CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo completely avoid Johns Hopkins study finding COVID lockdowns ineffective

submitted by [deleted] from foxnews.com

all 62 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 5 fun -  (53 children)

u/Socks I think CNN just won shitpostnews site of the year. You said you can't trust Fox. And you can't, but you really can't trust CNN.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (52 children)

If CNN made mistakes, they should admit it. IDK about the mistakes, but will trust your judgement on this. What's brilliant about CNN, however, is that they called out Rogan for his show's promotion of misinformation, which is leading a movement of reactions against Spotify for its role in spreading misinformation. Awesome :-) Spotify head cheeses will continue to voice their support for their programs and for Rogan's show, because - as they admit recently - this is their edge against the completion. But those who care about the ongoing serious problems that have developed with misinformation will hopefully continue to note their consumer preferences.

[–]iDontShift 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

ongoing serious problems that have developed with misinformation will hopefully continue to note their consumer preferences

i get the feel you are on the side of the vaxx.. they re-defined the word itself is misinformation

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine

no longer has prevent disease as defined by EVERYONE

literally lying to people about what they think they are getting

safe and effective cures, being ignored by cnn.. and you think they are good?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

The misinformation in this case is anti-science, anti-vaccine, anti-common sense.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

The misinformation in this case is anti-science, anti-vaccine, anti-common sense

Hey /u/socks. You're a source of information.

Are vaccines supposed to prevent diseases?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Seems it will be impossible to discuss this with you, if that's your view of the history of virology.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

/u/socks. The history of virology is another subject entirely.

You seem to have plenty of information available.

Surely you can answer this basic yes or no question..

Are vaccines (independent of the history of virology) supposed to prevent diseases?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

yes - HELP prevent (not entirely prevent)

[–]Tom_Bombadil 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

HELP prevent (not entirely prevent)

"HELP"..? Sounds like you're inferring that vaccines are intended to support NATURAL IMMUNITY.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That's how they work

[–]iDontShift 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

science has a 70% unreproducibility problem.

being anti science is common sense

as is being anti-symptom relief bullshit

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

No - in all three cases.

And of course think of the alternative to scientific evidence. Yep, the 8th century. Good times.

[–]iDontShift 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

According to a survey published in the journal Nature last summer, more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments. source

so yes.. in all three cases

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That argument is used sometimes on Saidit, and I'll agree it's an interesting problem, but it's also explained by the fact that experiments always have significant variables and slightly varying results. What's significant is the comparative data across the disciplline for similar experiments.

[–]iDontShift 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What's significant is the comparative data across the disciplline for similar experiments.

you don't get to pick what is significant

if they can't replicate their studies. they might as well just do nothing.

you can't base anything on it. literally violates logic.

and you, my dear dead friend.. are promoting lies and it requires mental gymnastics as you avoid truth.. such as this

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

you don't get to pick what is significant

I've not. That's how the peer review process works.

if they can't replicate their studies. they might as well just do nothing.

They do replicate the studies, but not with the exact same procedures or results

you can't base anything on it. literally violates logic.

This is why it's peer reviewed and similar studies ar conducted, to see if there are similar results. When there are similar results, this is useful.

and you, my dear dead friend.. are promoting lies and it requires mental gymnastics as you avoid truth.. such as this

I'm just telling you about the peer review process among scientists, in response to concerns about repeatable experiments, which scientists do appreciate are problematic, and for that reason they try to find similar results in their studies, or conversely, try to show that the original experiments were faulty and should be corrected or the results retracted. Unlike other disciplines, science is not supposed to be a self-affirmative process. Doubt is rule #1. The least refutable evidence is the bit we look for.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

What's brilliant about CNN

They're so brilliant.. that the CNN boss had to resign in disgrace.

Possibly the only positive CNN news in decades.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

That was because he had sex with someone in the company, if I remember correctly. It's unrelated to the accuracy of the news.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

That's the official excuse, but Cuomo has the goods on Zucker and he's suing CNN/AT&T.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

You mean, the corrupt AF Chris Cuomo, who shilled for his even more corrupt brother? Bring it. Those fuckers should be in jail.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

He's going to get millions of dollars to keep his mouth shut about CNN and Zucker's dirty little secrets.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That's for the remainder of corrupt AF Cuomo's contract (18 mil). Cuomo has already exposed the Zucker affair. Not much more to consider. Cuomo also wanted to sue ABC in 2013 (but I don't recall what happened). Cuomo's case would focus on unfair dismissal, which is a different matter. He'd have to prove that CNN violated his contractual agreement, which they know very well they did not to. Let's see who has better lawyers. That's what this will be about. Not really about Zucker.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Not much more to consider.

Oh come on. You really think someone would leave CNN just because he happened to be having a relationship with a co-worker he didn't disclose? That's a pretty lame excuse. Like when a politician says they're stepping down "to spend more time with their family." They had to quit, forced to.

Watch Cuomo get paid to not talk.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

OK - groovy - if there's much more dirt on Zucker, I'd LOVE to hear it. May he get what's coming to him. But rather than merely say that there is a lot to reveal, there should at least be a suggestion of what could be revealed. The bad decision to hire Cuomo is already an indicator that he was expected to provide insider information, sentitive government and mafia info to CNN. But the cost of this (corruption with his brother) outweighed the benefits. Zucher naturally has substantial connections to powerful people, which is one of the reasons we won't find out much, and one of the reasons this will likely be settled out of court, as you suggest. I'll bet you Cuomo goes to Fox, that shady bastard.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That was because he had sex with someone in the company a little boy

FTFU

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That'd be real neat if CNN didn't make any mistakes, but 4 top roles 'left' within 6 months anyway.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

But those who care about the ongoing serious problems that have developed with misinformation will hopefully continue to note their consumer preferences.

Consumer preference is pretty much Fox News. Not perfect by any means but it isn't the steaming pile CNN is. If CNN was a boat I wouldn't trust it on open water, especially with their scandals happening and Cuomo appears ready to burn some people unless he gets paid.

his show's promotion of misinformation

Pretty sure the CDC has been wrong more than Rogan, although I admit I don't listen to his podcast.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

The CDC gets its advice from scientists. Rogan gets advice from anti-vax, political influencers.

THE MOST-WATCHED NETWORKS OF 2021 (BY TOTAL VIEWERS)

Rank NETWORK VIEWERS (000) % CHANGE

  1. CBS 5,574 0%

  2. NBC 5,484 +9%

  3. ABC 4,077 -10%

  4. Fox 3,683 -12%

  5. Fox News Channel 2,394 -34%

  6. ESPN 1,618 +11%

  7. MSNBC 1,537 -28%

  8. Univision 1,432 -1%

  9. HGTV 1,243 -9%

  10. Hallmark Channel    1,115   -7%

  11. CNN     1,114   -38%

  12. TNT     1,087   +10%

  13. Ion     1,044   -13%

  14. Telemundo   1,034   +3%

  15. TBS     1,026   -4%

    TLC 1,026 -25%

  16. History     925     -12%

  17. Discovery Channel   920     -11%

  18. USA Network     848     -6%

  19. Food Network    820     -14%

  20. The CW  813     0%

  21. INSP    788     +17%

  22. Me TV   752     -2%

  23. Bravo   705     -13%

  24. Lifetime    690     +4%

  25. Investigation Discovery     640     -17%

  26. Hallmark Movies & Mysteries     579     -8%

  27. A&E     560     -32%

  28. UniMás     525     +9%

  29. TV Land     518     -9%

  30. AMC     504     -15%

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/network-ratings-2021-top-channels-1235143630/

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I'm having to correct your misinformation in parts now.

Rogan gets advice from anti-vax, political influencers.

Dr. Robert Malone is an infectious disease specialist. To dismiss an expert because he is saying something you don't like... that's not how science works. What you believe in is an anti-science Democrat ideology wrapped in the illusion of science.

I mean literally that whole dude's job is MRNA. I'm not saying I'm 100% sure he's right but it's absolutely mindblowingly foolish to not listen and take his concerns seriously.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Really? He and others are very happy to do the interview circuit in order to promote misinformation (and he's paid handsomely for it). Guess why there are only a handful of these fruads who are on the interview tours. He is one of the reasons people are cancelling their Spotify subsrciptions. More about him here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/01/24/robert-malone-vaccine-misinformation-rogan-mandates/

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/08/robert-malone-vaccine-inventor-vaccine-skeptic/619734/

https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/jan/06/who-robert-malone-joe-rogans-guest-was-vaccine-sci/

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/covid-misinformation-joe-rogan-spotify-petition-1282240/

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/robert-malone-misleading-unsubstantiated-claims-covid-19-safety-efficacy-vaccines-joe-rogan-experience-spotify-podcast/

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/21/1074442185/joe-rogan-doctor-covid-podcast-spotify-misinformation

These are very good responses to that misinformation. It's very serious.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Omg, Amazon Web Services has been providing cloud computing and hosting services to the CIA since 2013. That links the CIA to Jeff Bezos to WaPo.

https://www.mhpbooks.com/is-the-atlantic-a-cia-front/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poynter_Institute owners of politifact has "past training contracts with Voice of America."

https://stuartbramhall.wordpress.com/2021/12/10/cias-extraordinary-role-influencing-liberal-media-outlets-daily-kos-the-daily-beast-rolling-stone-part-1/ Rolling Stone has long been compromised.

Healthfeedback.org looks like a bunch of people who don't actually work in their fields. Possible CIA front, possibly just idiots.

The NPR assault on President Trump was part of an orchestration. The same story appeared in the Washington Post, long-believed to be a CIA asset.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/russiagate-is-constructed-of-pure-bullsit-no-facts/5648120

Also interviewed the CIA director first. https://www.npr.org/2021/07/22/1017900583/transcript-nprs-full-conversation-with-cia-director-william-burns

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Excellent links. Also - there are interesting corporate connections to the NSA, DoD and other US Intelligence Community member agencies.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Wow, they went through a lot of effort to hatchet job that guy. Why do you think that was?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

(Because they're scientists and journalists and he's spreading misinformation. Really, Musky, we both have better things to do than to discuss this.)

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

I'm surprised he hasn't killed himself with two shots to the back of the head yet, Gary Webb style. They did the same thing to him first. Totally trashed his reputation.

Really, Musky, we both have better things to do than to discuss this

I dunno man, I think you just uncovered a conspiracy.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

oh my god.....

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

An interesting metric, but CBS is number one because it has 7 of 8 of the most watched comedies.

End-of-year ratings are in and Fox News finished off 2021 as the top-rated basic cable channel for the sixth straight year, netting a lot of other wins along the way. MSNBC came in second place, followed by CNN, ESPN and HGTV.

And from your source

What a difference a year makes. Last year, the newsies were among the winners. This year, with no bombastic election cycle, and with COVID-19 coverage not as prevalent as it was before vaccines were developed, the major news channels and opinion networks faced deep dips in 2021. That goes for Fox News (down 34%, although still tops in cable), MSNBC (-28%) and CNN (-38%). Business channels experienced similar slumps: Fox Business Network was down 48%, while CNBC was off 13%. The one exception to this trend, apparently, is right-wing Newsmax, which increased 48% (granted, from low marks to begin with), and we could say why that might be — but, c’mon, you know whose cult-like fan base is looking for like-minded “news” content.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

That's terrifying. Most of Nielsen's responders are boomers and shut-ins, and those who have time to be part of their network. I think Statistica also uses those numbers, here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/373814/cable-news-network-viewership-usa But which people get their news via TV and Cable these days? I'd argue that there is a rising demographic that gets news online at news aggregate sites. In any event, the popularity of Fox Noise is really scary, because they are not technically a news channel, but instead the propaganda arm of the GOP (as is well known), viewers of which will tend to be boomers.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

It's very scary. You should check out the comments section, some stories I've seen 900+ people, hundreds of comments pop up before your eyes.

If this site can be believed, Yahoo News is the #1 online news source, but they aggregate from a number of sources -- and did end up running the one about lockdowns not working. Followed by Google News, another aggregate, HuffingtonPost 🤮, CNN 🤮🤮, NY Times, and then Fox News.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Yes - very good points - consumer news pivoting toward opinion instead of facts is much more profitable than factual news and investigative journalism. Really sad. U.S. newsroom employment has fallen 26% since 2008

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Really sad. U.S. newsroom employment has fallen 26% since 2008

Nah man, journalists are lazy talentless whores. Better off without them.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

They're the main reason you have a reasonable quality of live in a democracy that has freedoms of press and some of the few remaining investigative journalists. Without the muck-rakers, corporate greed and human rights abuses continue unabated. You would not enjoy living in a country that has no press freedom. Sorry to sound preachy - but this is a topic that I think is important, especially in Saidit echo chambers.

[–]IkeConn 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

The MSM acts like bible thumping christians that got called out and caught on their circular logic. They double down when confronted by facts conflicting with their "stated" beliefs. They deny and ignore the facts that are staring them right in the face.

[–]Mizzazz 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You are perfectly right

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

If it's not in Reuters or AP, it didn't happen --commie NWO

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Johns Hopkins University economics professor Steve Hanke, Lund University economics professor Lars Jonung, and special advisor at Copenhagen's Center for Political Studies Jonas Herby – analyzed the effects of lockdown measures such as school shutdowns, business closures, and mask mandates on COVID-19 deaths.

Studies that looked at only shelter-in-place orders found they reduced COVID-19 mortality by 5.1%, but studies that looked at shelter-in-place orders along with other lockdown measures found that shelter-in-place orders actually increased COVID-19 mortality by 2.8%.

THOSE are the reasons the study is not mentioned in the MSM. It's an economic study that uses death-rate stats. This is unrelated to the main purpose of the lockdowns (which were to reduce the spead of COVID, and thus reduce mutations, and thus reduce the suffering of people who get serious COVID infections and long term medical problems because of those earlier infections, and thus to reduce the infection curves of those initial spikes). This report by FOX is misinformation, and any news company quoting the report as a medical COVID study would have been spreading misinformaion.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

economic study

No, it's a meta analysis, a study of many other studies about Covid.

uses death-rate stats

Yes, covid mortality rates tells us how many people are dying from covid. More people dead is bad.

This is unrelated to the main purpose of the lockdowns

You're saying the point of the lockdowns was not to save lives? Seriously?

This report by FOX is misinformation, and any news company quoting the report as a medical COVID study would have been spreading misinformaion

That is not a reasonable conclusion to draw.

At some point you just have to stop these mental gymnastics and own up that you were wrong and all those people you thought were so stupid were right.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, it's a meta analysis, a study of many other studies about Covid.

Has nothing to do with medical science and the dangers of covid mutations and infections &c

Yes, covid mortality rates tells us how many people are dying from covid.

We know that death rates are important, but a rare aspect of the impact of COVID.

This is unrelated to the main purpose of the lockdowns

You're saying the point of the lockdowns was not to save lives? Seriously?

I'm saying that it's not the MAIN purpose of the lockdowns, as explained in my comments

This report by FOX is misinformation, and any news company quoting the report as a medical COVID study would have been spreading misinformaion

That is not a reasonable conclusion to draw.

Yes is it x1000... :-)

At some point you just have to stop these mental gymnastics and own up that you were wrong and all those people you thought were so stupid were right.

Sorry to disagree - and I am sure this annoys you and others on Saidit (and is not really intential by me) - but I am letting you know - appropriately - that FOX is spinning the economic study for GOP, misleading purposes, to make its demographic believe that lockdowns were bad - which by extension they will believe that lockdowns did not help reduce the spread of COVID, which is all misinformation. By reducing the spread of COVID, the reduced rate of infection and mutations helped people adjust to COVID by the time of weaker strains like omicron. In the history of viruses, you'll see that - as immunity develops - the severity of each virus reduces, and life got back to normal. Vaccines and lockdowns in 2020 to present have helped increase immunity and reduce the severity of COVID for billions of people. Those who insist on promoting misinformation are enemies of the 99%.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

can fly literally all over the country

Nice lockdown you got there.

How effective was lockdown in China?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I have no idea, the data coming out of China doesn't look legit.