brookings - [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
brookings

[ userinfo | sc userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Jan. 13th, 2021|10:24 am]
Previous Entry Add to Memories Tell A Friend Next Entry
linkpost comment

Comments:
[User Picture]
From:[info]brookings
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 05:10 pm
(Link)
But how many of those academics align themselves with the politics of that foundation? I guess the vast majority were just glad there was some organised attempt at putting out a different approach to the problem.

I'm not going to automatically accuse orthodox experts of being onboard with some Great Reset technocratic revolution - although I think it might appeal to some, rather I have noticed that those who 'come out', have a harder time than those who stay in. That's basically my point. If a Latvian academic with a PHD were to publicly focus on the lack of excess mortality in the 15-64 age group, then I think it might be unpleasant for them: that's it, really.

Re Fact Checkers, I really would be less sceptical if they turned their attention to the orthodox view with as much vim and vigour.
[User Picture]
From:[info]chaj
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 05:58 pm
(Link)
"If a Latvian academic with a PHD were to publicly focus on the lack of excess mortality in the 15-64 age group, then I think it might be unpleasant for them: that's it, really."

Vai ir kāds pamatojums tādam apgalvojumam?
[User Picture]
From:[info]brookings
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 06:01 pm
(Link)
It's what I think, based on what I have been reading. I have - via the prism of the media - been getting the view of an orthodoxy from academics.
[User Picture]
From:[info]brookings
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 06:12 pm
(Link)
To clarify, it seems there is drive to scare the public and focus on the most negative trends, statistics etc. It might be the case that if an academic was to focus on say, the mortality in the 15-64 age group, they would be seen as somehow minimising (or wishing to minimise) the effects of the virus.
[User Picture]
From:[info]chaj
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 06:26 pm
(Link)
Un te piekrītu - mediji biedē un valdība to promotē un maksimāli dara visu iespējamo, lai cilvēki tomēr neizplata vīrusu.

Man ļoti žēl, ka mūsu valstī neviens nevienam neuzticas.

Un neciena viens otro.
[User Picture]
From:[info]brookings
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 06:31 pm
(Link)
Bet ja mediji biedē visu laiku, tad cilvēki sāks šaubīties (Boy who cried wolf), vai nē?

+ 'maksimāli dara visu iespējamo, lai cilvēki tomēr neizplata vīrusu' varētu izraisīt pat briesmīgākas sekas, un musu pienākums (amatieri) ir jautāt, petīt un domāt.
[User Picture]
From:[info]chaj
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 07:54 pm
(Link)
Jā, diemžēl. Pie mums neuzticas.
Bet Somijā - uzticas un ir arī rezultāts.

__

Un ļoti labi, ka apšauba un jautā. Redzu - komunikācijas problēma milzīga.

Man arī patīk ieskatīties alternatīvos viedokļos un argumentos, es arī domāju. Varbūt ir bijis risinājums mazākai skādei ekonomikai un cilvēku psihei. Es nezinu.
Interesants laiks.

Ja nu kas - lv valdība attiecībā uz privātā sektora pasargāšanu/balstīšanu izgāzās totāli.
[User Picture]
From:[info]brookings
Date:January 14th, 2021 - 01:14 pm
(Link)
Labs ir. Manuprāt, mums visiem (tajā skaitā mani) ir jābūt draudzīgākiem, saprotošākiem un atvertākiem, kad apsriedīsim šādas lietas.
[User Picture]
From:[info]extranjero
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 06:38 pm
(Link)
Attiecībā uz vakcinēšanu, tad jāpiebilst, ka nedara gan.
[User Picture]
From:[info]brookings
Date:January 13th, 2021 - 06:27 pm
(Link)
Re the deleted commemt:

I wrote "were to publicly focus on".

The orthodoxy I see in media posts (and many social media posts) is that we are all in a terrible situation. This is how it is presented through the prism of the media - both in the UK and Latvia.

That means that a discussion of below-average mortality in an academic paper would not be - in the current climate - focussed on in the public sphere (media etc.).