Media and 'experts' does complete 180 on crowds and Protests

Post Reply New Topic

So this has probably been posted before, if so I'm fine with it being merged.

The media and some 'experts' (I hesitate to call people who pivot positions so quickly actual experts) have come out in support of the protests, while basically ignoring the implications of Coronavirus spread. Some news do acknowledge the possibility that the outbreak will get worse. But my beef is with the experts who say people should go out and protest, who told everyone to stay inside.

Curiously CNN and Fox news have flipped positions on the epidemic (which I take as clear evidence that both are highly corrupted biased news sources. How anyone can believe that CNN is corrupt and Fox is not and vice versa I don't understand.)

Some so-called experts are telling people to go out, which I find irresponsible, a real expert would express concern over the protests ability to magnify the pandemic, which thankfully Dr. Anthony Fuaci did.

Now I am of the opinion that it is important to protest, and that the police should stop using tear gas because that's just going to make people cough. Dumb as s***, they have tons of riot control techniques, yet they use tear gas as their go-to? What about fire trucks and flashbangs?

Now that my feeling are out of the way I'd like to talk about the demonstrable difference between these protests and the lockdown protests.

George Floyd protests vs Lockdown Protests

GF protests are (as far as I have seen) mostly unarmed
Lockdown Protests came in full combat gear and rushed government buildings.

Police responded with violence and tear gas to one and just stood by in the other.

GF protests are about the terrible and unjustified death of a black man
Lockdown protests were about economic pain and hardship (despite the fact that it looked like most of the people were carrying signs about getting haircuts, blaming Obama, and other strange signs.) And truth is America was never really in lockdown, a lockdown would be what China did, the US, for the most part, did not social distance or lockdown as we can clearly see in the data.

GF protests had curfews enacted against them and significant police presence.
Lockdown protests had protestors regularly disrespecting what law enforcement there was.

But, GF protests did sometimes inflame into riots and there was looting (BUT America is not spiraling out of control, we're just hurt and lashing out.) However, despite the difference I see a clear difference in the reaction of police to different protests.

So to sum it up, I think the GF protests are more justified, given the reasons. I think that the police are overreacting to the protests and making things worse. I think Donald Trump is crazy for saying George Floyd would be happy about the job numbers report. I saw him say it in real-time and could not believe my ears. Why the hell would a black man who died to a police officer care about the monthly jobs report. Well that's all my thoughts about the situation right now. I'd like to hear your takes.

What you are saying is that you do not trust anyone who changes their minds when new data is presented that debunks their old opinions.  What do you think about scientists who changed their minds about the Earth being flat, or those who changed their minds after the invention of the microscope and accepted the fact that germs cause diseases?

Enlightened people are allowed to change their minds when presented with evidence that refutes their old and obsolete opinions.  Only closed-minded people refuse to accept new ideas when confronted with overwhelming evidence.

Fnord, you seem to be attacking me for something that I am not trying to say. Plus you are not offering you're own views.

I do trust people who change their minds after new data comes out. Mask policy, changed and I approved, after all at first we needed to save PPE for healthcare workers, however after experts consider the problem, it was decided it was best to wear masks to prevent/slowdown the spread of Covid-19.

My points were
1. Some Experts have been advocating going out to protest and not giving sufficient warnings about the dangers of protesting, barely a nod to the fact that there is a pandemic going on.
However in a protest that happened a few weeks ago agaisnt the lockdown, experts were calling the protests 'irresponsible."
I wanted to ask people on this forum WHAT DO YOU THINK ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THESE PROTESTS AND THE LOCKDOWN PROTESTS AND THE DIFFERENCES IN RESPONSES FROM THE EXPERTS ABOUT THE PROTESTS?

2. CNN and FOX news flipped their positions on the coronavirus. To me this seems like a clear example of political bias. Is it corruption? Conservatives call CNN Corrupt, Liberals call Fox Corrupt, to me it seems like they are both corrupt. So I'd like to hear what some people have to say about this change in stance from both news networks.\\\


Instead the first post is a red herring. I am accused of "you do not trust anyone who changes their minds when new data is presented that debunks their old opinions." when I said "But my beef is with the experts who say people should go out and protest, who told everyone to stay inside."


Where is the clear scientific evidence that points out that it is better to go out protesting about George Floyd's death versus protesting about the lockdown? Ok, when facts come out, I do change my position, like when the official position on masks changed, that was fine. THERE WAS CLEAR DELIBERATION ABOUT THE HEALTH BENEFITS OF USING MASKS VS SAVING MASKS FOR HEALTHCARE WORKERS.

However I see an expert say "It is essential to public health that people go out and protest Racism." Where is the scientific evidence for that??????????????????? The virus doesn't care about your political beliefs, it'll infect you all the same whether or not you go out to protest the lockdown or protest the injustice of George Floyd

I would have more RESPECT for the so called experts if they said "WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE PROTESTS ARE POTENTIAL SUPERSPREADERS FOR THE CORONAVIRUS, HOWEVER WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT PROTESTING THIS SOCIAL INJUSTICE IS WORTH THE POTENTIAL RISK TO PUBLIC HEALTH."

In no way are these protest GOOD for public heatlh.

PLEASE FNORD, send me some links about how the protests are good for public health, I'll read them fact check them and I may change my opinion. But do not attack me. I am a person with an opinion, so are you I respect your opinion I only wished that you respected mine.

I wanted some thoughts about the current situation and I just get attacked. For the first time, I am disappointed in this forum. I welcome counterarguments, I even welcome disagreements provided you have reasons, just not attacks or a holier than thou attitude.

The lockdown and pro gun protests didn’t rush gov building.
The gf protests did rush , take and burn gov buildings.

You talk about the news being biased but so are you.

"But, GF protests did sometimes inflame into riots and there was looting (BUT America is not spiraling out of control, we're just hurt and lashing out.) However, despite the difference I see a clear difference in the reaction of police to different protests."

Woah, you know I could've sworn I said something about GF protests inflaming into riots. Man, you're right, I'm wrong and biased. Your position is the right one (Hint: I don't even know you're position.)

Now I will proceed to address your bias concerns. Some bias is unavoidable unless you choose not to take a side in a topic. But we can reduce bias by rightfully acknowledging other people's concerns and ideas. This could be done by you know actually reading my post and me actually reading your post.

So I acknowledge that the difference is that some the GF protests did inflame into riots, and said despite that it does look like there is a clear difference in the treatment of protestors by police. If you want me to clarify that statement, there's been a host of attacks on even peaceful protestors and excessive force by police in breaking up protests.

I'm not trying to make a STATEMENT I'm looking for other people's OPINIONS on this matter.

So Ad Hominem attack in second post that didn't read my post and a red herring attack on the first post.

Sadly, neither post offers their views on the events or reasons to support their views, or anything resembling a discussion and is just a personal attack.

I was looking for people willing to discuss bias, defend CNN or Fox, say something with something to back it up. Compare and contrast and discuss the protests, but again ad hominem attack, the forum is rather disappointing.

But to address sly279, but the lockdown protests did rush into government buildings carrying guns, they just didn't loot and burn anything. I never said they looted and burned, I said they rushed government building. Basically they went in and stood there intimidating people, which presumably is their first amendment right and did not violate any laws. They were armed and they were in combat gear. While most GF protestors are not armed and are not in combat gear.

Although I don't think you seriously read my post or even converse, you just wanted to immaturely attack someone, happens all the time. I don't take it too personally, I just hoped that WrongPlanet wouldn't suffer from the same issues as other forums.

Fauci is catching flak for this right now because his lack of opposition to and lack of cautionary protocol against the shoulder to shoulder maskless protests by the thousands is being viewed as hypocritical or even fraudulent. Fraudulent in the sense that if he's largely ignored the protests as a serious public health issue, then perhaps it was never a serious public health issue in the first place to the degree of things like:

Losing your business
Caring for family
Preventing people from attending funerals of loved ones
Going to church
Getting preventative healthcare that could end up being life or death for someone
Etc.

In my opinion the virus absolutely could be such a serious threat to public health that it warranted and warrants all of the above. If it is that serious of a threat to public health though, it would be completely illogical to be silent about the public health risk of protests.

Really? Fauci has been clear he believes the protests represent a high risk of transmission.

^ He said that on June 5th on during an interview with a radio station. I believe the protests started at least 10 days prior to that. During that period of time Fauci to my knowledge was silent.