I am deeply convinced that the media, unfortunately including public media, bear the main responsibility for the current situation regarding Covid.
For many years now, I have observed a strange shift in the media from seeking the truth to a kind of alibi and "genderless" indifference. When you ask a journalist today about the weather, rather than lifting his ass and looking out the window, he would rather invite an expert who claims that it is guaranteed to rain and next to the other one who has relevant data that the sun is shining.
Have you also noticed that we no longer have thieves, swindlers, and murderers? We only have ALLEGED perpetrators, or quotes from other sources. "According to the XYZ newspaper, so-and-so is alleged to be..."„
I consider the peak of this journalistic "state" and complete relativization of everything to be when a few years ago they invited a person to the radio station claiming that the Earth is flat and had Dr. Grygar argue quite seriously against this fool.
https://plus.rozhlas.cz/pribyva-lidi-kteri-neveri-vede-ale-zvastum-o-placate-zemi-vsima-si-jiri-grygar-7170230
This is where Socrates' test of three fits perfectly:
One day, a student came to Socrates, very upset: "Socrates, did you hear what your friend did? I must tell you right away."„
„"A moment, please," the sage interrupted. "Have you sifted what you want to tell me through three sieves?"“
„"Three sieves?" the man wondered.
„"Yes, my dear, through three sieves. See if what you want to tell me passes through the three sieves. The first sieve is the sieve of truth. Have you examined everything you want to tell me to see if it is true?"“
„"No, I heard it told and..."“
„"Well, you see! But you must have tried the other sieve. It is the sieve of goodness. Is what you are about to tell me – if it is not supposed to be true – at least good?"“
The other one replied hesitantly: "No, it's not, on the contrary..."„
„Ah!“ Socrates interrupted him. „Then let’s use at least a third sieve and ask whether what you want to tell me, which has so angered and hurt you, is useful?“
„"That's not useful..."“
„"Well," concluded Socrates, "what you are about to tell me is neither true, nor good, nor even useful, so why would you want to tell me?"“
I don't know what the old journalistic faculties teach their students in schools or in editorial offices today, but when I was young, it was customary for a journalist to have it confirmed by three independent sources before publishing something. Funny today, isn't it?
Today's journalist (I'm talking about the majority in online newsrooms, although there are still old-school exceptions) is a young, often wrinkled millennial, ignorant of real life, who has never left his warm chair in the newsroom. He sits in front of the computer all day and waits for what new things the world's agencies will churn out, only to rewrite and translate it before the competition, at best, and at worst, use the classic CTRL+C and CTRL+V. However, his main task is to come up with a concise headline to attract readers. And as we know, blood and death attract the most...
It's probably not someone's intention, but rather it's simply a product of an era that wants everything to be fast and online. Unfortunately, that's probably the only way...
The result is exactly what society has trained itself to do – in order for more people to have a high school diploma, its level has decreased and, statistically, we have become a much more educated nation...
And thanks to stupid articles with grandiose headlines that compete for readership, interviews with people who, for the sake of ego and their own benefit, proclaim stupidities and catastrophic visions, the media reality is formed. The journalist himself does not have his own opinion, or he hides it and prefers not to think at all - he alibily protects himself by using the magic word "expert" and this gives his own empty and, above all, UNVERIFIED words magical weight.
Regardless of the fact that the journalist does not even try to find out that, contrary to the opinion of his expert, which he presents as truth and reality, there are, for example, a number of contradictory statements and studies from other, equally well-founded experts and scientists.
And in this way, by choosing only the words of experts who fit his "shocking" way of seeing the "truth", he completely distorts reality and instills a sense of fear in society.
And a politician is just a cautious and often stupid populist (unfortunately, even the opposition one these days) who only cares about office, a good image and another election and not about what is good for his country. And he is then perfectly subject to the pressure and irrational fear of the people, which is created by the media.
And that's exactly what I think of the Covid madness - it's a strange stew of stupidity, herd mentality, alibis, populism, egos and incompetence. And of course, with a pinch of the own business of many stakeholders who quickly seized the opportunity under the cloak of emergency and fear.
And by the way, did you know that there is a real study that confirms that "The probability of a person adopting an idea increases with the number of people who have already adopted it"?
In time, when the fear subsides, people will wake up as if from a bad dream and wake up in indebted countries, they will start asking questions - only then will they probably start looking for the truth, which they now do not want to know out of fear...
You will best support my work buys books,
if you don't read, you can and otherwise....
