[OutsiderFan]

This morning I saw Ali Velshi interview a former country health officer who resigned her position after threats, including to her family.  You might ask why this didn't get put in the health officials under threat thread, but that's not what the thrust of this post is about.

She said - and this is the first time I have heard this - there are some people sick with Covid, even about to be put on ventilators who won't accept they have Covid-19 because they think it is a hoax.  I just about spit out my Cheerios.  It's one thing to claim something is a hoax when you aren't personally experiencing it. It's quite another to deny you have it when you do.  I mean this is like being on fire and saying you aren't on fire.

This is a serious psychosis way more dangerous than Covid itself.  I always think there is some sort of rational solution to all problems, whether they are actually doable or regardless of whether they will realistically be put in place or not.  But this has me totally lost. How do you deal with people who are so detached from reality that they can't even grasp it when it is literally physically impacting them? And what can we do as a society to stop  people from developing this psychosis, or curing those who have it?

[OutsiderFan]

This morning I saw Ali Velshi interview a former country health officer who resigned her position after threats, including to her family.  You might ask why this didn't get put in the health officials under threat thread, but that's not what the thrust of this post is about.

She said - and this is the first time I have heard this - there are some people sick with Covid, even about to be put on ventilators who won't accept they have Covid-19 because they think it is a hoax.  I just about spit out my Cheerios.  It's one thing to claim something is a hoax when you aren't personally experiencing it. It's quite another to deny you have it when you do.  I mean this is like being on fire and saying you aren't on fire.

This is a serious psychosis way more dangerous than Covid itself.  I always think there is some sort of rational solution to all problems, whether they are actually doable or regardless of whether they will realistically be put in place or not.  But this has me totally lost. How do you deal with people who are so detached from reality that they can't even grasp it when it is literally physically impacting them? And what can we do as a society to stop  people from developing this psychosis, or curing those who have it?

[oregontim]

This morning I saw Ali Velshi interview a former country health officer who resigned her position after threats, including to her family.  You might ask why this didn't get put in the health officials under threat thread, but that's not what the thrust of this post is about.

She said - and this is the first time I have heard this - there are some people sick with Covid, even about to be put on ventilators who won't accept they have Covid-19 because they think it is a hoax.  I just about spit out my Cheerios.  It's one thing to claim something is a hoax when you aren't personally experiencing it. It's quite another to deny you have it when you do.  I mean this is like being on fire and saying you aren't on fire.

This is a serious psychosis way more dangerous than Covid itself.  I always think there is some sort of rational solution to all problems, whether they are actually doable or regardless of whether they will realistically be put in place or not.  But this has me totally lost. How do you deal with people who are so detached from reality that they can't even grasp it when it is literally physically impacting them? And what can we do as a society to stop  people from developing this psychosis, or curing those who have it?

"This is a serious psychosis way more dangerous than Covid itself." Yes, indeed.

It feels like it's reality in this country and these times. We have 50-60 million or so adults in this country who believe only what they see inside an enormous group-think bubble. Covid is a hoax. The last election was stolen. So-called "mainstream media" is a conspiracy. They are locked in so firmly that actual information doesn't reach them.

This is what we baby boomers imagined, as we grew up during the cold war, was happening inside the U.S.S.R. and China. It's similar to what we abhor about North Korea. State media broadcasting propaganda that is the people's only source of information. All day every day.

Except in this case, since we lost the equal time rules when news went cable, and then social media took over word of mouth with paid, fake word of mouth, it's happening inside the U.S.A. Tens of millions of people accept truth as told to them by Trumpism. Their belief, gullibility, and loyalty has had four years to fester. They don't know or care about the constitution or the history of democracy and rule of law. They care about white grievance and Roe v Wade.

I'm not (not my expertise) that professionals who deal with delusional people have learned that the least successful approach is to try to attack the delusion. It's taken as confirmation of conspiracy. Does that sound familiar? Do we have a collective delusion affecting tens of millions of our own citizens? How do we deal with that.

And, just like OF suggests here, the embedded popular denial of Covid is perhaps the deadliest, most outrageous, result. But not the only one. We have a country split in two, and no obvious path to bring us back together. I shudder to think what this means for the next generation.

[oregontim]

This morning I saw Ali Velshi interview a former country health officer who resigned her position after threats, including to her family.  You might ask why this didn't get put in the health officials under threat thread, but that's not what the thrust of this post is about.

She said - and this is the first time I have heard this - there are some people sick with Covid, even about to be put on ventilators who won't accept they have Covid-19 because they think it is a hoax.  I just about spit out my Cheerios.  It's one thing to claim something is a hoax when you aren't personally experiencing it. It's quite another to deny you have it when you do.  I mean this is like being on fire and saying you aren't on fire.

This is a serious psychosis way more dangerous than Covid itself.  I always think there is some sort of rational solution to all problems, whether they are actually doable or regardless of whether they will realistically be put in place or not.  But this has me totally lost. How do you deal with people who are so detached from reality that they can't even grasp it when it is literally physically impacting them? And what can we do as a society to stop  people from developing this psychosis, or curing those who have it?

"This is a serious psychosis way more dangerous than Covid itself." Yes, indeed.

It feels like it's reality in this country and these times. We have 50-60 million or so adults in this country who believe only what they see inside an enormous group-think bubble. Covid is a hoax. The last election was stolen. So-called "mainstream media" is a conspiracy. They are locked in so firmly that actual information doesn't reach them.

This is what we baby boomers imagined, as we grew up during the cold war, was happening inside the U.S.S.R. and China. It's similar to what we abhor about North Korea. State media broadcasting propaganda that is the people's only source of information. All day every day.

Except in this case, since we lost the equal time rules when news went cable, and then social media took over word of mouth with paid, fake word of mouth, it's happening inside the U.S.A. Tens of millions of people accept truth as told to them by Trumpism. Their belief, gullibility, and loyalty has had four years to fester. They don't know or care about the constitution or the history of democracy and rule of law. They care about white grievance and Roe v Wade.

I'm not (not my expertise) that professionals who deal with delusional people have learned that the least successful approach is to try to attack the delusion. It's taken as confirmation of conspiracy. Does that sound familiar? Do we have a collective delusion affecting tens of millions of our own citizens? How do we deal with that.

And, just like OF suggests here, the embedded popular denial of Covid is perhaps the deadliest, most outrageous, result. But not the only one. We have a country split in two, and no obvious path to bring us back together. I shudder to think what this means for the next generation.

[Goose]

And, just like OF suggests here, the embedded popular denial of Covid is perhaps the deadliest, most outrageous, result. But not the only one. We have a country split in two, and no obvious path to bring us back together. I shudder to think what this means for the next generation.

FWIW, I think it is a severe error to believe that a large percentage of the people who voted for Trump also believe COVID-19 does not exist. The latter group is a tiny minority. There is a much larger group that believes COVID-19 is overblown, and not as much a danger to them as they are told. They are probably correct in that, at least as far as the threat to them personally goes. They don't fear having a heart attack and not being able to get into an overly full hospital. This idea is not confined to the USA. Look at Italy, or France for instance. Same issue. It would appear that this Thanksgiving, air travel is only going to be off by 10% from last year. Are all those people flying Trump supporters?

The divide in our country is real, and it does none of us any good to identify the "other side" as the most extreme element of said group. There are definite reasons why there are many people who voted for Trump that are not crazy. I believe those people are misguided, but it is an error to believe they live in a echo chamber. I find it disturbing that the attitude seems to be "Everybody who doesn't see it my way is crazy, a fool, or both". IMHO, that sentiment is what has created the divide in the nation. Unfortunately, it appears we have reached the point most people on both sides believe that. There is the most serious problem.

[Goose]

And, just like OF suggests here, the embedded popular denial of Covid is perhaps the deadliest, most outrageous, result. But not the only one. We have a country split in two, and no obvious path to bring us back together. I shudder to think what this means for the next generation.

FWIW, I think it is a severe error to believe that a large percentage of the people who voted for Trump also believe COVID-19 does not exist. The latter group is a tiny minority. There is a much larger group that believes COVID-19 is overblown, and not as much a danger to them as they are told. They are probably correct in that, at least as far as the threat to them personally goes. They don't fear having a heart attack and not being able to get into an overly full hospital. This idea is not confined to the USA. Look at Italy, or France for instance. Same issue. It would appear that this Thanksgiving, air travel is only going to be off by 10% from last year. Are all those people flying Trump supporters?

The divide in our country is real, and it does none of us any good to identify the "other side" as the most extreme element of said group. There are definite reasons why there are many people who voted for Trump that are not crazy. I believe those people are misguided, but it is an error to believe they live in a echo chamber. I find it disturbing that the attitude seems to be "Everybody who doesn't see it my way is crazy, a fool, or both". IMHO, that sentiment is what has created the divide in the nation. Unfortunately, it appears we have reached the point most people on both sides believe that. There is the most serious problem.

[OutsiderFan]

This isn't a sides issue.

This is a some people are mentally so broken that they are literally incapable of concluding reality is reality. What would you say if you were a doc who did a PCR test on someone to see if they have Covid-19, saw it was positive, and then took a chest x-ray of their infected lungs, to show the patient they have it, and their reply is "you are lying, Covid is a hoax, I do not have it."

How can we function in a society with a number of people totally incapable of admitting to what is actually the reality in front of them? I assume we can't, thus my question how do we fix it?

[OutsiderFan]

This isn't a sides issue.

This is a some people are mentally so broken that they are literally incapable of concluding reality is reality. What would you say if you were a doc who did a PCR test on someone to see if they have Covid-19, saw it was positive, and then took a chest x-ray of their infected lungs, to show the patient they have it, and their reply is "you are lying, Covid is a hoax, I do not have it."

How can we function in a society with a number of people totally incapable of admitting to what is actually the reality in front of them? I assume we can't, thus my question how do we fix it?

[DenverCard]

A few comments and a link to an article that gets at another factors likely at play in multifactorial, far-from-new-in-onset polarized thinking that concerns us all.

OutsiderFan, props for repeatedly starting new threads that get us all thinking.  Indeed, what do we do about the divide that at best makes it extremely difficult for our federal government to help solve our societal problems (starting with the pandemic and its economic effects but many other issues as well), and at worst is a threat to our system of government?

Oregontim, I completely identify with your concerns.  I remember debates about all manner of topics in my fraternity.  We had a wide spectrum of political beliefs represented in the members, about which two features stand out.  One, the focus was on the best way to approach problems, as the facts were largely agreed upon.  Two, the debates were friendly, and did not sour any relationships.  Maybe that type of situation is still found in colleges, but ours is a very, very different society now than 35 years ago.

Goose, Notwithstanding my fears, I try to reassure myself that you are right: that one is prone to see the adversarial party as largely reflected in its extreme representations.  The values of those in my heavily Democratic part of the city have much in common with heavily Republican areas elsewhere in the metropolitan area.

Finally, with respect to the divide in beliefs surrounding Covid, in addition to Goose's point about those who simply do not see much risk from the virus, there is the effect of motivated reasoning related to wanting the virus to be benign and/or easily dealt with, as addressed in this article.  Nothing really new in comparing Trump to a charlatan, and yet it helped me seen things in a slightly new light.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi...es/617051/

[DenverCard]

A few comments and a link to an article that gets at another factors likely at play in multifactorial, far-from-new-in-onset polarized thinking that concerns us all.

OutsiderFan, props for repeatedly starting new threads that get us all thinking.  Indeed, what do we do about the divide that at best makes it extremely difficult for our federal government to help solve our societal problems (starting with the pandemic and its economic effects but many other issues as well), and at worst is a threat to our system of government?

Oregontim, I completely identify with your concerns.  I remember debates about all manner of topics in my fraternity.  We had a wide spectrum of political beliefs represented in the members, about which two features stand out.  One, the focus was on the best way to approach problems, as the facts were largely agreed upon.  Two, the debates were friendly, and did not sour any relationships.  Maybe that type of situation is still found in colleges, but ours is a very, very different society now than 35 years ago.

Goose, Notwithstanding my fears, I try to reassure myself that you are right: that one is prone to see the adversarial party as largely reflected in its extreme representations.  The values of those in my heavily Democratic part of the city have much in common with heavily Republican areas elsewhere in the metropolitan area.

Finally, with respect to the divide in beliefs surrounding Covid, in addition to Goose's point about those who simply do not see much risk from the virus, there is the effect of motivated reasoning related to wanting the virus to be benign and/or easily dealt with, as addressed in this article.  Nothing really new in comparing Trump to a charlatan, and yet it helped me seen things in a slightly new light.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi...es/617051/

[Goose]

There are a couple of factors in play here that we have seen throughout history. When there are events that affect all of society adversely, a certain part of the population responds by going into denial. They simply can't face the fact that society has relatively little control over what is happening to it. Another part of the society looks for simple solutions. Many of the solutions they pick out are absurd, but they stick to them because there is nothing else, as they see it. Yet another part of the society looks for somebody to blame. There is a conspiracy going on that is responsible for the entire situation. This happens time after time thought history. Doesn't make any of this a good idea, but it is what happens.

Fortunately, few (if any) people on this board fall into any of the above categories. We do hear lots of people saying "follow the science", which is fine as far as it goes, but public policy is not science, it is politics. Therein lies the rub. I can make a pretty good argument that the science behind "the hammer and the dance" was correct, but our society simply failed to execute. That isn't sciences fault, but it can sure convince people that following the science is futile given the results. The SIP was supposed to allow us to control the disease. We didn't, for reasons that have nothing (or little at least) to do with science and everything to do with politics/government. Given that, people may fall into one of the three previously mentioned groups or into a state of dissonance, where they kind of accept the science but it doesn't really control their behavior. That is where I am afraid we are now. The vaccine better arrive soon is all I can say.

[Goose]

There are a couple of factors in play here that we have seen throughout history. When there are events that affect all of society adversely, a certain part of the population responds by going into denial. They simply can't face the fact that society has relatively little control over what is happening to it. Another part of the society looks for simple solutions. Many of the solutions they pick out are absurd, but they stick to them because there is nothing else, as they see it. Yet another part of the society looks for somebody to blame. There is a conspiracy going on that is responsible for the entire situation. This happens time after time thought history. Doesn't make any of this a good idea, but it is what happens.

Fortunately, few (if any) people on this board fall into any of the above categories. We do hear lots of people saying "follow the science", which is fine as far as it goes, but public policy is not science, it is politics. Therein lies the rub. I can make a pretty good argument that the science behind "the hammer and the dance" was correct, but our society simply failed to execute. That isn't sciences fault, but it can sure convince people that following the science is futile given the results. The SIP was supposed to allow us to control the disease. We didn't, for reasons that have nothing (or little at least) to do with science and everything to do with politics/government. Given that, people may fall into one of the three previously mentioned groups or into a state of dissonance, where they kind of accept the science but it doesn't really control their behavior. That is where I am afraid we are now. The vaccine better arrive soon is all I can say.

[Genuine Realist]

There are a couple of factors in play here that we have seen throughout history. When there are events that affect all of society adversely, a certain part of the population responds by going into denial. They simply can't face the fact that society has relatively little control over what is happening to it. Another part of the society looks for simple solutions. Many of the solutions they pick out are absurd, but they stick to them because there is nothing else, as they see it. Yet another part of the society looks for somebody to blame. There is a conspiracy going on that is responsible for the entire situation. This happens time after time thought history. Doesn't make any of this a good idea, but it is what happens.

Fortunately, few (if any) people on this board fall into any of the above categories. We do hear lots of people saying "follow the science", which is fine as far as it goes, but public policy is not science, it is politics. Therein lies the rub. I can make a pretty good argument that the science behind "the hammer and the dance" was correct, but our society simply failed to execute. That isn't sciences fault, but it can sure convince people that following the science is futile given the results. The SIP was supposed to allow us to control the disease. We didn't, for reasons that have nothing (or little at least) to do with science and everything to do with politics/government. Given that, people may fall into one of the three previously mentioned groups or into a state of dissonance, where they kind of accept the science but it doesn't really control their behavior. That is where I am afraid we are now. The vaccine better arrive soon is all I can say.

What comes to my mind when I read what seems to me to be an entirely anecdotal account by a single county health worker, is the 'Covid parties' furor of a few months ago, which had a brief credibility before it turned out to be almost completely urban rumor. A number of health officials had heard of them - no one had actually encountered one. I think pretty much the same thing is going to turn out to have happened here - maybe one ambulatory schizophrenic, maybe someone who wanted to create scandal, maybe no one at all, something  that one doctor repeated to another - just a chance remark misreported, maybe even a joke taken literally. Such an attitude expressed by a person on a ventilator - and by the way, how many are on ventilators these days? - is counterintuitive in the extreme. I didn't believe 'covid parties' for a lot of good reasons, and i don't believe this, for different good reasons.

I'm going to mount the soapbox here for a moment, and if I'm pompous in the process, I'll take the risk. The danger of fake news,which abounds, isn't the misinformation your party opponents fall for. It's the illusions you fall for yourself. I remember long ago some historian playfully describing the actual attitudes of the Founders' generation to freedom of religion - leave me free to practice what I believe and don't come round with hat superstitious nonsense of yours. Fake news is somewhat the same - leave off that foolishness of yours, but MY beliefs are built on solid rock. Well  . . . it's that sort of thing that leads to gritted teeth defenses of Trump - because fake news from the opposition began even before he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

It's our own illusions, and the tendency not to examine them too closely, that are the real challenge for most of us in living. The movie 'The Big Short' began with a marvellous quote from Mark Twain that I have never heard before, but which has become a staple:

It ain't what you don't know that gets you in trouble.
It's what you know for sure that just ain't so. 

(BTW, the posters that could benefit most from this little sermon have already got me on ignore. Which figures.)

[Genuine Realist]

There are a couple of factors in play here that we have seen throughout history. When there are events that affect all of society adversely, a certain part of the population responds by going into denial. They simply can't face the fact that society has relatively little control over what is happening to it. Another part of the society looks for simple solutions. Many of the solutions they pick out are absurd, but they stick to them because there is nothing else, as they see it. Yet another part of the society looks for somebody to blame. There is a conspiracy going on that is responsible for the entire situation. This happens time after time thought history. Doesn't make any of this a good idea, but it is what happens.

Fortunately, few (if any) people on this board fall into any of the above categories. We do hear lots of people saying "follow the science", which is fine as far as it goes, but public policy is not science, it is politics. Therein lies the rub. I can make a pretty good argument that the science behind "the hammer and the dance" was correct, but our society simply failed to execute. That isn't sciences fault, but it can sure convince people that following the science is futile given the results. The SIP was supposed to allow us to control the disease. We didn't, for reasons that have nothing (or little at least) to do with science and everything to do with politics/government. Given that, people may fall into one of the three previously mentioned groups or into a state of dissonance, where they kind of accept the science but it doesn't really control their behavior. That is where I am afraid we are now. The vaccine better arrive soon is all I can say.

What comes to my mind when I read what seems to me to be an entirely anecdotal account by a single county health worker, is the 'Covid parties' furor of a few months ago, which had a brief credibility before it turned out to be almost completely urban rumor. A number of health officials had heard of them - no one had actually encountered one. I think pretty much the same thing is going to turn out to have happened here - maybe one ambulatory schizophrenic, maybe someone who wanted to create scandal, maybe no one at all, something  that one doctor repeated to another - just a chance remark misreported, maybe even a joke taken literally. Such an attitude expressed by a person on a ventilator - and by the way, how many are on ventilators these days? - is counterintuitive in the extreme. I didn't believe 'covid parties' for a lot of good reasons, and i don't believe this, for different good reasons.

I'm going to mount the soapbox here for a moment, and if I'm pompous in the process, I'll take the risk. The danger of fake news,which abounds, isn't the misinformation your party opponents fall for. It's the illusions you fall for yourself. I remember long ago some historian playfully describing the actual attitudes of the Founders' generation to freedom of religion - leave me free to practice what I believe and don't come round with hat superstitious nonsense of yours. Fake news is somewhat the same - leave off that foolishness of yours, but MY beliefs are built on solid rock. Well  . . . it's that sort of thing that leads to gritted teeth defenses of Trump - because fake news from the opposition began even before he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

It's our own illusions, and the tendency not to examine them too closely, that are the real challenge for most of us in living. The movie 'The Big Short' began with a marvellous quote from Mark Twain that I have never heard before, but which has become a staple:

It ain't what you don't know that gets you in trouble.
It's what you know for sure that just ain't so. 

(BTW, the posters that could benefit most from this little sermon have already got me on ignore. Which figures.)

[oregontim]

I'm going to mount the soapbox here for a moment, and if I'm pompous in the process, I'll take the risk. The danger of fake news,which abounds, isn't the misinformation your party opponents fall for. It's the illusions you fall for yourself. I remember long ago some historian playfully describing the actual attitudes of the Founders' generation to freedom of religion - leave me free to practice what I believe and don't come round with hat superstitious nonsense of yours. Fake news is somewhat the same - leave off that foolishness of yours, but MY beliefs are built on solid rock. Well  . . . it's that sort of thing that leads to gritted teeth defenses of Trump - because fake news from the opposition began even before he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

I object to the false equivalence. The problem of attacking the legitimate press and fact- and source-based reporting, professional journalism, is not symmetrical. There’s a movement in this country that attacks facts straight on, with intention, and malice. Both Sides Now is a great folk song, not a political reality. IMO. Pretending equal attacks on truth is part of the problem. That’s a talking point of one side.

[oregontim]

I'm going to mount the soapbox here for a moment, and if I'm pompous in the process, I'll take the risk. The danger of fake news,which abounds, isn't the misinformation your party opponents fall for. It's the illusions you fall for yourself. I remember long ago some historian playfully describing the actual attitudes of the Founders' generation to freedom of religion - leave me free to practice what I believe and don't come round with hat superstitious nonsense of yours. Fake news is somewhat the same - leave off that foolishness of yours, but MY beliefs are built on solid rock. Well  . . . it's that sort of thing that leads to gritted teeth defenses of Trump - because fake news from the opposition began even before he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

I object to the false equivalence. The problem of attacking the legitimate press and fact- and source-based reporting, professional journalism, is not symmetrical. There’s a movement in this country that attacks facts straight on, with intention, and malice. Both Sides Now is a great folk song, not a political reality. IMO. Pretending equal attacks on truth is part of the problem. That’s a talking point of one side.

[Genuine Realist]

I'm going to mount the soapbox here for a moment, and if I'm pompous in the process, I'll take the risk. The danger of fake news,which abounds, isn't the misinformation your party opponents fall for. It's the illusions you fall for yourself. I remember long ago some historian playfully describing the actual attitudes of the Founders' generation to freedom of religion - leave me free to practice what I believe and don't come round with hat superstitious nonsense of yours. Fake news is somewhat the same - leave off that foolishness of yours, but MY beliefs are built on solid rock. Well  . . . it's that sort of thing that leads to gritted teeth defenses of Trump - because fake news from the opposition began even before he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

I object to the false equivalence. The problem of attacking the legitimate press and fact- and source-based reporting, professional journalism, is not symmetrical. There’s a movement in this country that attacks facts straight on, with intention, and malice. Both Sides Now is a great folk song, not a political reality. IMO. Pretending equal attacks on truth is part of the problem. That’s a talking point of one side.

Your belief in the professionalism of the press is somewhat idiosyncratic these days. Most of the rest of us have noticed the dramatic falling off in the standards of the MSM in the last generation. 

Per a Gallup Poll two months ago, only 9% of Americans trust the mass media implicitly. Well over half have little confidence, and a third have no confidence at all. It is the media that has done this to itself over two generations. 

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

[Genuine Realist]

I'm going to mount the soapbox here for a moment, and if I'm pompous in the process, I'll take the risk. The danger of fake news,which abounds, isn't the misinformation your party opponents fall for. It's the illusions you fall for yourself. I remember long ago some historian playfully describing the actual attitudes of the Founders' generation to freedom of religion - leave me free to practice what I believe and don't come round with hat superstitious nonsense of yours. Fake news is somewhat the same - leave off that foolishness of yours, but MY beliefs are built on solid rock. Well  . . . it's that sort of thing that leads to gritted teeth defenses of Trump - because fake news from the opposition began even before he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

I object to the false equivalence. The problem of attacking the legitimate press and fact- and source-based reporting, professional journalism, is not symmetrical. There’s a movement in this country that attacks facts straight on, with intention, and malice. Both Sides Now is a great folk song, not a political reality. IMO. Pretending equal attacks on truth is part of the problem. That’s a talking point of one side.

Your belief in the professionalism of the press is somewhat idiosyncratic these days. Most of the rest of us have noticed the dramatic falling off in the standards of the MSM in the last generation. 

Per a Gallup Poll two months ago, only 9% of Americans trust the mass media implicitly. Well over half have little confidence, and a third have no confidence at all. It is the media that has done this to itself over two generations. 

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

[teejers1]

Per a Gallup Poll two months ago, only 9% of Americans trust the mass media implicitly. Well over half have little confidence, and a third have no confidence at all. It is the media that has done this to itself over two generations. 

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

I think it may be about survival.  In this very noisy Internet world, only the screamers get noticed/heard.  Straight down the middle - what we generally grew up with - didn't/doesn't sell.  Thus, "journalism" as we knew it, falls by the wayside.

And a poster here chastised me for using the term Agenda-Driven MSM, pointing out that all outlets have an agenda and pursue that, such that the term "MSM" cannot be equated with a single agenda.  That gave me pause, and I realized that my proxy for MSM were the outlets that I considered the leaders in doing it right back in the day:  WaPo, NYT, and CNN.  Those, especially lately, have been agenda-driven.  But that doesn't mean other outlets aren't counterbalancing that - it's just that I'm not familiar with any of them, beyond Fox News, which is a fly by on the dial.  

In truth, I'm part of the "well over half" - although as noted previously, a law school buddy said he thought Bloomberg played it pretty straight.  [Probably should check them out].

[teejers1]

Per a Gallup Poll two months ago, only 9% of Americans trust the mass media implicitly. Well over half have little confidence, and a third have no confidence at all. It is the media that has done this to itself over two generations. 

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

I think it may be about survival.  In this very noisy Internet world, only the screamers get noticed/heard.  Straight down the middle - what we generally grew up with - didn't/doesn't sell.  Thus, "journalism" as we knew it, falls by the wayside.

And a poster here chastised me for using the term Agenda-Driven MSM, pointing out that all outlets have an agenda and pursue that, such that the term "MSM" cannot be equated with a single agenda.  That gave me pause, and I realized that my proxy for MSM were the outlets that I considered the leaders in doing it right back in the day:  WaPo, NYT, and CNN.  Those, especially lately, have been agenda-driven.  But that doesn't mean other outlets aren't counterbalancing that - it's just that I'm not familiar with any of them, beyond Fox News, which is a fly by on the dial.  

In truth, I'm part of the "well over half" - although as noted previously, a law school buddy said he thought Bloomberg played it pretty straight.  [Probably should check them out].

[oregontim]

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

Interesting examples ... both CBS and Fox are on this generally respected media bias chart, which is updated regularly (this is the latest). I wonder who “most of us” are. 

[oregontim]

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

Interesting examples ... both CBS and Fox are on this generally respected media bias chart, which is updated regularly (this is the latest). I wonder who “most of us” are. 

[teejers1]

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

Interesting examples ... both CBS and Fox are on this generally respected media bias chart, which is updated regularly (this is the latest). I wonder who “most of us” are. 

Thank goodness for The Weather Channel!

I am out of touch with most of the media - as I haven't even heard of a bunch of the names on the graph, let alone watched/read them.

[teejers1]

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

Interesting examples ... both CBS and Fox are on this generally respected media bias chart, which is updated regularly (this is the latest). I wonder who “most of us” are. 

Thank goodness for The Weather Channel!

I am out of touch with most of the media - as I haven't even heard of a bunch of the names on the graph, let alone watched/read them.

[OutsiderFan]

Where is The Epoch Times on the chart?  Anything endorsed by Steve Bannon can't be taken seriously.

[OutsiderFan]

Where is The Epoch Times on the chart?  Anything endorsed by Steve Bannon can't be taken seriously.

[chrisk]

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

Interesting examples ... both CBS and Fox are on this generally respected media bias chart, which is updated regularly (this is the latest). I wonder who “most of us” are. 

Thank goodness for The Weather Channel!

I am out of touch with most of the media - as I haven't even heard of a bunch of the names on the graph, let alone watched/read them.

Trump supporters who are not thrilled with Fox’s less than full-throated support for Trump are flocking to NewsMax, run by Trump friend Chris Ruddy. N a few months, it’s top show has gone from 58,000 to 1.1 million viewers.

[chrisk]

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

Interesting examples ... both CBS and Fox are on this generally respected media bias chart, which is updated regularly (this is the latest). I wonder who “most of us” are. 

Thank goodness for The Weather Channel!

I am out of touch with most of the media - as I haven't even heard of a bunch of the names on the graph, let alone watched/read them.

Trump supporters who are not thrilled with Fox’s less than full-throated support for Trump are flocking to NewsMax, run by Trump friend Chris Ruddy. N a few months, it’s top show has gone from 58,000 to 1.1 million viewers.

[OutsiderFan]

I am hoping the Biden Administration in conjunction with the U.S. Military, FBI, and FCC prop up an anti-disinformation and propaganda operation. As stated in the original post of this thread, the disinformation operations in the U.S. and other places in the world are more dangerous than any virus. 

The fairness doctrine must be re-employed and we must have disclaimers to indicate what is opinion and what is the product of real journalistic standards. I find it completely absurd that the "F word" can't be said on TV, but spewing propaganda and sewing unfounded conspiracies is totally fine.

[OutsiderFan]

I am hoping the Biden Administration in conjunction with the U.S. Military, FBI, and FCC prop up an anti-disinformation and propaganda operation. As stated in the original post of this thread, the disinformation operations in the U.S. and other places in the world are more dangerous than any virus. 

The fairness doctrine must be re-employed and we must have disclaimers to indicate what is opinion and what is the product of real journalistic standards. I find it completely absurd that the "F word" can't be said on TV, but spewing propaganda and sewing unfounded conspiracies is totally fine.

[Goose]

I am hoping the Biden Administration in conjunction with the U.S. Military, FBI, and FCC prop up an anti-disinformation and propaganda operation.

Obviously their first targets should be Bearinsider and ReignOfTroy, as their content is clearly disinformation and propaganda. On a serious note, I hope the Biden Administration (and all other administrations) target giving the public enough information to immunize them against propaganda. Efforts to eliminate propaganda lead either to a police state and nothing but propaganda from one side or fizzle out when the government realizes it is impossible to distinguish propaganda from truth in many cases.

[Goose]

I am hoping the Biden Administration in conjunction with the U.S. Military, FBI, and FCC prop up an anti-disinformation and propaganda operation.

Obviously their first targets should be Bearinsider and ReignOfTroy, as their content is clearly disinformation and propaganda. On a serious note, I hope the Biden Administration (and all other administrations) target giving the public enough information to immunize them against propaganda. Efforts to eliminate propaganda lead either to a police state and nothing but propaganda from one side or fizzle out when the government realizes it is impossible to distinguish propaganda from truth in many cases.

[Farm93]

I am hoping the Biden Administration in conjunction with the U.S. Military, FBI, and FCC prop up an anti-disinformation and propaganda operation. As stated in the original post of this thread, the disinformation operations in the U.S. and other places in the world are more dangerous than any virus. 

The fairness doctrine must be re-employed and we must have disclaimers to indicate what is opinion and what is the product of real journalistic standards. I find it completely absurd that the "F word" can't be said on TV, but spewing propaganda and sewing unfounded conspiracies is totally fine.

This may sound good, but I sure hope the Biden Administration, the government and military don't do anything on free speech.   That's very treacherous ground for a government to patrol, and in some nations the end result has not been favorable.

The embrace of alternate facts creates a heap of challenges, but trying to police or suppress that speech feels dangerous to me.

I would prefer the government leaders step up and say publicly what they acknowledge privately on a lot of these subjects rather than embrace conspiracies theories if it works for their short term interests.

There is also no need to manage or police Twitter or Facebook as there will always be a new company or alternative platform willing to traffic in conspiracies if the market is big enough to generate revenue.

For example, ponzi scams and pyramid schemes probably would do very well pushing their programs to those in the latest conspiracy ecosystems.  That group seems likely to believe almost anything that sounds good.  What a great self-selection opportunity for those able to weave amazing stories to an audience highly unlikely to investigate the veracity of the information on their own.

[Farm93]

I am hoping the Biden Administration in conjunction with the U.S. Military, FBI, and FCC prop up an anti-disinformation and propaganda operation. As stated in the original post of this thread, the disinformation operations in the U.S. and other places in the world are more dangerous than any virus. 

The fairness doctrine must be re-employed and we must have disclaimers to indicate what is opinion and what is the product of real journalistic standards. I find it completely absurd that the "F word" can't be said on TV, but spewing propaganda and sewing unfounded conspiracies is totally fine.

This may sound good, but I sure hope the Biden Administration, the government and military don't do anything on free speech.   That's very treacherous ground for a government to patrol, and in some nations the end result has not been favorable.

The embrace of alternate facts creates a heap of challenges, but trying to police or suppress that speech feels dangerous to me.

I would prefer the government leaders step up and say publicly what they acknowledge privately on a lot of these subjects rather than embrace conspiracies theories if it works for their short term interests.

There is also no need to manage or police Twitter or Facebook as there will always be a new company or alternative platform willing to traffic in conspiracies if the market is big enough to generate revenue.

For example, ponzi scams and pyramid schemes probably would do very well pushing their programs to those in the latest conspiracy ecosystems.  That group seems likely to believe almost anything that sounds good.  What a great self-selection opportunity for those able to weave amazing stories to an audience highly unlikely to investigate the veracity of the information on their own.

[Mick]

Where is The Epoch Times on the chart?  Anything endorsed by Steve Bannon can't be taken seriously.

It is in the "Mixed Reliability" category.  On the right.  In the same category of reliability as Salon, Daily Beast, Slate, CNN TV, according to the chart.

[Mick]

Where is The Epoch Times on the chart?  Anything endorsed by Steve Bannon can't be taken seriously.

It is in the "Mixed Reliability" category.  On the right.  In the same category of reliability as Salon, Daily Beast, Slate, CNN TV, according to the chart.

[fullmetal]

I hate that chart with the passion of a thousand suns.

"Hyper-partisan left" really means doubling down on social justice/single-payer healthcare, advocating for indigenous land return, treating the poor/mentally ill with humanity, elimination of the carceral state, and reparations.

"Hyper-partisan right" is borderline anti-Semitic, nativist, borderline-white supremacist, ignorant of reality, and blatant monetization of conspiracy theories founded on ignorance and emotional manipulation.

THEY ARE NOT OPPOSITES.

[fullmetal]

I hate that chart with the passion of a thousand suns.

"Hyper-partisan left" really means doubling down on social justice/single-payer healthcare, advocating for indigenous land return, treating the poor/mentally ill with humanity, elimination of the carceral state, and reparations.

"Hyper-partisan right" is borderline anti-Semitic, nativist, borderline-white supremacist, ignorant of reality, and blatant monetization of conspiracy theories founded on ignorance and emotional manipulation.

THEY ARE NOT OPPOSITES.

[Griffins78]

I hate that chart with the passion of a thousand suns.

"Hyper-partisan left" really means doubling down on social justice/single-payer healthcare, advocating for indigenous land return, treating the poor/mentally ill with humanity, elimination of the carceral state, and reparations.

"Hyper-partisan right" is borderline anti-Semitic, nativist, borderline-white supremacist, ignorant of reality, and blatant monetization of conspiracy theories founded on ignorance and emotional manipulation.

THEY ARE NOT OPPOSITES.

I agree!

[Griffins78]

I hate that chart with the passion of a thousand suns.

"Hyper-partisan left" really means doubling down on social justice/single-payer healthcare, advocating for indigenous land return, treating the poor/mentally ill with humanity, elimination of the carceral state, and reparations.

"Hyper-partisan right" is borderline anti-Semitic, nativist, borderline-white supremacist, ignorant of reality, and blatant monetization of conspiracy theories founded on ignorance and emotional manipulation.

THEY ARE NOT OPPOSITES.

I agree!