Good Thing It's Not Political

[abbey1227]

Science
Baltimore Sun

Commentary: Why are so many Republicans refusing vaccination? Because Russia is telling them to

[Prometheus]

Without a link, there's really nothing to comment on. As you have pointed out: headlines are bullshit.

[abbey1227]

Aug 2, 2021 16:32:54 GMT Prometheus said:

Without a link, there's really nothing to comment on. As you have pointed out: headlines are bullshit.

One can still find the humor in them and enjoy a good laugh

[merh]

Aug 2, 2021 16:32:54 GMT Prometheus said:

Without a link, there's really nothing to comment on. As you have pointed out: headlines are bullshit.

Copy title, search.

news.yahoo.com/commentary-why-many-republicans-refusing-102200925.html

Baltimore Sun
Commentary: Why are so many Republicans refusing vaccination? Because Russia is telling them to
Lee Mcintyre, The Baltimore Sun
Mon, August 2, 2021, 3:22 AM·3 min read

What is the difference between doubt and distrust? Doubt can be overcome by evidence. Distrust cannot.

According to a recent Washington Post poll, refusal to get the COVID-19 vaccine has now become completely politicized in the USA. Among Democrats, 93% report that they’ve already gotten at least one shot or are likely to, compared with only 49% of Republicans.

Why so much refusal to vaccinate among the GOP? Because they’re being targeted by a deliberate campaign of disinformation. Science denial isn’t a mistake, it’s a purposeful lie.

Despite ample data that the vaccines are safe, false stories circulate on the internet claiming that scientists are lying to us, that the vaccines can make you infertile, that they contain microchips, that they can alter your DNA. Do these worries arise organically? Maybe some do. But such disinformation is often intentionally created to serve someone’s financial, political or ideological interests.

Among those with something to gain is the Russian government, which is diligently working to undermine confidence in the vaccines as part of its goal of destabilizing American society. It has been spreading misinformation for years on a host of other virus-related topics, including the flu and Ebola. From there, it’s a short hop to having their message amplified by conspiracy-embracing, right-wing media, whether witting or not, and by the soulless churn of algorithms on social media.

And it doesn’t take many people amplifying a false message to have an outsize effect. According to a recent PBS story, 65% of the anti-vaccine propaganda on Twitter was due to just 12 people, some of whom are profiting from the creation of bogus skepticism through the promotion of alternative treatments and cures.

The targets for all of this disinformation are gullible people, who are already feeling defensive and threatened and now feel justified in questioning scientific consensus. Of course, they don’t get anything out of it. Most of the people we call science deniers are just pawns of others who profit from their credulity or ideological allegiance. And in the case of COVID vaccine refusal, those pawns are dying. According to an Associated Press analysis of CDC data, 99.2% of COVID deaths in the U.S. are now among the unvaccinated.



What is the most effective way to fight back? Certainly, it would be good to inform people who are being duped just exactly who is doing the duping. For those who are already disposed to believe in conspiracy theories, here is a real live conspiracy! (Of course, as Mark Twain reportedly said, it’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they’ve been fooled).

What doesn’t work? Telling a science denier they’re wrong. Just providing facts and evidence won’t work. The antidote to denial is not more (potentially untrustworthy) information, but to increase trust.

The anecdotal literature shows that when someone gives up their denialist beliefs it is almost always a result of personal engagement. Within this context, trust grows and facts can be effective.

But can it work with strangers?



Longtime GOP pollster Frank Luntz conducted a focus group to try to find an effective message to get people to take their COVID shots. Here’s what he found worked: listening, patience and respect. The participants — all of whom started out reluctant to take the vaccine — began to trust him, and within that context he provided information that ultimately led all 19 of them to say that they were more likely to take their shots.

In researching my forthcoming book, “How to talk to a science denier,” I found similar tactics were effective not only on anti-vaxxers, but also climate deniers and others.

Perhaps the answer to our current crisis is not more evidence, but more engagement. Rather than retreat to our favorite news silos, we might try interacting with those who think differently than we do. In an era of polarization, wouldn’t it be great if we learned to talk to — and trust — one another again?

It goes back to the whole people who trust Facebook for their "facts"

If it had said "China", ABBEY would be all in.
He doesn't believe in Cozibear or any of that Russian disinformation hacking

[abbey1227]

Aug 3, 2021 2:26:52 GMT merh said:

It goes back to the whole people who trust Facebook for their "facts"

If it had said "China", ABBEY would be all in.
He doesn't believe in Cozibear or any of that Russian disinformation hacking

Just to clarify......... I don't doubt they all get up to hacking, spying and whatnot....... I just don't buy into it swaying my opinions of principles.

It hasn't worked on you, right?  

[merh]

Aug 3, 2021 2:40:17 GMT abbey1227 said:

Aug 3, 2021 2:26:52 GMT merh said:

It goes back to the whole people who trust Facebook for their "facts"

If it had said "China", ABBEY would be all in.
He doesn't believe in Cozibear or any of that Russian disinformation hacking

Just to clarify......... I don't doubt they all get up to hacking, spying and whatnot....... I just don't buy into it swaying my opinions of principles.

It hasn't worked on you, right?  

I had my trial by fire, remember?

Good little Christian girl?

Then I discovered how much lying was done in the name of spreading the good word. Lying to save souls is sometimes necessary.

So I tend to look for back-up to stories.
Single source is suspect.

Not to mention, my Facebook time is likely less than 1 hour total for as long as it has existed. 

That's what I liked about Olbermann. His stories always seemed to have back-up.
Not as much all the others.

[Prometheus]

Aug 3, 2021 2:26:52 GMT merh said:

Aug 2, 2021 16:32:54 GMT Prometheus said:

Without a link, there's really nothing to comment on. As you have pointed out: headlines are bullshit.

Copy title, search.

news.yahoo.com/commentary-why-many-republicans-refusing-102200925.html

Baltimore Sun
Commentary: Why are so many Republicans refusing vaccination? Because Russia is telling them to
Lee Mcintyre, The Baltimore Sun
Mon, August 2, 2021, 3:22 AM·3 min read

What is the difference between doubt and distrust? Doubt can be overcome by evidence. Distrust cannot.

According to a recent Washington Post poll, refusal to get the COVID-19 vaccine has now become completely politicized in the USA. Among Democrats, 93% report that they’ve already gotten at least one shot or are likely to, compared with only 49% of Republicans.

Why so much refusal to vaccinate among the GOP? Because they’re being targeted by a deliberate campaign of disinformation. Science denial isn’t a mistake, it’s a purposeful lie.

Despite ample data that the vaccines are safe, false stories circulate on the internet claiming that scientists are lying to us, that the vaccines can make you infertile, that they contain microchips, that they can alter your DNA. Do these worries arise organically? Maybe some do. But such disinformation is often intentionally created to serve someone’s financial, political or ideological interests.

Among those with something to gain is the Russian government, which is diligently working to undermine confidence in the vaccines as part of its goal of destabilizing American society. It has been spreading misinformation for years on a host of other virus-related topics, including the flu and Ebola. From there, it’s a short hop to having their message amplified by conspiracy-embracing, right-wing media, whether witting or not, and by the soulless churn of algorithms on social media.

And it doesn’t take many people amplifying a false message to have an outsize effect. According to a recent PBS story, 65% of the anti-vaccine propaganda on Twitter was due to just 12 people, some of whom are profiting from the creation of bogus skepticism through the promotion of alternative treatments and cures.

The targets for all of this disinformation are gullible people, who are already feeling defensive and threatened and now feel justified in questioning scientific consensus. Of course, they don’t get anything out of it. Most of the people we call science deniers are just pawns of others who profit from their credulity or ideological allegiance. And in the case of COVID vaccine refusal, those pawns are dying. According to an Associated Press analysis of CDC data, 99.2% of COVID deaths in the U.S. are now among the unvaccinated.



What is the most effective way to fight back? Certainly, it would be good to inform people who are being duped just exactly who is doing the duping. For those who are already disposed to believe in conspiracy theories, here is a real live conspiracy! (Of course, as Mark Twain reportedly said, it’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they’ve been fooled).

What doesn’t work? Telling a science denier they’re wrong. Just providing facts and evidence won’t work. The antidote to denial is not more (potentially untrustworthy) information, but to increase trust.

The anecdotal literature shows that when someone gives up their denialist beliefs it is almost always a result of personal engagement. Within this context, trust grows and facts can be effective.

But can it work with strangers?



Longtime GOP pollster Frank Luntz conducted a focus group to try to find an effective message to get people to take their COVID shots. Here’s what he found worked: listening, patience and respect. The participants — all of whom started out reluctant to take the vaccine — began to trust him, and within that context he provided information that ultimately led all 19 of them to say that they were more likely to take their shots.

In researching my forthcoming book, “How to talk to a science denier,” I found similar tactics were effective not only on anti-vaxxers, but also climate deniers and others.

Perhaps the answer to our current crisis is not more evidence, but more engagement. Rather than retreat to our favorite news silos, we might try interacting with those who think differently than we do. In an era of polarization, wouldn’t it be great if we learned to talk to — and trust — one another again?

It goes back to the whole people who trust Facebook for their "facts"

If it had said "China", ABBEY would be all in.
He doesn't believe in Cozibear or any of that Russian disinformation hacking

I was just being lazy.

[abbey1227]

Aug 3, 2021 4:05:58 GMT merh said:

I had my trial by fire, remember?

Good little Christian girl?

Then I discovered how much lying was done in the name of spreading the good word. Lying to save souls is sometimes necessary.

So I tend to look for back-up to stories.
Single source is suspect.

Not to mention, my Facebook time is likely less than 1 hour total for as long as it has existed. 

That's what I liked about Olbermann. His stories always seemed to have back-up.
Not as much all the others.

That's certainly how most Obama supporters must view things, too. 

I mostly use FB to keep abreast of friends and family goings on.......without actually having to meet in person.

Hasn't Olbermann been pretty much the poster child for hysterics since 2016?

[merh]

Aug 3, 2021 6:23:12 GMT abbey1227 said:

Aug 3, 2021 4:05:58 GMT merh said:

I had my trial by fire, remember?

Good little Christian girl?

Then I discovered how much lying was done in the name of spreading the good word. Lying to save souls is sometimes necessary.

So I tend to look for back-up to stories.
Single source is suspect.

Not to mention, my Facebook time is likely less than 1 hour total for as long as it has existed. 

That's what I liked about Olbermann. His stories always seemed to have back-up.
Not as much all the others.

That's certainly how most Obama supporters must view things, too. 

I mostly use FB to keep abreast of friends and family goings on.......without actually having to meet in person.

Hasn't Olbermann been pretty much the poster child for hysterics since 2016?

I'm talking his show on MSNBC which he was fired from for making campaign donations to a couple candidates which MSNBC decided wasn't unbiased. 

[abbey1227]

Aug 3, 2021 14:37:19 GMT merh said:

Aug 3, 2021 6:23:12 GMT abbey1227 said:

I'm talking his show on MSNBC which he was fired from for making campaign donations to a couple candidates which MSNBC decided wasn't unbiased. 

Too rich.......THAT was their reason for firing him? 

Didja catch that recent bit on NPR?

Commentary
NPR's Ethics Policy Now Allows Reporters to Engage in Activism
By Jarrett Stepman | August 2, 2021 | 2:59pm EDT

The thin veil over National Public Radio’s commitment to objective journalism has been lifted.

NPR has announced a new ethics policy that allows its journalists to “participate in activities that advocate for ‘the freedom and dignity of human beings’ on both social media and in real life.”

National Public Radio, an organization partially funded by taxpayers, will allow its supposedly straight-news reporters to engage in outright political activism.

===========================================

Now they can be just as objective and unbiased as PBS and the rest, huh?     What a sound use of tax dollars

[merh]

Aug 3, 2021 23:55:34 GMT abbey1227 said:

Aug 3, 2021 14:37:19 GMT merh said:

I'm talking his show on MSNBC which he was fired from for making campaign donations to a couple candidates which MSNBC decided wasn't unbiased. 

Too rich.......THAT was their reason for firing him? 

Didja catch that recent bit on NPR?

Commentary
NPR's Ethics Policy Now Allows Reporters to Engage in Activism
By Jarrett Stepman | August 2, 2021 | 2:59pm EDT

The thin veil over National Public Radio’s commitment to objective journalism has been lifted.

NPR has announced a new ethics policy that allows its journalists to “participate in activities that advocate for ‘the freedom and dignity of human beings’ on both social media and in real life.”

National Public Radio, an organization partially funded by taxpayers, will allow its supposedly straight-news reporters to engage in outright political activism.

===========================================

Now they can be just as objective and unbiased as PBS and the rest, huh?     What a sound use of tax dollars

Suspension
On October 28, 2010, days before the 2010 U.S. elections, Olbermann donated $2,400 each to three Democratic candidates for Congress: Kentucky Senate candidate Jack Conway, and Arizona Democratic Representatives Raul Grijalva and Gabby Giffords.[88] Grijalva had appeared on Olbermann's show immediately before Olbermann mailed the donations. In response, on November 5, MSNBC President Phil Griffin suspended him indefinitely without pay for violating a network policy which required employees to obtain approval from management before making political contributions. An online petition calling for his reinstatement received over 250,000 signatures;[91] two days after the suspension began, Griffin announced that Olbermann would return to the air on November 9.

Departure
On January 21, 2011, Olbermann announced his departure from MSNBC and that the episode would be the final episode of Countdown. MSNBC issued a statement that it had ended its contract with Olbermann, with no further explanation. Additional reporting in the days immediately following suggested that the negotiations for the end of Olbermann's tenure at MSNBC had begun soon after the end of his suspension.

[abbey1227]

Aug 4, 2021 1:34:45 GMT merh said:

 Additional reporting in the days immediately following suggested that the negotiations for the end of Olbermann's tenure at MSNBC had begun soon after the end of his suspension.

I would think all of the positive coverage for their team.......and negative coverage for the opposition would count as much, if not more, as a donation

[merh]

Aug 4, 2021 2:09:56 GMT abbey1227 said:

Aug 4, 2021 1:34:45 GMT merh said:

 Additional reporting in the days immediately following suggested that the negotiations for the end of Olbermann's tenure at MSNBC had begun soon after the end of his suspension.

I would think all of the positive coverage for their team.......and negative coverage for the opposition would count as much, if not more, as a donation

Nonpartisan was apparently more of an issue in 2010

[abbey1227]

Aug 4, 2021 5:51:36 GMT merh said:

Aug 4, 2021 2:09:56 GMT abbey1227 said:

Nonpartisan was apparently more of an issue in 2010

I'm olde enough to remember seeing Walter Cronkite live.

Back then it seemed like the media was making an effort to at least appear unbiased.

I think it'd be pretty easy to show the playing field has been tilted in a similar direction since at least his time.

Now they don't even bother to hide it

[merh]

Sailor Who ‘Hated’ Navy Torched $1.2B Assault Ship: Warrant
Justin Rohrlich
Tue, August 3, 2021, 7:56 PM

NCIS
A 20-year-old sailor with a grudge against the U.S. Navy and a failed attempt at becoming a Navy SEAL under his belt is accused of setting an amphibious assault ship ablaze and singlehandedly costing the Navy $30 million in damage.

According to an NCIS search warrant affidavit obtained by The Daily Beast, Ryan Sawyer Mays aroused the suspicions of investigators almost immediately after the 40,000-ton USS Bonhomme Richard went up in flames on July 12, 2020, burning for nearly five days and leaving dozens injured while extinguishing the ferocious blaze

Mays, whose identity has not previously been revealed, now faces charges of arson within a special maritime and territorial jurisdiction, use of fire to damage federal property, and making a false statement, the warrant states. If the Navy instead proceeds with a court martial, Mays will be charged with aggravated arson and willful hazarding of a vessel, said a Navy spokesman. Mays does not have a lawyer listed in court records, and could not be reached for comment.

The fire raged through the 14-deck ship after beginning in a cargo hold, with the temperature onboard exceeding 1,000 degrees at times, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday told reporters last summer. The fire aboard the Bonhomme Richard, which was waiting on a $250 million upgrade at the time, was finally tamed by some 400 sailors from 16 vessels, helicopters dumping water on the flames, the Naval Base San Diego Fire Department, and numerous civilian fire departments from surrounding cities.

<div class="inline-image__title">1226606565</div> <div class="inline-image__caption"><p>The fire on the USS Bonhomme Richard lasted five days.</p></div> <div class="inline-image__credit">U.S. Navy</div>
1226606565
The fire on the USS Bonhomme Richard lasted five days.

U.S. Navy
More
Every deck above the waterline was damaged, and although no deaths or serious injuries were reported, 71 people were hurt or treated for smoke inhalation. At least 18 firefighters filed workers’ compensation claims following the blaze, specifying they suffered, among other things, concussions, orthopedic issues, and dehydration.

Mays was identified by NCIS investigators after they interviewed some 177 sailors assigned to the Bonhomme Richard. One reported that he had seen a “light-skin male” in clean coveralls and a face mask carrying a metal bucket into the Lower V—the ship’s aft section—but didn’t recognize the person in question. But later, the sailor, named in the search warrant affidavit as Kenji Velasco, “did mention a sailor named Mays that ‘hates’ the U.S. Navy and the Fleet,” the filing states.

In further interviews, Velasco said he was “fairly sure” and “90 percent sure” he saw Mays descend into the Lower V before the fire broke out. He also noted that firefighting equipment in the area seemed to have been tampered with.

“Velasco further explained that in the hours and days after the fire, it had dawned on him that the individual who descended to the Lower V at 0805 on the day of the fire was Mays’s height and build, had fair hair that could be seen coming out from his cover, like Mays, sounded like Mays, and said, ‘I love deck,’ which is an expression Velasco knew Mays to say,” the affidavit states, adding that other sailors had also suggested to investigators that the person in question seemed to be Mays based on his clothing and language and that a command master chief “identified Mays as a person who showed disdain towards authority and the U.S. Navy.”

Investigators reviewed Mays’ now-private Instagram account, and found a post that stated, “I love the smell of napalm in the morning,” the affidavit explains. Mays’ service record showed that he joined the Navy in 2019 “with the intent on becoming trained in the Advanced Electronics Computer Fields,” then “changed his career goals to becoming a Navy SEAL.” But five days after beginning SEAL training, Mays dropped out and was reassigned to the Bonhomme Richard as an “undesignated Seaman.”

<div class="inline-image__credit">NCIS</div>
NCIS
“According to Navy leadership, the morale and behavior of sailors who had aspired to become a SEAL, and then find themselves serving in a more traditional role on a Navy ship, are frequently very challenging,” the affidavit states.

Mays told investigators he was willing to take a polygraph exam, after which he was arrested. Mays is said to have then incriminated himself in the presence of two Master-at-Arms designated sailors, who “heard Mays say (unasked) that he was guilty, seemingly talking to himself,” according to the warrant. He later denied ever making the comments, and denied involvement in the arson, claiming he was being “set up.”

Investigators also dug into Mays’ personal life and discovered several red flags. After telling investigators during an initial 10-hour interview that he’d recently separated from a female sailor upon discovering that she was pregnant and he was not the father, investigators “later learned this was mostly contradicted by the female sailor” in question, the warrant said.

That sailor recounted to investigators that while Mays had gone around telling everyone she was pregnant and that he was “going to be a father,” she had never been pregnant and made that clear to him, even taking a pregnancy test to prove it.

It was not clear if that series of events was thought to have pushed Mays toward the alleged arson. NCIS investigators seized Mays’ iPhone, searched his car and apartment, and swabbed his cheek for a DNA sample. So far, Mays’ DNA has not been a match for DNA found at the scene.

Last November, the Navy said it would scrap the Bonhomme Richard in light of estimated repair costs of as much as $3.2 billion. The ship cost about $750 million when it was built in 1998, or about $1.2 billion by today’s standards. The investigation, according to the affidavit, is ongoing

www.yahoo.com/news/sailor-hated-navy-torched

[abbey1227]

Aug 4, 2021 21:35:23 GMT merh said:

Sailor Who ‘Hated’ Navy Torched $1.2B Assault Ship: Warrant


Last November, the Navy said it would scrap the Bonhomme Richard in light of estimated repair costs of as much as $3.2 billion. The ship cost about $750 million when it was built in 1998, or about $1.2 billion by today’s standards. The investigation, according to the affidavit, is ongoing

www.yahoo.com/news/sailor-hated-navy-torched

how is that related?

goofy people in the military are plentiful.........especially these days

[merh]

Aug 5, 2021 13:24:30 GMT abbey1227 said:

Aug 4, 2021 21:35:23 GMT merh said:

www.yahoo.com/news/sailor-hated-navy-torched

how is that related?

goofy people in the military are plentiful.........especially these days

One would gamble he's likely conservative considering he joined up to do his patriotic duty & had a tantrum when it didn't go his way.

His temper tantrum cost the military a $1.2 billion dollar ship.

[abbey1227]

Aug 5, 2021 21:23:05 GMT merh said:

Aug 5, 2021 13:24:30 GMT abbey1227 said:

how is that related?

goofy people in the military are plentiful.........especially these days

One would gamble he's likely conservative considering he joined up to do his patriotic duty & had a tantrum when it didn't go his way.

His temper tantrum cost the military a $1.2 billion dollar ship.

you would take that bet these days?