Wash, rinse, shake it off. Wash, rinse, shake it off. Repeat.
When this president says something he should not say or something crazy, there is a cycle of defense. It goes like this:
He didn't say that.
Then there's a transcript or video where he clearly did say that.
It was taken out of context.
When the full context shows it's definitely not different in full context....
He didn't mean it.
When that falls flat, cue up the next response.
He was joking.
When that falls flat, cue up the next response.
You're stupid for believing what you heard.
OR It doesn't matter because someone else did something as bad or worse.
Wash, rinse, shake it off. Repeat.
Best to just sit back, get out the popcorn and believe it's Ground Hog day all over again.
Saturday, April 25, 2020
Tuesday, April 21, 2020
Perspective and the Challenge of Balance
Some months ago, a Facebook acquaintance posted an anti-Trump meme attributing a quote to him that was derogatory. I'm not a Trump fan but, for some reason, I decided to fact check it and learned that he had not actually said it. I shared what I had learned. She thanked me and took the meme down.
Recently, again on Facebook, I saw a post that attributed the COVID-19 virus to a scheme created by some Harvard professor. Fact checking showed that he was in trouble for misuse of funds, but not the creation of this pandemic. I shared what I had learned. I was outright dismissed. And the fact finding site I linked to was dismissed as "liberal". My guess is ANY fact finding resources would be dismissed as "liberal". Perhaps fact finding is now a "liberal" endeavor.
I made the mistake of writing a blog about clues to use in sorting stories that may be misleading. I did not post it under their meme or name anyone. But WOW did I get blasted on my page.
Today, again on Facebook, a friend shared a version of that Harvard professor story. She seemed to post it as wondering about it's possibility. So, I took a deep breath and shared what I had learned. She thanked me. But she might be "liberal" leaning.
I'm a curious person. I like to look beyond the surface and try to understand things. I try to be respectful. I try to seek truth.
I'm a bit mystified with the often repeated "You can't believe any news" statements. I want to ask, what are you believing? You are getting information from somewhere. What is making that information more compelling?
The things I'm seeing, don't match with that reality.
As COVID-19 broke out in China, I had my annual doctor visit. It was early February. He encouraged me to boost my immune system. I love that he is very into a supplement routine. And he said, this virus was coming. "We don't know when, but it will come."
So, I boosted. And I watched international news - BBC and Sky News. People I knew across the political aisle, expressed disbelief about the reporting from China. I think they were right, but maybe not always from the perspective they expressed. I watched Italy.
As I heard our leadership dismiss this virus as "like the flu", I continued to watch Italy. But I did take note as those around me expressed that many people die of flu each year. And, at the time I was concerned, mid-February, less than 1000 people had died due to COVID 19.
I researched flu seasons to see if there were times our health systems were overwhelmed. Indeed, there were pockets of flu outbreak in 2016 that overwhelmed local hospitals. And last year about 35,000 people died in the US from flu related illness.
But Italy's problems grew. And then, we passed Italy. We followed their path. In just 8 weeks, we have lost nearly 44,000 people due to this virus. And this has happened while much of our country is shut down. This is not "like the flu". This is one of those virus' that come along every 100 years or so.
It's also not some nefarious plot to derail this president any more than the Spanish flu was an attempt to derail President Wilson's presidency. Now, in hindsight, it appears that flu didn't originate in Spain at all. Decades from now, it may be discovered that COVID-19 didn't originate in China. There's so much we don't know.
What we do know is that this is a deadly virus - most deadly for those who are elderly and/or have underlying health issues. What is healthy to debate is how to best address it. It's painful. The question is, how much death is acceptable to offset the economic impact of extreme measures? If you feel there is little risk to you or those close to you, you likely feel that personal freedom and economic conditions are most important. Open up. If you feel there is great risk, no amount of money is worth the risk. If you are hurting financially, you may be somewhere in the middle.
What's not healthy is getting caught up in fringe arguments that have nothing to do with the real problem. Health versus money is the real issue. What's the balance that is socially acceptable by the majority of citizens. The majority of our governing bodies have been focused on the health side.
Where do we go from here? I wish I knew that answer.
Recently, again on Facebook, I saw a post that attributed the COVID-19 virus to a scheme created by some Harvard professor. Fact checking showed that he was in trouble for misuse of funds, but not the creation of this pandemic. I shared what I had learned. I was outright dismissed. And the fact finding site I linked to was dismissed as "liberal". My guess is ANY fact finding resources would be dismissed as "liberal". Perhaps fact finding is now a "liberal" endeavor.
I made the mistake of writing a blog about clues to use in sorting stories that may be misleading. I did not post it under their meme or name anyone. But WOW did I get blasted on my page.
Today, again on Facebook, a friend shared a version of that Harvard professor story. She seemed to post it as wondering about it's possibility. So, I took a deep breath and shared what I had learned. She thanked me. But she might be "liberal" leaning.
I'm a curious person. I like to look beyond the surface and try to understand things. I try to be respectful. I try to seek truth.
I'm a bit mystified with the often repeated "You can't believe any news" statements. I want to ask, what are you believing? You are getting information from somewhere. What is making that information more compelling?
The things I'm seeing, don't match with that reality.
As COVID-19 broke out in China, I had my annual doctor visit. It was early February. He encouraged me to boost my immune system. I love that he is very into a supplement routine. And he said, this virus was coming. "We don't know when, but it will come."
So, I boosted. And I watched international news - BBC and Sky News. People I knew across the political aisle, expressed disbelief about the reporting from China. I think they were right, but maybe not always from the perspective they expressed. I watched Italy.
As I heard our leadership dismiss this virus as "like the flu", I continued to watch Italy. But I did take note as those around me expressed that many people die of flu each year. And, at the time I was concerned, mid-February, less than 1000 people had died due to COVID 19.
I researched flu seasons to see if there were times our health systems were overwhelmed. Indeed, there were pockets of flu outbreak in 2016 that overwhelmed local hospitals. And last year about 35,000 people died in the US from flu related illness.
But Italy's problems grew. And then, we passed Italy. We followed their path. In just 8 weeks, we have lost nearly 44,000 people due to this virus. And this has happened while much of our country is shut down. This is not "like the flu". This is one of those virus' that come along every 100 years or so.
It's also not some nefarious plot to derail this president any more than the Spanish flu was an attempt to derail President Wilson's presidency. Now, in hindsight, it appears that flu didn't originate in Spain at all. Decades from now, it may be discovered that COVID-19 didn't originate in China. There's so much we don't know.
What we do know is that this is a deadly virus - most deadly for those who are elderly and/or have underlying health issues. What is healthy to debate is how to best address it. It's painful. The question is, how much death is acceptable to offset the economic impact of extreme measures? If you feel there is little risk to you or those close to you, you likely feel that personal freedom and economic conditions are most important. Open up. If you feel there is great risk, no amount of money is worth the risk. If you are hurting financially, you may be somewhere in the middle.
What's not healthy is getting caught up in fringe arguments that have nothing to do with the real problem. Health versus money is the real issue. What's the balance that is socially acceptable by the majority of citizens. The majority of our governing bodies have been focused on the health side.
Where do we go from here? I wish I knew that answer.
Thursday, April 16, 2020
Get smart. Get focused. Be part of staying Well.
Recognizing that we all have a bias is, for me, very important. I work hard to keep myself open to varied perspectives. Weeks ago I was struck by an important fact someone important to me shared. Last year, more than 34,000 people died from the flu in the US. At the time, deaths by COVID-19 in the US were a fraction of that. And we were shutting down parts of our country. It caused me pause.
And I researched. I watched documentaries about the Spanish flu of early last century. I watched international reporting from Italy and Europe. I researched the impact on past years of flu in the US. Were there times our health systems were overwhelmed?
Indeed, in 2016, there were 3 cities in the US that were overwhelmed by flu outbreaks. So, I watched the news with this perspective. And I saw another, then another, and another area of our country growing overwhelmed with COVID-19. It appeared to be larger in a short amount of time, but fatalities were not yet nearing the 34,000 from last year's flu. Were we over reacting?
Today, as I write this, we are quickly nearing historic numbers. We are not yet 2 months into this pandemic. Today alone, the number of fatalities have grown more than 2500. Soon we will be past the fatalities from last years flu. This, in just a few months! We have shut down much of our economy with draconian efforts to keep people distant. We did not do this last year to avoid the flu nor did we react this way when cities were overwhelmed in 2016.
The perspective provided me, by awareness of flu numbers past, would tell me that this is different. And just as I feel that listening to perspective has helped in my understanding, I see that now we must question fatality reporting. Supposedly, NY has over reported by 4000 deaths.
As I watch reporting, I see a story about someone who could not get tested and after death, his widow learned he had COVID-19. So, I if I subtract that, 3999 might be questionable. How many should I add that have not been properly attributed as deaths due to COVID-19?
Do I believe that somehow, for some nefarious reason, people are over reporting or under reporting? The reporting is coming from people - people on the front line. Do they all have some nefarious agenda?
We are in the middle of something we have not seen in a hundred years. Yes, it is important to have perspective. Vitally important! Yes, we need to carefully scrutinize the information presented. It's vitally important that we get smart and we get focused on what is important here. Our decisions on a daily basis are important. We need to get smart and we need to get focused on what keeps us all well.
And I researched. I watched documentaries about the Spanish flu of early last century. I watched international reporting from Italy and Europe. I researched the impact on past years of flu in the US. Were there times our health systems were overwhelmed?
Indeed, in 2016, there were 3 cities in the US that were overwhelmed by flu outbreaks. So, I watched the news with this perspective. And I saw another, then another, and another area of our country growing overwhelmed with COVID-19. It appeared to be larger in a short amount of time, but fatalities were not yet nearing the 34,000 from last year's flu. Were we over reacting?
Today, as I write this, we are quickly nearing historic numbers. We are not yet 2 months into this pandemic. Today alone, the number of fatalities have grown more than 2500. Soon we will be past the fatalities from last years flu. This, in just a few months! We have shut down much of our economy with draconian efforts to keep people distant. We did not do this last year to avoid the flu nor did we react this way when cities were overwhelmed in 2016.
The perspective provided me, by awareness of flu numbers past, would tell me that this is different. And just as I feel that listening to perspective has helped in my understanding, I see that now we must question fatality reporting. Supposedly, NY has over reported by 4000 deaths.
As I watch reporting, I see a story about someone who could not get tested and after death, his widow learned he had COVID-19. So, I if I subtract that, 3999 might be questionable. How many should I add that have not been properly attributed as deaths due to COVID-19?
Do I believe that somehow, for some nefarious reason, people are over reporting or under reporting? The reporting is coming from people - people on the front line. Do they all have some nefarious agenda?
We are in the middle of something we have not seen in a hundred years. Yes, it is important to have perspective. Vitally important! Yes, we need to carefully scrutinize the information presented. It's vitally important that we get smart and we get focused on what is important here. Our decisions on a daily basis are important. We need to get smart and we need to get focused on what keeps us all well.
Saturday, April 4, 2020
Embrace Love
Generally, I avoid getting into situations that may cause conflict. It's just not who I am or want to be. I like being around people who are fun loving, kind, and generally have a positive outlook. They experience hardship and disappointment. They've been hurt at times. But rather than harden themselves, they become more tender and caring. Being around them is uplifting. It makes me want to be a better person.
Engaging with angry, bitter, and distrustful people does the opposite. It tempts me to return anger, to feel bitter, and to be less trustful - especially in relation to them. It's spiritually wrong. We are commanded to love one another.
"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth."
So how do we love through conflict and disagreement? We may need to step away. We may need to distance ourselves and become introspective. Put on a shield of love. Find safe space and pray not just for them but that you may be more loving in all the ways "Love is". Be patient. Be kind. Do not envy. Do not boast. Shed pride. Do not engage in rudeness. Don't flame anger. Keep no record of perceived wrong-doing. Don't look for evil. Seek joy in truth.
At the moment, I am thankful that someone reminded me to look at my spiritual self in the face of anger.
I embrace love and loving memories.
Engaging with angry, bitter, and distrustful people does the opposite. It tempts me to return anger, to feel bitter, and to be less trustful - especially in relation to them. It's spiritually wrong. We are commanded to love one another.
"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth."
So how do we love through conflict and disagreement? We may need to step away. We may need to distance ourselves and become introspective. Put on a shield of love. Find safe space and pray not just for them but that you may be more loving in all the ways "Love is". Be patient. Be kind. Do not envy. Do not boast. Shed pride. Do not engage in rudeness. Don't flame anger. Keep no record of perceived wrong-doing. Don't look for evil. Seek joy in truth.
At the moment, I am thankful that someone reminded me to look at my spiritual self in the face of anger.
I embrace love and loving memories.
Hooked on Media Crack
One of the things that saddens me is how disinformation has become so engrained in our digital mass media, some "news" media, and woven deeply into the political fabric of the country. These are the "alternate fact" sources that aim to weave distrust into the hearts and minds of those who are susceptible to their tactics. And we are all susceptible to one degree or another.
There are a few simple things a person can do to avoid getting too sucked in. First, identify the source of the information. If they have created a name or domain that ties in a major, more trusted, news source such as PBS, NBC, CBS, BBC, along with some extension, they are suspect. Just their name is intentionally misleading. Quite likely, the story they are telling is misleading as well.
Next, is how they present the story. If it includes "here's something the media won't tell you", there's probably a reason the media isn't telling you. It cannot be substantiated. Reliable news sources verify stories. Yes, they make mistakes and sometimes get taken in themselves, but their percentages are pretty good. Some better than others.
Finally, if the style of presentation is emotionally charged, be skeptical. Sometimes a set of facts can leave us feeling emotional but if the presentation is a constant call to be outraged or angry and distrustful of others, the goal is to try to get us to react with our emotions rather than our heads. If you find yourself constantly needing to dial into emotionally charged news sources, you're hooked on media crack.
The result is that no one can tell you that something you believe is not true. You will dismiss fact checking. You will tune out or become angry with reliable news sources because they are not hitting the emotional buttons required to satisfy the loop you have entered. You won't listen to differing views and you'll become unable to present yours without injecting emotion. You'll be fixated on the smallest misstep of reliable sources but totally overlook obvious and consistent mis-information from your favorite sources.
We all need to step back and do a gut check. I find myself getting a bit snarky from time to time. Those are times I think I should step back, take a deep breath and let the other person have the last word no matter how I might feel about it. Then scrutinize myself with the same level of attention I may be directing at others.
There are a few simple things a person can do to avoid getting too sucked in. First, identify the source of the information. If they have created a name or domain that ties in a major, more trusted, news source such as PBS, NBC, CBS, BBC, along with some extension, they are suspect. Just their name is intentionally misleading. Quite likely, the story they are telling is misleading as well.
Next, is how they present the story. If it includes "here's something the media won't tell you", there's probably a reason the media isn't telling you. It cannot be substantiated. Reliable news sources verify stories. Yes, they make mistakes and sometimes get taken in themselves, but their percentages are pretty good. Some better than others.
Finally, if the style of presentation is emotionally charged, be skeptical. Sometimes a set of facts can leave us feeling emotional but if the presentation is a constant call to be outraged or angry and distrustful of others, the goal is to try to get us to react with our emotions rather than our heads. If you find yourself constantly needing to dial into emotionally charged news sources, you're hooked on media crack.
The result is that no one can tell you that something you believe is not true. You will dismiss fact checking. You will tune out or become angry with reliable news sources because they are not hitting the emotional buttons required to satisfy the loop you have entered. You won't listen to differing views and you'll become unable to present yours without injecting emotion. You'll be fixated on the smallest misstep of reliable sources but totally overlook obvious and consistent mis-information from your favorite sources.
We all need to step back and do a gut check. I find myself getting a bit snarky from time to time. Those are times I think I should step back, take a deep breath and let the other person have the last word no matter how I might feel about it. Then scrutinize myself with the same level of attention I may be directing at others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)