[Genuine Realist]

Offered without comment. The rise in lower age groups is particularly interesting. 

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/noah-...=automated

Allsides.com rates Commentary Magazine as its lowest level confidence rating and its furthest available level to the right. https://www.allsides.com/news-source/com...media-bias

It's easy to offer something with no comment when the comment(ary) is built into the piece. Nothing wrong with sharing op-eds, but doing so is generally a tacit endorsement in the absence of appended commentary to the contrary. 

If we settled on the notion that the protests no doubt had some non-zero contribution to the surge, but were not a chief driver, would many take issue with such an assessment? From everything I've read, I am more worried about crowded indoor restaurants and bars than outdoor protests, clambakes, or any other large social gatherings where facemasks are worn... Sure, every large outdoor gathering with masks poses a risk, but my view is any form of outdoor, mask-wearing activity is substantially safer than anything indoor and without masks. 

...But I realize the algorithms don't like that take, because it doesn't tend to inflame. :P

I was more interested in the demographics of the spread. However, to dismiss the protests as a factor out of hand is nonsense.

The more pernicious effect, as I think of it, is in the presentation. Both protests and coverage placed the virus in such a secondary position - all nut disregarded - that it was easy to think that the issue is behind. Add to that the coincidence of staged reopening, and you have a lot of people who lst all sense of danger.

[Genuine Realist]

Offered without comment. The rise in lower age groups is particularly interesting. 

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/noah-...=automated

Allsides.com rates Commentary Magazine as its lowest level confidence rating and its furthest available level to the right. https://www.allsides.com/news-source/com...media-bias

It's easy to offer something with no comment when the comment(ary) is built into the piece. Nothing wrong with sharing op-eds, but doing so is generally a tacit endorsement in the absence of appended commentary to the contrary. 

If we settled on the notion that the protests no doubt had some non-zero contribution to the surge, but were not a chief driver, would many take issue with such an assessment? From everything I've read, I am more worried about crowded indoor restaurants and bars than outdoor protests, clambakes, or any other large social gatherings where facemasks are worn... Sure, every large outdoor gathering with masks poses a risk, but my view is any form of outdoor, mask-wearing activity is substantially safer than anything indoor and without masks. 

...But I realize the algorithms don't like that take, because it doesn't tend to inflame. :P

I was more interested in the demographics of the spread. However, to dismiss the protests as a factor out of hand is nonsense.

The more pernicious effect, as I think of it, is in the presentation. Both protests and coverage placed the virus in such a secondary position - all nut disregarded - that it was easy to think that the issue is behind. Add to that the coincidence of staged reopening, and you have a lot of people who lst all sense of danger.