Covid misinformation by reporters calling out Covid misinformation

The following is a news analysis.

One thing that’s come across loudly and clearly in the past year and a half is that supposed Covid “misinformation” is in the eye of the establishment beholder.

Too often when establishment figures and media publish factually untrue information or make false statements, it’s overlooked or “fact-checked” as accurate.

But when off-narrative scientists and reporters publish factually correct information and studies, it is referred to as “debunked,” or “disinformation.”

One prime example is CDC’s repeat Covid disinformation. In January last year, the agency’s top officials and scientists got caught repeatedly, falsely claiming that Covid vaccine studies early-on showed there was a benefit to people getting vaccinated if they’d already had Covid. That was untrue. Even after the agency’s officials admitted on audio recordings that their information was inaccurate, they continued to distribute it on their website to the public and to medical officials. To this day, nobody has been publicly held accountable for the dangerous disinformation.

Another, among dozens of examples, is CDC’s director falsely telling the public that people who are vaccinated cannot spread Covid. Although others in the agency soon corrected their director’s mistake, the fact that a medical doctor and head of the world’s most important public health agency wouldn’t have basic, accurate information is shocking.

A final big one to mention here is the many insistences, from Dr. Anthony Fauci on down, that masks weren’t needed or aren’t effective– followed by edicts saying masks should mandatory– followed by revelations that these very officials weren’t wearing them themselves, or observing other mandates applied to others.

Amid the misinformation and confusion has been the sliding scale definition of “effectiveness” when it comes to Covid-19 vaccines.

Initially, many insisted the vaccines wouldn’t be able to be given for years. That information, of course, proved false, but the “fact checkers” and censors didn’t ban those responsible for the bad calls. Next, it was claimed that the vaccines were almost “100% effective” and would prevent infection.

Of course that turned out to be wildly false.

Each time a vaccine metric failed, instead of the fact checkers and censors calling out the bad information, they got on the propaganda train and redefined what “effectiveness” supposedly means.

“Well– maybe it doesn’t prevent infection but it’s effective because it prevents spread,” they falsely insisted.

“Well–maybe it doesn’t prevent infection or spread but it’s effective because it prevents illness,” they then falsely insisted.

“Well–maybe it doesn’t prevent infection or spread or illness but it’s effective because it prevents hospitalization,” they falsely insisted.

“Well–maybe it doesn’t prevent infection or spread or illness or hospitalization but it’s effective because it prevents death,” they falsely insisted.

And so on.

They also falsely claimed Covid is a “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

And as one-sided news articles are written about the supposed disinformation, they are responsible for spreading their own disinformation.

One example is an article in The Hill by a writer named Caroline Vakil, who appears to be trying to explain why Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene was suspended from Twitter for misinformation.

Of course, in an unconflicted news environment, a real news story would look at Twitter’s conflicts of interest and censorship on behalf of pharmaceutical interests.

Instead, The Hill article states misleading, out of context, or false information about Covid as if it is fact– with no apparent self awareness or sense of irony.

Here are some of the problematic statements made in The Hill article:

  1. “[Greene] falsely claimed COVID-19 was ‘not dangerous’ for people who are under the age of 65 or not obese.”

In fact, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has said Covid-19 is a mild disease for most people, with a majority suffering few or no symptoms. CDC has acknowleged it is largely a non-serious disease for younger people and/or those who are not obese.

2. “[Greene] claimed that ‘these vaccines are failing and do not reduce the spread of the virus & neither do masks.”

In fact, the vaccines have proven to fail in terms of infection and spread. And they are not effectives as once claimed or hoped in preventing all serious illness, hospitalization or death. Additionally, they have fallen disappointingly short in terms of duration, with some recommended for four shots inside of one year because the original shots are not working. When it comes to masks, many scientists believe they do not mitigate the spread of Covid, and since President Biden and many of our leaders have chosen to go without them even in situations where they are mandated, their view seems to support lack of effectiveness for masking.

3. “The COVID-19 vaccines have proved to be effective against severe infections.”

This statement is, at the very least, debatable. Certainly, the vaccines have not been universally effective against severe infections. Colin Powell was vaccinated, but died of Covid. Thousands of others have gotten very sick or died of Covid after being fully vaccinated. Yet The Hill article makes this statement as if it’s an undisputed fact.

4. “The disease is severe and deadly, especially among the elderly and the immunocompromised, and has repeatedly overwhelmed hospitals.”

Again, this statement is debatable. It sorely lacks context and, without the proper context, makes implications that are not true. For example, according to CDC, the disease is not severe or deadly for most. As for it “repeatedly overwhelming hospitals,” that may be true in some cities, but is not true for the vast majority of the geographic United States.

If there’s one thing the bad reporting and censorship has taught most Americans: it’s that when one-sided viewpoints are presented, and opinions and scientific studies that are contrary to the narrative are censored, it’s a sign that we should seek out and learn about that information. Because it means powerful interests are trying to keep us from learning about it and making up our own mind.

The Lemonade Mermaid Store

Unique gifts for Land or Sea Mermaids, Mer-pets and Little Mermaids!

Left: Pastel Beach Necklace $16


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

17 thoughts on “Covid misinformation by reporters calling out Covid misinformation”

  1. very nice piece. aside from yourself and several others, i see no value in reading what most journo’s write about science, covid. i’ve never seen them as the sharpest knives and are captive to a preconceived narrative. because they like to hear themselves talk, they assume others do as well. that is a mental disorder.

  2. Typo: “In fact, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has said CDC is a mild disease for most people, ”

    Yet it still seems accurate! :)

  3. All true. But since so many have been stricken by mass formation psychosis, it may be a very long time before people wake up to the truth.

  4. “In fact, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has said CDC is a mild disease for most people, with a majority suffering few or no symptoms.”

    I think “CDC is a mild disease…” should be “COVID is a mild disease…” ?

  5. We are seeing the same bogus “fact-checking” with regards to January 6th. Claims that there were federal agents and/or informants on the scene acting as provocateurs are dismissed as “false” or “debunked” despite the fact that questions remain unanswered as to why several men (Ray Epps, among others) remain unindicted despite being filmed taking active roles – even leadership roles – in the storming of the Capitol.

    There is also the question of why security was so lax despite the massive crowd and purported forewarnings of potential violence. Did the Deep State WANT things to unfold exactly as they did, and actively try to turn events in that direction? Ever since that day, the Deep State has exploited those events to spin a narrative of a massive movement of “white supremacists” who threaten the very existence of “democracy.” It has used that narrative to purge the military and National Guard of anyone deemed “extremist” in a conservative direction, and we know how fast and easy and biased the left is in its definitions of “extremism.”.

    It is too charitable to accuse reporters of being “uncurious.” This is NOT a lack of curiosity – it is an active suppression of any investigation into issues which could implicate federal authorities in serious breaches of professional conduct, even violations of the law. It is an attempt to suppress inquiries which may challenge the narrative that the MSM desperately want to maintain.

    In a congressional hearing on this matter, AG Merrick Garland refused to confirm or deny the presence of any federal operatives in the crowd on that day. This is particularly suspicious given the prominent role played by FBI operatives in the alleged Whitmer kidnap plot just a few months earlier, and their long history of infiltration of “extremist” groups and manipulating vulnerable individuals into illegal actions.

    Frightening as it may seem – impossible as it may seem – our major media are now active opponents of free inquiry, active proponents of censorship, and active participants in government propaganda and cover-ups. When a Democrat regime is in power, they actively and eagerly engage as agents of the state.

  6. Thank you so much for your honest reporting. We would love to support you more, but after buying our first mug from your website, discovered that it was made in China. If you change your manufacturer to one not in a tyrannical, murderous regime let us know and we will be sure to buy more.

Scroll to Top