"However, when neither Florida nor Iowa experienced negative consequences"
Florida obviously experienced a negative consequence. Virus deaths never went down very much, as the graph shows. You also fail to show an earlier part of the graph, where you would see an earlier peak in Florida while there was no peak in California (due to the measures taken). It has been discovered that the peak in California is due to a new, faster spreading variant. Eventually this variant will also become dominant in Florida, and likely will cause a new peak.
But hey, feel free to cherry-pick positive data while others cherry-pick negative data. Clearly you people are in cahoots with the media to create maximum confusion and disinformation. Most "news" on the coronavirus are clearly produced by people who hate facts and despise people. Some of you also want old people to die as quickly as possible. I'm fine with this, I'm telling all my friends that the purpose of many websites is to kill old people and that they should listen to me instead. And you know what? It's working. Congratulations, you've reached the zero trust point.
The Florida-California chart isn't "cherry-picking." It starts where it does to gauge the impact of Florida's full reopening and compare it to one of the most stringent lockdown regimes—that of California.
Your pointing out that Florida did worse *before* the full reopening actually undermines your implicit proposition that shutdowns are essential. To borrow an expression from sports talk radio, "you're making my argument."
Your suggestion that I hate facts is baseless, as the article is filled with sources and citation links. The notion that I want to "kill people" is of course preposterous on its face.
From from "despising people," I was motivated to write this article in part by my deep empathy for those who've suffered needlessly (layoffs, financial hardships, depression, suicides, overdoses, etc) as a consequence of shutdowns that have little basis in science and showcase policymakers' negligent disregard for unintended consequences.
Your reaction to this article reinforces that Stark Realities with Brian McGlinchey isn't for everyone. After all, I describe it as "Invigoratingly Unorthodox Perspectives for Intellectually Honest Readers." Thanks for coming by.
thank you sir this is an outstanding article. fair and factual. i like being able to read facts and come to my own conclusions. i don't need anyone lying to me or telling me what to believe, if they did this to my face i would forcibly remove them from my presence. i haven't watched cable news in nearly ten years or broadcast news for that matter. however, judging by the many children i see with their parents fully masked up in the pacific northwest deep in the woods on walks around no one I know Im in the minority. i have no hope for the american media the only hope can be that americans will look within their own selves/souls and ask questions that most of us seem are normal to ask, in this case is the media telling the truth about covid or are they manipulating me to be scared so big government can come in more on my rights? until this happens america will stay doomed. fat, lazy, rude and nasty.
Thank you, Matthew! Having graduated from Bucknell University, I enjoyed getting high marks from a different Bucknell. You've surely pulled up my average!
The charts of Covid-19 trends in Iowa, California and Florida are from the Twitter feed of @ianmSC. If you're interested in Covid and love charts and graphs, it's an account you'll find very interesting. https://twitter.com/ianmSC
-------
The media negativity study surprisingly found Fox News was the most negative of all. Given the presidential election overlapped with the pandemic, I'd have expected that crown to be worn by anyone else but Fox.
The study determined negativity by the presence of negative words within 10 lines of the words "Covid" or "coronavirus." One wonders if the explanation for Fox's top ranking reflects dynamics such as Fox quoting criticism of Trump, and then deflecting it with more negative words? Or was it simply old-fashioned "if it bleeds it leads" journalism?
Also noteworthy: media negativity dropped just after the election. Some may assume that indicates the media had been accentuating negatives to foster dissatisfaction with Trump, but perhaps it reflects positive vaccine news after the election.
This study is right. People heared tons of negative information about covid. They just focused on bad news and that is all.
You can get more wellness information at http://lireani.com/wellness-tips/.
"However, when neither Florida nor Iowa experienced negative consequences"
Florida obviously experienced a negative consequence. Virus deaths never went down very much, as the graph shows. You also fail to show an earlier part of the graph, where you would see an earlier peak in Florida while there was no peak in California (due to the measures taken). It has been discovered that the peak in California is due to a new, faster spreading variant. Eventually this variant will also become dominant in Florida, and likely will cause a new peak.
But hey, feel free to cherry-pick positive data while others cherry-pick negative data. Clearly you people are in cahoots with the media to create maximum confusion and disinformation. Most "news" on the coronavirus are clearly produced by people who hate facts and despise people. Some of you also want old people to die as quickly as possible. I'm fine with this, I'm telling all my friends that the purpose of many websites is to kill old people and that they should listen to me instead. And you know what? It's working. Congratulations, you've reached the zero trust point.
The Florida-California chart isn't "cherry-picking." It starts where it does to gauge the impact of Florida's full reopening and compare it to one of the most stringent lockdown regimes—that of California.
Your pointing out that Florida did worse *before* the full reopening actually undermines your implicit proposition that shutdowns are essential. To borrow an expression from sports talk radio, "you're making my argument."
Your suggestion that I hate facts is baseless, as the article is filled with sources and citation links. The notion that I want to "kill people" is of course preposterous on its face.
From from "despising people," I was motivated to write this article in part by my deep empathy for those who've suffered needlessly (layoffs, financial hardships, depression, suicides, overdoses, etc) as a consequence of shutdowns that have little basis in science and showcase policymakers' negligent disregard for unintended consequences.
Your reaction to this article reinforces that Stark Realities with Brian McGlinchey isn't for everyone. After all, I describe it as "Invigoratingly Unorthodox Perspectives for Intellectually Honest Readers." Thanks for coming by.
Thanks for reaming Doly a new Ahole.
thank you sir this is an outstanding article. fair and factual. i like being able to read facts and come to my own conclusions. i don't need anyone lying to me or telling me what to believe, if they did this to my face i would forcibly remove them from my presence. i haven't watched cable news in nearly ten years or broadcast news for that matter. however, judging by the many children i see with their parents fully masked up in the pacific northwest deep in the woods on walks around no one I know Im in the minority. i have no hope for the american media the only hope can be that americans will look within their own selves/souls and ask questions that most of us seem are normal to ask, in this case is the media telling the truth about covid or are they manipulating me to be scared so big government can come in more on my rights? until this happens america will stay doomed. fat, lazy, rude and nasty.
Thank you, Matthew! Having graduated from Bucknell University, I enjoyed getting high marks from a different Bucknell. You've surely pulled up my average!
*Stark Outtakes and Extras*
The charts of Covid-19 trends in Iowa, California and Florida are from the Twitter feed of @ianmSC. If you're interested in Covid and love charts and graphs, it's an account you'll find very interesting. https://twitter.com/ianmSC
-------
The media negativity study surprisingly found Fox News was the most negative of all. Given the presidential election overlapped with the pandemic, I'd have expected that crown to be worn by anyone else but Fox.
The study determined negativity by the presence of negative words within 10 lines of the words "Covid" or "coronavirus." One wonders if the explanation for Fox's top ranking reflects dynamics such as Fox quoting criticism of Trump, and then deflecting it with more negative words? Or was it simply old-fashioned "if it bleeds it leads" journalism?
Also noteworthy: media negativity dropped just after the election. Some may assume that indicates the media had been accentuating negatives to foster dissatisfaction with Trump, but perhaps it reflects positive vaccine news after the election.
What are your thoughts?
Here's another link to the study:
https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.dartmouth.edu/dist/4/2318/files/2021/03/Why-Is-All-Covid-News-Bad-News-3_22_21.pdf