Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > GENERAL DISCUSSION > Coronavirus/COVID19 Temp Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Coronavirus/COVID19 Temp Forum This is a temporary forum for discussion, debate, sharing and helping each other during and in relation to the Coronavirus/COVID19

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-29-2021, 8:24 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,492
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default The Emerging Narratives To Promote Vaccination - Half Truths and Outright Lies

It would seem, now that they have their 'permission slip' from DOJ, the narrative(s) are forming.

There are three which I think predominate at the moment.
  • Unvaccinated are undesireable. We're all familiar with this one as it has been a steady drumbeat. It's all the unvaccinated's fault. 50%, 60%, 96% of the hospitalized and dead are now unvaccinated. This narrative appears to be aimed at making it seem as though the unvaccinated are in the minority and, thus, "undesireable" status does not impact the majority. The problem is, if you were to drill down on the actual numbers, it's not quite that simple and, in fact, less than half of the U.S. population is actually fully vaccinated.
  • You have no Constitutional right to infect others. I heard this from Alan Dershowitz tonight on Laura Ingraham and saw it tonight in a Los Angeles Times Editorial... Editorial: Bring on the crackdown. The unvaccinated must be held accountable... Kinda one of those guilty until proven innocent, but your guilt will always remain in question...
    Quote:
    ...Hooray. It’s time the stubbornly unvaccinated are held to account for their part in the resurgence of COVID-19...

    The new COVID-19 rules prompted a predictable backlash from those who insist the Constitution gives them the freedom to infect others. (It doesn’t; witness the Supreme Court decision in 1905 declaring that states could mandate smallpox vaccinations.) We have little patience with the knee-jerk naysayers who label every new pandemic policy a governmental overreach. What exactly would the government gain by asking people to put cloth over their faces to save their own lives? In what bizarro world is it an abuse of power to give people the choice of taking a free, life-saving medication or doing preventive testing to prove they aren’t infectious?...
  • The vaccines are safe and any information to the contrary is lies/misinformation. Now, if you're a conspiracy theorist or simply one who is open-minded and has been studying the facts as they emerge, this one strikes a chord in that, as we often say, the Left often projects their own machinations on to others. Back in 2015, a piece was published entitled How science and storytelling influence the debate over vaccines. In it, you will find the following...
    Quote:
    ...In a paper published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2014, Dahlstrom looked at the effectiveness of narratives in sharing scientific information with the public. He wrote that the persuasiveness of narratives can both benefit science communication and create challenges. While stories can sway beliefs on topics, such as vaccines, narratives can also perpetuate misinformation and inaccuracies...
That paper, published in September 2014, is entitled... Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. In it you will find...
Quote:
...Research suggests that narratives are easier to comprehend and audiences find them more engaging than traditional logical-scientific communication. More pragmatically, the sources from which nonexperts receive most of their science information are already biased toward narrative formats of communication. Once out of formal schooling, nonexpert audiences get the majority of their scientific information from mass media content. Because media practitioners have to compete for the attention of their audiences, they routinely rely on stories, anecdotes, and other narrative formats to cut although the information clutter and resonate with their audiences. Although the plural of anecdote may not be data, the anecdote has a greater chance of reaching and engaging with a nonexpert audience. The challenge for science communicators, then, is to decide when and how narratives can effectively and appropriately help them communicate to nonexperts about science...

However, another important news value is one with clear links to narrative: personification. Even when reporting on larger social forces, news media routinely personify abstract concepts for dramatic storytelling, focusing on a particular individual or smaller group within the larger context and exploring the consequences of their actions, a practice explored in detail within exemplification theory. There are many reasons why personification makes sense for news media. For the audience, personification allows the audience a greater chance of identification and empathy compared with the larger aggregate and aligns better with the Western expectation of individualism. For the media, personification better meets the needs of news production, as it is easier to interview and photograph an individual rather than something that represents larger social forces. Similarly, individual people generally act in a time span that more closely matches the frequency of news publication...
Now, compare such 'thinking' to what was put out in April 2021 by the same news service... Narratives can help science counter misinformation on vaccines. It references the same paper and highlights this thinking...
Quote:
...For example, a story about how the COVID-19 vaccine is allowing families to reconnect after months apart is more persuasive and compelling than explaining how the vaccine works and its efficacy, Dahlstrom said. However, he cautions that stories won’t always have an impact. On controversial issues, there will be people on both extremes who align with stories that confirm what they believe and attack stories counter to their beliefs.

As Dahlstrom explained in the paper, research has shown that audiences have a difficult time identifying errors in narratives and will generally accept those errors as fact. Even when people know a story is misleading or incorrect, they still tend to believe it, rather than disregard. That is why presenting an equally compelling narrative may be more effective than trying to counter that misinformation with facts alone...
Did you notice how a paper published in September of 2014, somehow, was speaking, specifically, to COVID-19 vaccines? Uh... No mention is made of COVID in the actual paper and while the author of the paper is connected to the 'news source' via the same institution, no mention in the article is made to interviewing the paper's author. Quite the contrary, mention is specifically made to what "the paper" says.

Such seems to hint at the strategy; i.e., the USE of narratives to persuade regarding 'science-related' matters such as vaccines. Where they slip is in their conflation and application. Yet, as is often the case, they further give themselves away with snippets such as: "audiences have a difficult time identifying errors in narratives and will generally accept those errors as fact." What was it Joe Biden said in 2019... Biden tells Iowans: 'We choose truth over facts'

Another snippet would be... "narratives can also perpetuate misinformation and inaccuracies." Clearly, both sides of the issue are guilty of that, all while declaring their own, intrinsic accuracy while decrying the utter falsehood of the other. Yet, it would seem that, as is often the case, projection of intent is found in the narrative itself.

In short, be careful of the narratives from both sides; but, take note of the emerging narratives pushing vaccination as it is, potentially, the more insidious in terms of our rights, our freedoms, and our future. That's not a statement supporting anti-vaccination. It's an advisory to not be persuaded by the narrative and, instead, look to the facts and how they apply to your, individual circumstance.

Last edited by TrappedinCalifornia; 07-29-2021 at 8:27 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-29-2021, 8:38 PM
SPUTTER's Avatar
SPUTTER SPUTTER is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: L.A.
Posts: 7,504
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

What do you mean be careful of the narratives from both sides? There's only one side that is using a narrative to promote an agenda.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-29-2021, 8:49 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,492
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPUTTER View Post
What do you mean be careful of the narratives from both sides? There's only one side that is using a narrative to promote an agenda.
Really?

I'd suggest you check your hole card and confirm that your backers actually put real money in the kitty before you make such a 'call.'

As has been discussed already, if I have to explain, detail, and highlight it for you, there's little chance you're going to agree, let alone understand it. (We see this between you and me/several others when 'facts' are presented or your own beliefs are challenged.) But, once again, thank you for illustrating and reinforcing what the author of "the paper" referenced said...

Quote:
...research has shown that audiences have a difficult time identifying errors in narratives and will generally accept those errors as fact. Even when people know a story is misleading or incorrect, they still tend to believe it, rather than disregard...
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-29-2021, 9:00 PM
SPUTTER's Avatar
SPUTTER SPUTTER is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: L.A.
Posts: 7,504
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia View Post
Really?

I'd suggest you check your hole card and confirm that your backers actually put real money in the kitty before you make such a 'call.'

As has been discussed already, if I have to explain, detail, and highlight it for you, there's little chance you're going to agree, let alone understand it. (We see this between you and me/several others when 'facts' are presented or your own beliefs are challenged.) But, once again, thank you for illustrating and reinforcing what the author of "the paper" referenced said...
What does this even mean?(the bolded)
There's only one side here foisting an agenda on the population. I and many other others can clearly see their narrative is just lies to coerce/force an injection on the world's population. There's no "two sides" with two competing narratives.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-29-2021, 9:30 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,492
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPUTTER View Post
What does this even mean?(the bolded)
There's only one side here foisting an agenda on the population. I and many other others can clearly see their narrative is just lies to coerce/force an injection on the world's population. There's no "two sides" with two competing narratives.
Again, thanks for demonstrating that you didn't even read (meaning grasp) the post, simply grabbing a parsed piece, objecting, and going on a tirade.

If you go back and read the OP, the intent of "the paper" was using narrative, rather than facts or facts alone, as a counter-narrative. Both sides are doing exactly that. What you choose to believe is not the entirety of fact and truth. Simply because the Left is, as I said, more overt and with more transparent goals related to the acquisition/exercise of power doesn't mean the Right is any less culpable in foisting 'narratives' related to COVID. In fact, the very idea that "there's no 'two sides' with two, competing narratives" is, itself, a narrative, not fact and your personal belief doesn't alter that.

Do the facts, as we know and understand them, favor the narrative being put forth by many on the Right? I'd have to agree with that. Do the facts, as we know and understand them, favor ALL the narratives coming from the Right, conspiracy theorists, etc.? Simple answer... No.

At the moment, however, the clearly more nefarious narratives are emerging from the Left. As I noted, the three, most obvious, are...
  • Unvaccinated are undesireable.
  • You have no Constitutional right to infect others.
  • The vaccines are safe and any information to the contrary is lies/misinformation.
As we saw last year, particularly from a couple of contributors, such is an outgrowth of the narratives already pushed by the Left. As I and others have noted about the current 'intelligentsia' dominating this subforum, outright denial, dismissiveness, and derision of anything which perceptibly counters the narrative being pushed as to this being a 'fakedemic' or 'plandemic' is just as unhelpful to those seeking... you know... what this subforum was established for...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll
...This sub forum is being created to allow discussion, debate, sharing and helping each other during and in realtion to Coronavirus/COVID19.
Don't forget the later two of those reasons...
I'm not going to spend the night, once again, going back and forth with you on this. You want to derail, deflect, denigrate, et al.? Fine. All you do is further provide evidence of a NARRATIVE that is being pushed, not a counter-point to what has been posited.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-29-2021, 9:45 PM
bootstrap bootstrap is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,227
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Default

Contrary to what the CCP controlled media parrots, about 50% of Americans have refused the jab. Add the number of people who have received the jab and wish they hadn't... the combo of the 2 groups is the majority.

It is time for the silent majority to no longer remain silent.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-29-2021, 9:50 PM
SPUTTER's Avatar
SPUTTER SPUTTER is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: L.A.
Posts: 7,504
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I actually appreciate your post, I find it interesting. I just don't agree with the left/right, two sides, etc. My gut tells me that this whole vaccination thing is a setup for something much worse. I pray I'm wrong though.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-29-2021, 10:02 PM
el chivo el chivo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: the hills of Kentucky
Posts: 2,062
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

it's a Trump vaccine after all
__________________

"No need to weave fairy tales or parrot the ones you read"

- stonefly-2

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-30-2021, 12:35 AM
Gundiver Gundiver is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,030
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by el chivo View Post
it's a Trump vaccine after all
I think that supports the argument above that there’s no sides. It’s either the system or freedom and Trump only SAID things against the system. Everything he DID totally furthered the system of control.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-30-2021, 12:46 AM
Sousuke Sousuke is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,790
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bootstrap View Post
Contrary to what the CCP controlled media parrots, about 50% of Americans have refused the jab. Add the number of people who have received the jab and wish they hadn't... the combo of the 2 groups is the majority.

It is time for the silent majority to no longer remain silent.
I'm not entirely sure that there is a silent majority here. The double dose rate is just shy of 50% and the single jab total is 57% and rising which means the majority are vaccinated in some form. (i'm not sure how 1 dose only vaccines are counted in these numbers btw).

That being said, going back to the OP, the only thing that will break the two narratives is when hospitalisations and deaths remain low and stay there. This will all quietly disappear into the night. Even with a population of 50% vaccinated, once you account for natural immunity, the virus will start to fade back as more of a minor endemic annoyance then a pressing social danger.

Even if governments try to push rules, more and more of the population will start to ignore them.
__________________
For you to believe globalization can continue, you have to believe it doesn't require increased consumption and that the Americans will continue to bleed and die so that the Chinese can access energy. - Peter Zeihan
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-30-2021, 2:29 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,492
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sousuke View Post
...the virus will start to fade back as more of a minor endemic annoyance then a pressing social danger.

Even if governments try to push rules, more and more of the population will start to ignore them.
I think the first part is, ultimately, where we're headed with this one; hopefully without vaccine mandates.

Insofar as the second, if Government mandates vaccines across the board, it's going to be difficult to 'ignore.' If businesses enforce mandates, a lot will depend on what your tolerance levels are for inconvenience, discomfort, pain, etc.

However, I think that's precisely why we're in the 'narrative' phase; i.e., where they are looking for an effective 'sales pitch' (or bogeyman) to overcome the blow back that's already started. Not to mention that part of that blow back is stemming from things like... Fauci And Rand Paul Accuse Each Other Of Lying In Tense Testimony Over Covid Origins

Which narrative do or are you supposed to believe? Are there elements of 'truth' in both, neither?

For Thee and Me, I suspect that Fauci is, at best, practicing legerdemain and, at worst, flat out lying. Can Senator Paul prove that in court? I doubt it, but that's what he wants us to think... Rand Paul to Fox News: Justice Department should pursue 'criminal referral' against Fauci; i.e., a 'narrative' is being created by Paul. Why is the narrative perceived as necessary? Because it's both a political and a PR battle at the moment.

It's also why Fauci tried to change the narrative with his counter-accusations during his testimony.

Ultimately, I'd just like to get to the 'endemic' stage many of us have been predicting for awhile and move on to the next 'crisis of the moment' that'll be used by one side or the other or both.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-30-2021, 4:12 AM
sd_shooter's Avatar
sd_shooter sd_shooter is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hill Country, TX
Posts: 10,680
iTrader: 81 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPUTTER View Post
What do you mean be careful of the narratives from both sides? There's only one side that is using a narrative to promote an agenda.
I'm with Sputter here, I don't see the "other side" actively pushing any narratives. There are a couple mouthpieces (eg. Rand Paul, Tucker) but they are not in a position of real authority. If the government, university or company mandates the vax there's nothing any "counter-narrative" can accomplish.

We no longer need to argue about whether the election was stolen (I believe it was.) Since the election results are now fully certified the Dems are in solid control, that is a fact. Most government bureaucracies reluctantly did what they were told under Trump because to openly disobey would mean biting the hand that feeds. Now that the Dems are in charge they are eager to continue with the globalist agenda as they had for decades.

The most active resistance is coming from Red states, God bless them, with Texas and Florida leading. I hope they continue to have courage in the face of similar forces that were stacked against Trump.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-30-2021, 4:19 AM
FNH5-7's Avatar
FNH5-7 FNH5-7 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: A Third World Country Formerly Known as California
Posts: 9,369
iTrader: 155 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia View Post
[*]You have no Constitutional right to infect others.
That seems to be argument that these vaccine zealots have to try and trick you into not having a response.

But do THEY have the constitutional right to coerce others into taking an experimental medical treatment that may or may not have side effects which the manufacturer is by law not liable for? Legitimate question.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by FalconLair View Post
I weep for my country and what it is becoming.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-30-2021, 6:11 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,492
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FNH5-7 View Post
... Legitimate question.
Addressed on your OT thread asking the same question.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:40 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy