Remember when “there’s a bug going around” and a good amount of the people you knew were sick for a few days, during what usually equates to a two or three week period, was all the ILI news you got? Maybe a mention or two on local news during flu season but it was all pretty much 2nd or 3rd story stuff.
Remember when “there’s a bug going around” and a good amount of the people you knew were sick for a few days, during what usually equates to a two or three week period, was all the ILI news you got? Maybe a mention or two on local news during flu season but it was all pretty much 2nd or 3rd story stuff.
Is it possible that, just like they’ve done with the weather, “news” outlets have looked at their ratings data, and determined that health “emergencies” and constant fear have had a boosting effect, so are more than happy to twist the facts to match their click bait attention grabbing headlines?
The problems with the “if it bleeds it leads” tactic are that first, you can only get away with fake blood for so long, but that also the blood needs to flow quicker, faster and more close to home with every story to grab the same amount of attention.
Remember when “there’s a bug going around” and a good amount of the people you knew were sick for a few days, during what usually equates to a two or three week period, was all the ILI news you got? Maybe a mention or two on local news during flu season but it was all pretty much 2nd or 3rd story stuff.
Is it possible that, just like they’ve done with the weather, “news” outlets have looked at their ratings data, and determined that health “emergencies” and constant fear have had a boosting effect, so are more than happy to twist the facts to match their click bait attention grabbing headlines?
The problems with the “if it bleeds it leads” tactic are that first, you can only get away with fake blood for so long, but that also the blood needs to flow quicker, faster and more close to home with every story to grab the same amount of attention.