Fox is staffed by dangerously stupid misanthropes

[Aimless]

Emphasis on stupid:

https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-new...plished-moment

I continue to be surprised by just how fucking stupid these people are.

[Being]

I hope you are bringing your numerous complaints to people who can actually assist,

Where should you turn?

Broadcasters may not intentionally distort the news.

[Aimless]

No, my only purpose with this thread is to shame Lewk for being stupid.

[Being]

What is it they say about trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result? You must know by now that Lewk has no shame.

[Aimless]

Almost everyone is capable of feeling shame, though many have learned to swiftly suppress or sublimate it.

[Being]

Almost everyone is capable of feeling shame, though many have learned to swiftly suppress or sublimate it.

Exclusions include Trump, CitizenKane and Lewk.

[Aimless]

Lewk feels shame, that's why he tries so very hard.

[Lewkowski]

Emphasis on stupid:

https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-new...plished-moment

I continue to be surprised by just how fucking stupid these people are.

Fact: The death toll growth rate and totals are not as bad as initial estimates. Still early of course but the fact that was presented was accurate. The analysis piece is subject to debate but the fact that was reported was correct.

Fact: Corona-virus death counts could be inflated.

"It’s unclear how exactly Hume and Carlson would like to disaggregate the coronavirus’ impact on patients who have the virus and die of respiratory failure from any underlying conditions they might have in order to establish a more “accurate” number."

Impossible to say for certain but you could model a few different types of guesswork. For example take heart attack cause of deaths in x month in 2019, compare to it in 2020 and if there is a shortfall in 2020 then some of those "Coronavirus deaths" that ended in heart failure could be seen as excess. I actually don't think there's a strong case to be made but it is a potential.

Fact: Some doctors have prescribed and believed hydroxychloroquine is a beneficial medicine for Covid patients.

"And of course, all three Fox prime-time shows continued the network’s rampant promotion of the use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19."

This is the dumbest argument. You need an Rx to get this. Doctors aren't going to say "well Fox talking head said this is the next best thing so I'll just do it" come on now. Again - the analysis portion could absolutely (and IMO probably is) but the facts that they are presenting aren't off.

The idea that different opinions should be viewed as "bad" is pretty absurd. Right now we have very limited data on what will happen, a free discourse of ideas in the public square is good. Some people will be right, some people will be wrong. Fox doesn't decide medical or political policy. Chill.

[Flixy]

What makes you say it's not as bad as initially estimated? I thought it would magically disappear in March, and then have passed by Easter? Also the death rates in the US are still rising pretty much exponentially, so it's a bit weird to make that case..

Also there's a decent chance Corona deaths are underreported.

[Loki]

Lewk, Trump's initial estimate was that the whole virus was fake news, a position he maintained even as he was getting memos from his top advisors arguing otherwise and even as some GOP senators were dumping their stocks.

[RandBlade]

Not to forget that GOP Senators were also peddling the "its nothing" line while dumping their stocks too.

[Lewkowski]

Keep up y'all, the projections after we shut down most of the country was still going to be at 200k deaths. That model has been revised, pay attention.

[Loki]

Did you have a point?

[RandBlade]

Keep up y'all, the projections after we shut down most of the country was still going to be at 200k deaths. That model has been revised, pay attention.

200k was if you didn't socially distance etc.

[Ominous Gamer]

Keep up y'all, the projections after we shut down most of the country was still going to be at 200k deaths. That model has been revised, pay attention.

You really need to look into your timelines, being an idiot is expected from you, but come on.

[Loki]

Incidentally, it looks like the death toll from the virus is wildly underestimated (not just in the US). Excess mortality is far higher than the deaths currently being attributed to the virus.

[Aimless]

Fact: The death toll growth rate and totals are not as bad as initial estimates. Still early of course but the fact that was presented was accurate. The analysis piece is subject to debate but the fact that was reported was correct.

Fact: Corona-virus death counts could be inflated.

"It’s unclear how exactly Hume and Carlson would like to disaggregate the coronavirus’ impact on patients who have the virus and die of respiratory failure from any underlying conditions they might have in order to establish a more “accurate” number."

Impossible to say for certain but you could model a few different types of guesswork. For example take heart attack cause of deaths in x month in 2019, compare to it in 2020 and if there is a shortfall in 2020 then some of those "Coronavirus deaths" that ended in heart failure could be seen as excess. I actually don't think there's a strong case to be made but it is a potential.

Fact: Some doctors have prescribed and believed hydroxychloroquine is a beneficial medicine for Covid patients.

"And of course, all three Fox prime-time shows continued the network’s rampant promotion of the use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19."

This is the dumbest argument. You need an Rx to get this. Doctors aren't going to say "well Fox talking head said this is the next best thing so I'll just do it" come on now. Again - the analysis portion could absolutely (and IMO probably is) but the facts that they are presenting aren't off.

The idea that different opinions should be viewed as "bad" is pretty absurd. Right now we have very limited data on what will happen, a free discourse of ideas in the public square is good. Some people will be right, some people will be wrong. Fox doesn't decide medical or political policy. Chill.

Keep up y'all, the projections after we shut down most of the country was still going to be at 200k deaths. That model has been revised, pay attention.

Who said anything about opinions being "bad"? I'm talking about these people and their opinions being stupid. An example of stupidity is the argument that concerns were overblown because things haven't - after implementation of shelter-in-place orders etc - been as bad as models predicted they would be absent the effective implementation of such measures, and that the modelers have now been shamed into revising their models. This is a stupid argument because the most alarming scenarios are predicated on people and govts. not taking effective measures to curb transmission, with outcomes becoming slightly better depending on which measures are implemented and when. It is appropriate to revise models to take into account the reality of new interventions; it is stupid to act like that's some sort of hilarious or embarrassing admission of error. It is a particular kind of stupidity emblematic of your constitutional mental inability to deal with a real world that is complex and changing.

Your objections about Fox not being culpable are either stupid or mendacious. Fox strongly influences public opinion, and that opinion exerts pressure - on both doctors and on politicians. It also has an impact on the halfwit you've elected to lead your country. Whether you're talking about unnecessarily prescribing an unproven treatment, or prematurely ending necessary interventions, what these idiots say has an impact. However, even if that weren't the case, the central issue remains: their opinions and recommendations are - stupid. That is the only way to characterize the suggestion to end obviously effective interventions during an active pandemic. What the fuck do these morons think will happen with covid infections when people start moving around again?

The pathetic defense of "the facts" also demonstrates stupidity - if I'm being charitable, because, again, the alternative is mendacity - because the presentation of these "facts" cannot be separated from context. If you for example focus on the "fact" that covid mortality could be inflated without an equal focus on the possibility - indeed, the greater likelihood - that it represents an underestimation, you're not engaging in factual reporting - you're just being a deceptive dumbass trying to undermine support for those of your cities who've been brutally mauled by this pandemic. In Carlson's case, this was overt - he's trying to sow the idea in the minds of the dullards who watch his show that the media, the liberals, the anti-Trump experts are all trying to trick patriots into thinking the pandemic is really bad when it isn't, all so that they can hurt Trump and those he represents.

In the interest of being factual, let me present some other quotes mentioned in or referenced by that article:

“The short-term crisis, the ones that we worried about so fervently in which pressure on hospitals grew so exponentially day by day, with no end in sight -- that short-term crisis may have passed.”

“But it is worth asking, is it not, what would our response have been and would our response have been less damaging to the economy, and to the lives of all of you millions of Americans, if we had had more accurate models from the start? And shouldn't this experience make us less willing to rely on the same experts to help determine when and how we should reopen our economy? ”

“the disease turned out not to be quite as dangerous as we thought”

These people and their opinions are really fucking stupid.

[Aimless]

The leader you deserve:

Twitter Link

[Aimless]

Diagram of something the halfwits at Fox should've known about when they derped about a media conspiracy to inflate covid deaths:



Deaths in New York City Are More Than Double the Usual Total

[Steely Glint]

That looks like it makes the official NY death-toll pretty accurate, i.e neither over nor under counted?

[wiggin]

Incidentally, it looks like the death toll from the virus is wildly underestimated (not just in the US). Excess mortality is far higher than the deaths currently being attributed to the virus.

This is 1000% true. Anecdotally, we receive death notices for people in my particular social circle (figure a few hundred people and their extended families, mostly in Boston and NYC). We typically get one person dying every few weeks. I've recently been getting notices every day or two, very few of which are explicitly linked to diagnosed Covid-19. Most of the dead are quite elderly, but the death rate is astronomical compared to normal among this demographic. I wouldn't be remotely surprised if someone told me that we already have 100k deaths due to covid-19 (either because of infections or because other treatments were deferred).

We should take statistics on current infections/deaths with a great deal of caution due to the limitations on RNA miniprep kits.

[Wraith]

Isn't a big part of the reason this virus is scary because we know there can be a wide gulf between the known numbers and the real numbers?

[wiggin]

Isn't a big part of the reason this virus is scary because we know there can be a wide gulf between the known numbers and the real numbers?

I'm not sure that's a reason I'm scared, or that I'm actually 'scared' at all. I'm concerned that this pandemic will cause a lot of people to die sooner than they would have otherwise, that our response has largely been inadequate, that we don't have good data to make informed public health policy decisions, and that the economic damage is substantial and largely accruing to the most vulnerable among us. But not knowing how many of the additional people dying are doing so because of COVID-19 is largely academic IMO, not a reason for fear.

[Wraith]

You gotta take things less literally.

[wiggin]

As you undoubtedly know by now, I think word choice is really important.

[Aimless]

That looks like it makes the official NY death-toll pretty accurate, i.e neither over nor under counted?

Not sure, the graph only shows stats for NYC and afaict by April 4th they'd reported a total of like 1800 covid deaths in NYC.

[Loki]

This is 1000% true. Anecdotally, we receive death notices for people in my particular social circle (figure a few hundred people and their extended families, mostly in Boston and NYC). We typically get one person dying every few weeks. I've recently been getting notices every day or two, very few of which are explicitly linked to diagnosed Covid-19. Most of the dead are quite elderly, but the death rate is astronomical compared to normal among this demographic. I wouldn't be remotely surprised if someone told me that we already have 100k deaths due to covid-19 (either because of infections or because other treatments were deferred).

We should take statistics on current infections/deaths with a great deal of caution due to the limitations on RNA miniprep kits.

A BBC article claimed half the care homes in Scotland had coronavirus outbreaks. None of those cases are reflected in national statistics.

[Flixy]

Over here in the Netherlands they estimate that actual deaths are at least double than the official numbers, based on excess mortality.

It looks like distribution over age, gender, and location does match pretty well with the excess mortality, so the official numbers are a decent way to track progression, at least over here. Though i can imagine in a country like the US the way the statistics are reported vary wildly between states, making it even harder to say anything.

Edit: source, has some interesting graphs as well.