• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Covid and the media =confusion

We Never Know

No Slack
When the media can't make up their mind lol.
And people wonder why others are confused.


Yahoo news June 3, 2024....

Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths​



Yahoo news June 11, 2024....

No, study didn't blame COVID-19 vaccines for excess pandemic deaths​


 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
When the media can't make up their mind lol.
And people wonder why others are confused.


Yahoo news June 3, 2024....

Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths​



Yahoo news June 11, 2024....

No, study didn't blame COVID-19 vaccines for excess pandemic deaths​


Don't blame yahoo when it just aggregated an article from an extremely right biased and marginally credible source.
The Telegraph is not a good source for news.
As to the article itself, It does not seem to contain any factual errors but is full of misleading unanswered questions.

No doubt it will get parroted many times here and elsewhere as evidence though it is nothing of the sort.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
When the media can't make up their mind lol.
And people wonder why others are confused.


Yahoo news June 3, 2024....

Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths​



Yahoo news June 11, 2024....

No, study didn't blame COVID-19 vaccines for excess pandemic deaths​


Yeah, I quit using Yahoo for news a very long time ago because it's really not that good and wonky things like that happen.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
But but but it's YAHOO!
s-l1600.webp
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
Kansas Attorney General on adverse effectwouldn't s for pregnant women:


P**** Pfizer.
Got a source with any credibility? Kris Kobach?
here is the complaint, https://ag.ks.gov/docs/default-source/documents/2024-06-15-pfizer-complaint-(002).pdf sorry pdf 179 pages but it is a litany of anti vax garbage like Pfizer said it was effective even though they knew its effect waned over time and might not protect against variants. As well as the usual drivel about transmission etc. the first few pages are enough.

Should get laughed out of court, but since since the local courts are probably as ignorant of biology as the AG a lot of money will be wasted educating them.

But expect to hear a lot about it from the usual jokers.

fixed link
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
When the media can't make up their mind lol.
And people wonder why others are confused.
I'm generally all for criticising the media and they've certainly been poor, in general and during the pandemic particularly. That said, I think you're being a little unfair here.

Note that Yahoo is just the news aggregator here. The first article comes from The Telegraph, which is somewhere in the middle of quality for UK newspapers (though that's not a very high standard), but they appear to have been relatively accurate in their reporting of this study, focusing on the questions and the need for further study. The second article from USA Today correctly criticised how right-wing sources took that same report but spun it somewhat further, with clear bias against the vaccines. The two links aren't contradictory.

While the mainstream media has questions to answer and media on the political extremes (from all sides) are awful, the public has much to answer for too. The general issue with this kind of story is that even people who go to mainstream sources typically won't read all the details and so come away with flawed impressions and the people who only go to their preferred partisan sources will be intentionally misled.

You can get fairly accurate reporting, even on controversial topics like this one, if you put in a little effort to get it (after all, USA Today published the fact check). The problem is that most people can't be bothered to make the effort or subconsciously don't want to hear difficult truths.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Don't blame yahoo when it just aggregated an article from an extremely right biased and marginally credible source.
The Telegraph is not a good source for news.
As to the article itself, It does not seem to contain any factual errors but is full of misleading unanswered questions.

No doubt it will get parroted many times here and elsewhere as evidence though it is nothing of the sort.
I do blame yahoo. Its sharing and spreading misinformation.(one is false)
No different than gossip IMO.
 
Last edited:

Pogo

Well-Known Member
I do blame yahoo. Its sharing and spreading misinformation.
No different than gossip IMO.
They are there to make money by getting clicks, it is unfortunately up to us to evaluate the actual news being presented which is why you need to look at the source of the information.
The solution is to limit yourself to direct sources who make their money by being accurate, but they're the ones people complain are biased because they don't say what they want to hear.
And vette the sources through a media bias site that actually analyzes them rather than just polling people.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
The difficult truth in this case is that government is not acting in the interest of the people.
They were trying to but the loonies kept screaming censorship when the government informed people of the false information that people were circulating.

Sorry, we know you don't believe it but that is because you believe all the false information.
This Kansas suit being only the most recent.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
I'm generally all for criticising the media and they've certainly been poor, in general and during the pandemic particularly. That said, I think you're being a little unfair here.

Note that Yahoo is just the news aggregator here. The first article comes from The Telegraph, which is somewhere in the middle of quality for UK newspapers (though that's not a very high standard), but they appear to have been relatively accurate in their reporting of this study, focusing on the questions and the need for further study. The second article from USA Today correctly criticised how right-wing sources took that same report but spun it somewhat further, with clear bias against the vaccines. The two links aren't contradictory.

While the mainstream media has questions to answer and media on the political extremes (from all sides) are awful, the public has much to answer for too. The general issue with this kind of story is that even people who go to mainstream sources typically won't read all the details and so come away with flawed impressions and the people who only go to their preferred partisan sources will be intentionally misled.

You can get fairly accurate reporting, even on controversial topics like this one, if you put in a little effort to get it (after all, USA Today published the fact check). The problem is that most people can't be bothered to make the effort or subconsciously don't want to hear difficult truths.
USA today is rated mostly factual, in the center. Its not great but not bad.
Its left center bias, IOW favors the left.

So based on that is it credible?

Right center bias source are generally waved off by others here because its favors the right.

IMG_20240619_163635.jpg
 

We Never Know

No Slack
They are there to make money by getting clicks, it is unfortunately up to us to evaluate the actual news being presented which is why you need to look at the source of the information.
The solution is to limit yourself to direct sources who make their money by being accurate, but they're the ones people complain are biased because they don't say what they want to hear.
And vette the sources through a media bias site that actually analyzes them rather than just polling people.

I do my own research. However many don't.
My post was showing why some are confused.
They are told one thing today, a different thing tomorrow, next week, etc.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
I do my own research. However many don't.
My post was showing why some are confused.
They are told one thing today, a different thing tomorrow, next week, etc.
The reporting on Covid has actually been good from major news sources and as understanding changed, they reported it accurately, the misinformation has been from the usual questionable sources as even today's links are demonstrating.
 
Top