I remain bemused and paradoxically affirmed in my concern that the best #covid coverage is reliably out of business publications. How is this the first I'm hearing of the #LongCovid Research Moonshot Act?
Things are this bad: Bernie proposed a bill for a billion a year to the NIH for it, and FORTUNE, who with their target audience are so famously enamored of him (this is profound sarcasm), are reporting it favorably.
https://fortune.com/well/article/long-covid-cost-1-trillion-treatment-cure/
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cwicseolfor@urbanists.social
@cwicseolfor yeah, holy shit.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ireneista@irenes.space
@cwicseolfor Business news has almost always been superior to general-consumption news.
Much of that has to do with incentives. Business publications tend to be more reliant on subscriptions, less on advertising, and have a greater vested interest in accuracy and relevance. Ad-supported mass-market papers simply want to attract eyeballs and rely on spectacle. You can trace this back to the 19th century.
There are exceptions. Scientific journals and some partisan papers may have a greater truth valence. And public broadcasters often do pretty well (BBC, PBS, CBC, ABC/Australia, DW, AlJazeera, etc.) And you want to be on guard for covert and overt biases. Such as: The Economist was explicitly founded to promote free-market ideology, as its prospectus still shows:
https://web.archive.org/web/20180825113414/https://www.economist.com/unknown/1843/08/05/prospectus
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from dredmorbius@toot.cat
@cwicseolfor I found in 2020 that the best vaccine news was also found in business publications. I think these publications are forced to be more clear abd succumb to the hype less because investors want to make the best possible financial choices
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from eniko@peoplemaking.games
@eniko @cwicseolfor
In some sense the drier the better.
I find the actuarial perspective to be one of the most trustworthy.
From time to time I check https://www.actuaries.digital/category/covid-19-blog/
And I read their disclaimers the other way around:
"Disclaimer
This excess mortality analysis is intended for discussion purposes only and does not constitute consulting advice on which to base decisions. We are not medical professionals, public health specialists or epidemiologists.
"
I take their analyses most seriously precisely because they don't belong to any of those groups, which have unfortunately been to a worrying extent captured by the politics of telling people what they want to hear.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from carlos@social.perceptiveconstructs.com
@cwicseolfor
It's appalling how they don't mention even once private companies and their inaction on taking protection and prevention measures or their action in forcing back to office measures
🤬
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from FerDe@xarxa.cloud
@FerDe @cwicseolfor I think the article is one piece of a larger puzzle that people would be reading about. A large amount of the global economy relies on people being physically at a place to make or do something that they cannot do remotely. For example, fabrication of furniture, cabinetry, and clothing. Farming also very labor intensive. Is it an important discussion to have? Yes. Are other articles out there addressing the topic? Also yes.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from TransitBiker@urbanists.social
@TransitBiker @FerDe I have seen some pieces that touch on this, but actual prescription would violate the intentional dryness of their communication style and give an impression of partisanship on a politicized issue. I think what they’re trying to do is the same dance of climate publications circa 2010 indicating that in fact the problem is real with the implication that widely known actions - importantly prescribed elsewhere - aligned with that reality should be followed.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cwicseolfor@urbanists.social
@cwicseolfor I think that a growing number of people who may have been disinterested previously are becoming alarmed at the real dangers of this virus long-term as they learn about more and more folks affected that may be closer to them than they are comfortable with. Fear can be a powerful motivator.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from TransitBiker@urbanists.social
@TransitBiker I fiercely hope so. My anecdata has run the other way, as people seemed to succumb by twos and threes to the anesthetizing popular fantasy that once a thing is undiscussed it is irrelevant, as if they mistake that reality, and not just the consumer economy, were a construction of human attention. Occasionally I hear from a friend an admission they ought to “get back to masking” in the same tone as getting back to running.
I ferociously want to be wrong in the extreme about this.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from cwicseolfor@urbanists.social This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini