As a politician or public health official, crying wolf early or raising the alarm of a potential outbreak will certainly have a negative financial impact... what's not known is how serious a given outbreak might be. So in short, they are weighing a known, substantial cost (lost tourism) against an unknown and unquantifiable benefit (avoiding an outbreak)... being the political worms they are that got them into office in the first place, they will most likely take the route that provides the least direct blow-back to them, which is sadly the route of hiding the outbreak.

jpatokal 13y ago

Because if it leaks out that they have a new, lethal, incurable and contagious disease, they'll be treated like they have the plague. (See where the metaphor comes from?) I moved to Singapore in 2003, when the SARS epidemic was raging. (IIRC, the last death in Singapore was the day I arrived.) People back home thought I was crazy, the usually crowded city-state's streets were rattlingly empty, restaurants had desperately promotions ($1/plate sushi etc) and the five-star hotel I'd been booked into at an already low rate bumped me to an apartment suite. Of course, I was far more at risk of dying in a traffic accident, but "plague!" is one of those risk factors like "terrorism!" that makes people's hindbrains gibber in fear and discount all rational risk analysis.

icambron 13y ago
The risk for SARS was massively overblown, but, unlike terrorism, entire populations really have been decimated by plagues.