From snakes to bats to pangolins. Not that I'd encourage anyone to take more than a blood sample to find out, but are those little scaly animals really the origin of nCoV*, or is it just another means to keep a country from killing off more of its endangered wildlife? Either way, its numbers are low, so I can't see the harm in using the publicity to prevent an extinction. (And I wonder at the energy that it takes to muster a jet patrol in the middle of dealing with a heavy-hitting disease, but maybe it doesn't take so much to threaten a smaller neighbor.)
Wolves, now - that's an issue I connect to an earlier study on mice, on which I read at least two of the articles that were written. Once again, I look at the wording of those articles and their headlines. The article that comes up in my feeds (plural) and the one I sought out in another publication are on the same topic, but while the latter presents the animal's death in more straightforward terms, the former can't help but anthropomorphize. Broken records and reruns are the order of the day on the recommendations, and while I'll support the notion that an animal that's suffered because of the bipeds around it deserves a chance to regenerate its population (unless it endangers me, in which case, sod that), the presentation is more of the same callus-making mess.
With the ideological bent these articles are taking, I'm tempted to toss my vote alongside the grinning blonde with the hyenas, just to see the reaction. That issue won't be coming up for some time, though, and I have no interest in wasting my vote on someone I don't support, or of clarifying it for those who think a ripping performance is an indication of an adult in the room. But feel free to keep screaming for that meteor and endangering pedestrians, and I'll be sure to keep an eye out on the rest of these articles in the meantime. Especially the repetitious ones with financial advice on parents and pensions. (My condolences on the unexpected loss.)
* That's COVID-19 now.