New zodiac year, same daft beast.
I'm going to agree with those who say there is overreaction in COVID-19 coverage. Those who are facing an upheaval like this for the first time on top of rents, commutes, mortgages, children, and emotional support llamas are going to be susceptible to it, and the party lines that have been showing for a long time now have that election-year edge to them. I'm wondering if the susceptible population is also considering their elderly as yet another worry to drive their reactions to opposing coverage.
As to "not a big deal," consider that the people who are at the ages most at risk for COVID-19 fatalities have seen diseases emerge that were unknown to the science and governments of their day, lived through similar freak-outs before, seen their share of human weirdness in things like panic buying and everything's-fine-screech barhopping, may have participated in it themselves. Not a pleasant situation, but that doesn't mean they aren't taking it seriously. (Of course, social media shows me that there are still those of venerable age who haven't gotten the screech out of their systems.)
As to "big deal, ä¸å›½çš„ fault," look at how foreign state-controlled media has capitalized on the situation as it's presented, and compare the treatment of those who dare to criticize their dear leader with those who do the same here. Who's disappearing because somebody decided to make a circus reference? (Considering presentation, there was a point raised in the news that I wanted to question - using the term "foreign virus" is not okay, but using the term "ethnic" is?)
Who's doing the gaslighting here?
