Covid - 19

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

LOL at you! I watch FOX a lot and not one time have I seen anyone refer to it as a hoax. You're a pathetic, small-man, liar!

---

The only time I see Piss Guy's comments are when y'all reply, and I'm glad for this one.

Fox has not minimized this issue. They have for the most part been evenhanded and tried to tamp down fear...except for Tucker Carlson who has been such a firebrand on the issue that he's pissed me off a couple of times. He has been over the top on the extent of exposure, death rates, etc.

So for Piss Guy to say otherwise is an outright lie...but I'm not surprised. The boy is very intelligent, just not very smart!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

Which is why FOX out-distances its competitors.

---

It certainly knows it's market.

Jeanine Pirro on March 7: "all the talk about coronavirus being so much more deadly doesn't reflect reality.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

lol. Fox has been calling this whole COVID-19 thing a hoax for weeks.

---

You sir are a liar on that one.

This is now a war on real news and press.

CHINESE MEDIA: WUHAN CORONAVIRUS ‘THE U.S. AND EUROPE’S NEW CHERNOBYL’

Reporting on the false side of a story as well as the real side may make the coverage “balanced”, but that isn’t real journalism.

Tucker Carlson has actually been on the correct side of this issue. It is urgent and serious and people need to conduct themselves accordingly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Jeanine Pirro on March 7: "all the talk about coronavirus being so much more deadly doesn't reflect reality.”

---

I didn't see this when she said it, so I don't the context in which it was offered. But, in terms of raw numbers, it is a true statement. The Swine flu of 2009-2010 killed a lot more people than Covid-19 has killed...thus far.

I'm hearing the checks will be limited to folks with an annual household income under 75K.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Yeah, but you are just as likely, if not more so (because you are more social), to be a vector for the spread of the disease.

---

Agreed, and yet it has no bearing on what I am saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

My question would be what constitutes panic. Is it panic inducing to tell folks to keep away from groups of 10? I suppose, but isn't that also the only way to flatten the curve? Seriously restricting our behavior is about all we have left. It WILL spread, but the speed of the spread is the question. And still, with all the panic, the bars and restaurants were full in many places. We, as a society, don't take well to curtailing our behavior. The issue is not the effect on the disease for those who are not at high risk, it's their unknowing spread of the virus to those who ARE high risk. Many folks who've tested positive are asymptomatic. If we wait to curtail our behavior until we don't feel well, we've already spread the virus to all we've come in contact with.

It's where we are. The media coverage has been partisan (on BOTH sides) and that's annoying, but it shouldn't surprise anyone. Worst case scenarios ALWAYS lead. Just like Fox News never reports on the fact that undocumented aliens are less likely than the general population to be criminally violent...the heinous acts of the extreme minority lead those stories. Just like NBC is going to report on those that are sickest.

It's annoying, but it's also capitalism. If it bleeds it leads.

---

Panic to me is people thinking they are going to die from this disease when that is extremely unlikely. Panic is not telling folks to keep away from groups of 10. That is fine advice. Panic is telling people the virus is 10x more deadly than the flu (which honestly very few people worry about dying from) when the story is just as much about how it's 1/4 as deadly as originally thought.

It's clear it has been partisan from the start, as always. It's also clear that everyone their view of the coverage skewed by their personal politics. It won't stop me from wishing we weren't to this point and voicing my displeasure at the current state of affairs. I would just ask that they try not to be intentionally misleading. That seems like too much to ask by the responses from you, Guislapp, and Champ967. If you guys are cool with it or blame it on capitalism then so be it. I would absolutely love a news organization that could separate the politics from the news, but it seems we have reached a point where that is impossible and some people think it's some sort of punishment for people holding the incorrect political beliefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Jeanine Pirro on March 7: "all the talk about coronavirus being so much more deadly doesn't reflect reality.”

---

Depending on where you get your news. The jury is still out on that one, but the argument can still be made.

I said it was annoying. I think it’s a punishment, not for incorrect political beliefs, but for failing to teach people to think. It’s not hard to wade through what’s partisan and what is fact, but the consumer doesn’t care. I also think we are super sensitive when the facts dispute our previously held opinions, so we label whoever said what we disagree with a partisan hack and refuse to engage their argument.

If the argument were presented in a civil, non-attacking manner, and non-emotional way it would be easier to engage in an intelligent discussion. All to often the second response is an attack. This is not limited to one side or the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

I said it was annoying. I think it’s a punishment, not for incorrect political beliefs, but for failing to teach people to think. It’s not hard to wade through what’s partisan and what is fact, but the consumer doesn’t care. I also think we are super sensitive when the facts dispute our previously held opinions, so we label whoever said what we disagree with a partisan hack and refuse to engage their argument.

---

I thought I had a pretty good handle on human nature in, at least, our region. I didn't. It is much worse than I thought. I'm afraid we are about to see/hear about some bad stuff taking place among those who already ignore the law, but THAT will be over looked as the politicians focus on limiting those who are easy to limit.

It's like our Governor looks forward to his daily shock value unconstitutional declarations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tech70

If the argument were presented in a civil, non-attacking manner, and non-emotional way it would be easier to engage in an intelligent discussion. All to often the second response is an attack. This is not limited to one side or the other.

---

That’s why I prefer to read the news.

I think there is a real problem right now with selective interpretation. There are examples on this thread. When I say the panic the media is causing is overblown, I am not saying people should not be taking this seriously. My point is people shouldn't be in fear for their lives unless they fit the criteria (over 70 or over 50 with preexisting conditions). That doesn't mean they should go around licking things in public places, just that they shouldn't be in a panic that they are going to die. A friend was ready to head to the emergency room because they were sure they had the virus and were going to die. They were convinced they felt feverish (no fever) and were having shortness of breath and coughing. Despite the fact that they are in their 30s and in good health, they have bought into the sensationalism. Please note, I'm not saying if they are feeling ill they should continue their normal activity. I'm just saying they should calm down, monitor their temperature and symptoms and try not to panic. By the afternoon they were fine, but if someone hadn't talked them off the ledge they would have been putting undue strain on our medical system that everyone is so concerned about.

I can't speak for other people, but when I have heard the word hoax thrown around about this ordeal, it is more about the response to the virus (and the media coverage) rather than the virus itself. We honestly still don't know how much worse this is than a bad flu. China and Italy indicate it is much worse than even a bad flu, South Korea indicates it might be closer to a bad flu. There are still plenty of reason to be alarmed such as the lack of a vaccine (unlike the flu). The reality is the numbers for this virus are just not well understood yet versus the flu that we have plenty of history on (all of the flu numbers are based on presumed cases versus verified cases it should be noted). Early estimates suggest this is much more contagious than the flu (possibly 2-3x), there is no vaccine or established treatment unlike the flu, and the incubation time/being contagious without symptoms makes this something to be seriously concerned with.

I think many people think purpose of the flu comparison is to minimize the disease and discourage people from taking action. I have to run, but I will finish this thought later.