The anatomy of a miss information story from Fox News this morning, my preferred news outlet actually.
The story was regarding Pfizer‘s soon to be approval for the vaccine down to age 5.
The story started by calling it the Pfizer vaccine for Covid one time. And then quickly change the narrative by renaming it first shot and then a jab. From this point on the only refer to it as the jab and never the vaccine.
The anchor in this case referred to it as, “so are you going to get your kids the jab?” She of course asked this to a panel of three mothers. All three mothers I’m sure specifically picked because their answer was no. The first mother they interviewed they identified as being in the science industry. No specifics were given, no level of education was given, just in the science industry.
Reasons given not to get the “jab” are the same misleading reasons stated frequently here and elsewhere about lack of longitudinal research, which has never been a requirement for vaccines, the relative newness of messenger RNA vaccines, which by the way has been around for 30 years as a technology and is well study particularly in pediatrics, and of course the fact that children are Less likely to get severely ill if they get Covid (wow true, ignores the fact that we had such a large outbreak in July and August that several pediatric patients ended up on life support through law of averages and statistics). They also quoted the numerous adverse events that they had all heard of from getting the vaccine, again likely propagated by the Internet based off of miss represented VARES Data and miss guided tweets about what it did to my son or daughter.
The group then surmised, based off of these talking points, that the risk of getting the vaccine in this age group of 5 to 11 outweigh the benefit.
That all sounds great on television but it’s simply not true.
So let’s take a look at what they did:
They renamed it from a vaccine to “the jab.” By changing the name you change the definition and connotations that go along with the definition. Vaccine is generally viewed as something positive and favorable that saves lives, while a jab is just a pain shot with no purpose.
Next they did not use scientific data but they used three moms spouting for unproven and unsubstantiated talking points not based on size to appeal to the emotional relationship between a mother and their children.
Next they painted one of these mothers as being in the science industry somehow trying to quit them as being equal to all the researchers that keep telling us this is safe. This is designed to make you doubt the researchers by holding up somebody else as an equal expert saying don’t get it even though they did not give us her credentials and likely she is not the equal of the researchers in terms of education or experience.
They did not offer a physician or a virologist or a vaccine researcher on the panel, likely because it’s hard to find one anymore that doesn’t agree that the overwhelming research on vaccines in Covid is that they save lives at every age range and that they are extremely safe at every age range which has been shown definitively over and over again in the last six months. So they’re keeping the real information from you while shifting your mindset to talking points that have never been born out by the research.
@SORT14 in your spare time this morning please tell me if I missed anything based off the information you have available and can you assign some names to these different techniques. I’ll be interested if nobody else will be.
I was incredibly disheartening by the story on my favorite news outlet because it helps me realize how they all, every news outlet, in modern 24 hour news cycle spends the truth to what they want it to be.
justthenews.com
