I’ve a friend in Tokyo who said basically the same thing. She’s been loving having the free time do stuff, but she’s also an introvert so the staying at home is super easy for the time being.
5 Likes
Ugh, please don’t reference extremist propaganda sites as evidence. GR promotes anti-vaccination propaganda, 9-11 as a false flag operation, GMOs as harmful, chem trail nut job theories, etc.
People, you’ve got to fact check your sources, especially if you’re spreading them online.
6 Likes
Checked that offguardian is also not a great source either, at least according to Media Bias/Fact Check. I hear its not a super great website either but they seem to be earnest in what they are trying to do, but that’s not what I’m here to argue about.
3 Likes
you see, i dont know these sites at all, but the problem is that these are real experts regardless and that anyone saying anything which deviates from certain political agendas will not find any other mouthpiece to do so
the so-called “good sources” in the end are usually nothing but propaganda tools themselves either, owned by private corporations, banks, etc. to propagate whatever they want ppl to “know” (read: believe)
there’s a lesson in that by itself
and like i said, im not here to promote any specific idea or thought or site, just saying ppl should not blindly believe everything the media says and that a different perspective now and then doesn’t hurt
in the end, no one benefits by trying to silence anyone trying to say anything that might differ; you end up living in an illusion of freedom and democracy while it is nothing but a soft and barely hidden dictatorship enforced through psychological and intellectual suppression rather than an obvious physical one.
the truth is that even though some journalists at some media outlets would sometimes want to say something different or report on issues on other than what they are told to, they simply can’t; it is the management which decides on that, and those who dont like it get fired
it’s funny we still think the “free media” still guarantees independent checks and balances while there’s barely anything of that left
it’s enough to just look at how American media portray their politics to understand how the world rly functions; that has nothing to do with what we learned in school when we were young; that journalists were impartial etc. (a lot may try to be, but, again, they dont rly have that freedom cuz they need their paycheck)
4 Likes
I see where you come from, particularly regarding news regarding US politics even from supposed neutral sources like Reuters. Having several media outlets covering both sides of the coin or even in a mostly center/neutral bias can help increase your perspective of events going on. I guess it’s just bad circumstance that the source used has had a bad reputation really. Even sources I used for my project like The Guardian has been put into question regarding its validity at times.
Allsides.com from what I seen gives sources from left, right and center sources as an aid to help us see other sides. It’s not the only tool you can use but it can help somewhat. I guess the part that ticks people like you about big news sources is that they tend to just report news to appeal to a certain bias and barely cover other areas that would greatly benefit from global exposure.
I mean take a look at how some view China and the WHO: there’s a ton of damming stuff about them. For example, China delaying an official response for the disease and hiding said information until it gets to a boiling point. It’s obviously more than that if you read the article.
Source:
China didn't warn public of likely pandemic for 6 key days | AP News
I don’t like to point fingers so much because quite frankly I am not knowledgeable enough to give a conclusion on my own especially when there are a ton of contradictions left and right that makes it more of a preference to just stay quiet and look from a distance. Rightfully we have been focusing on containing the virus and I personally want that to be done first and ask questions regarding origin as a side thing or second personally. We need all the help we can get in this situation and blaming each other is not the most efficient way to solve this problem.
I don’t know if this is be a good response towards M00’s post but that’s my pov in this insane situation.
4 Likes
https://www.enews.net.au/eu-on-brink-brussels-chief-begs-for-solidarity-as-member-states-splinter/
EU officials, who have no power to dictate health measures to the 27 EU states, have repeatedly called for a common approach as nations acted independently of each other in combating the virus and are now proceeding in the same way in their lockdown exit strategies.
But EU leaders are now at loggerheads over how to kickstart growth once the epidemic ends, notably over whether recovery funds should be raised jointly or by each country individually.
It looks like countries are ready to exit lockdown at their own pace.
But most importantly. What is a loggerhead and why is it a word?
4 Likes
That sounds beyond retarded. Different nations are differently affected by the spread and have to figure out how to best handle their own situation, even different regions within each country are having different situations. Having EU officials make unilateral decisions for everyone is unfathomably stupid, these decisions must be made by local regional governments.
EU’s only role in this should be to help those regions that are hardest hit and have a hard time providing enough care and economically survive the quarantine.
7 Likes
well, would you look at that
4 Likes
I know you had good intentions, but there are fact checking sites out there - they may not be flashy or fancy, but behind the scenes you have a lot of journalists, independent fact checkers, databases full of historical logs and changes, and a more honest approach.
One useful way to check out a source like GR is to cross-reference their overall track record with reporting the truth…and boy is it abysmal – https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-research/ so, while sometimes they do have valid, accurate reporting (less than 10% of the time…) the entire site is littered with inaccuracies, false reporting, or twisting of the truth, and is VERY often agenda-based or agenda-driven articles with little focus placed on the facts (if it even bothers to accurately source the facts). The fact checking sites provide exact instances, articles, sources, and are willing to sign their names and stake their reputation on it, and they consistently uncover similar patterns regardless of which fact checking site you use. So, while those fact checking sites like MediaBiasFactCheck or FactCheck or Politifact or Snopes or LeadStories or ScienceFeedback or APFactCheck or ReutersFactCheck or FullFact or CheckYourFact may not be perfect 100% of the time, they try incredibly hard to deep dive sources and uncover the truth for us with every resource they can bring to bear, and they link pattern abuse of certain unsavory websites, journals, and authors better than we (as one article consumers) ever could. They are amazing resources! Please use.
So, while I did not watch the video you linked, just based on the source alone it has an astronomically high probability of being laced with mistruths, inaccuracies, or outright lies. And even if they are calling on experts within the relevant fields, that’s not to say there aren’t 1) tin foil hat conspiracy theorists within every field or occupation, or 2) their interviews are being spliced, edited, or cut out of context, BOTH of which this site has been caught doing repeatedly.
This GR isn’t a case of “oh, 1 of our bloggers or opinion writers is a bit out there…” they are blatant, aggressive, site-wide astroturfing and conspiracy pushing. At least some sources try to provide both sides while entertaining extreme views, this is not one of them.
Again, zero offense to you. Sites like this are designed to draw in clicks, views, have great reach on social media, and many people end up sharing their posts. But we are better than that. All of us can help protect each other, because this misinformation campaign online is not new – it’s as old as language itself, just wearing a new coat these days. So please, lets help each other out and lift each other up! 
8 Likes
yeah, like i said, i don’t know these sites and have never even heard or seen them before. What happened was that someone sent me a similar article in French, and I found it enlightening and thought-provoking, although ofc i don’t personally agree with everything being said in it, but i did feel it was worth sharing, and since ofc i’m not gonna post a French article here (and to be fair, the source is probably as untrustworthy as these; i didn’t even check and wouldnt even know where it was from now), i just googled the title in English and grabbed 2 of the presented results there
ofc if those sites spread a lot of lies and BS that’s not going to help anything either
i would argue though that ofc there’s no doubt that 99.9% of conspiracy theories are just nutty craziness, but occasionally governments do lie to their ppl or try to cover up shady shit, and then whoever mentions that will also be accused of spreading conspiracy theories by those same governments and their propaganda
but that’s a different subject ofc, and i’m not saying that’s the case here either
5 Likes
3 Likes
If there is anything i can do to help you or anyone for that matter feel free to reach out
3 Likes
Ok. After doing some research in figuring out what the press briefing was about. I was pointed to this article.
The technology, developed by Columbia University’s Center for Radiological Research, uses lamps that emit continuous, low doses of a particular wavelength of ultraviolent light, known as far-UVC, which can kill viruses and bacteria without harming human skin, eyes and other tissues, as is the problem with conventional UV light.
That’s basically the important paragraph. Seems interesting as I had not heard about it. They are in production and awaiting FDA approval and cost $500 - $1,000. I couldn’t find a picture of it but I hope it doesn’t look ugly.
Please don’t swallow UV lightbulbs to cure coronavirus.
5 Likes
People saying that in public will only get said thing to come true.
4 Likes
Thanks for looking that up, that’s pretty cool. But not sure cheeto was aware of the specifics. Or at all really.
It’s too bad that the media and people over simplify and leave out key facts. (I bet it drives scientists nuts)
Another key point is here:
“…large-scale production, as well as approval by the Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection Agency, will take several months.”
3 Likes
Oh my goodness. Well this turned out interesting. Apparently the link I found was not the exact thing Trump mentioned. It was this product.
My last post was of a product meant to sterilize areas. This link was to use a specific UV light to help people.
Here’s the funny problem. Youtube removed the video on that biotech company’s youtube channel.
Of course my link has the same video on their webpage using their own embedded media player. So if you want to see what youtube censored, you can watch it there.
Then I found that their twitter was suspended…
https://twitter.com/MichaelCoudrey/status/1254255771774119936/photo/1
Then there was backlash, then it was reinstated.
https://twitter.com/BioscienceAytu
AYTU is a publicly traded biotech company with FDA approved products. It’s a real company. This is Chinese levels of censorship here. LOL. They tried to hide an entire company! The funny part, it’s not in production and seems to be in development. There was no reason to hide it since it’s not around.
All this just by talking about how to save people from the coronavirus. What a mess.
6 Likes
Well, just the way YouTube works is a very laissez-faire approach, mostly automated but also very reliant on viewers to flag videos for their attention. So, my guess is, either the automation saw multiple keywords linking their novel concept to COVID-19 conspiracy theories and made the gross generalization that it was misinformation, -or- it was flagged by multiple viewers that assumed they’ve never heard of viruses being treated with this approach before, therefore it must be a crackpot idea, therefore it must be removed. And YouTube faithfully complied. And people rightfully got angry. And YouTube fixed their mistake. shrug You try curating 300 hours of video/minute and come up with a better solution that never gets it wrong!
It’s a giant NothingBurger if you ask me. The drama, and the idea, both. Regarding the tech/idea: doubt it works but if it does, great.
5 Likes
TB kills 1.5 million ppl a year, and they expect an extra 1.4 million to die BECAUSE of the lockdown.
When the dust settles, it will become clear that millions and millions and millions will die because of the lockdowns (poverty and hunger caused by it in addition to health issues as a result of increased poverty).
4 Likes
TL;DW: this is the President of Tanzania; they took samples of fruits, trees, animals and sent them to laboratories as if those were swabs taken from humans; a lot came back positive
his conclusion: either the laboratories are falsifying the results, or the (imported) test kits have been designed in such a way that many come up positive regardless of what you test with them
4 Likes
Can you even get covid if you’ve already had covfefe?
6 Likes