• ToxicDivinity [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think because you seem to be agreeing with the poster who is against masking? But I’m not sure because his post is removed now.

    When you said

    Because it generates clicks (and thus revenue) for media conglomerates.

    What generates clicks?

    I’m just asking because the post you were responding to got removed so I’m missing context

    • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve not got anything against people wearing masks, clearly it’s helpful for reducing the spread of COVID, flu, etc. - I wrote elsewhere in this thread that I think it would be good to see people wearing masks more commonly around flu season as well.

      I do think the article is sensationalist, though - it implies that there is broad scientific consensus that masks should be mandated again, but when you read it, it’s just a single tweet containing the opinion that it’s a good idea to wear a mask if you’re going to be in a crowded place.

      What generates clicks?

      Sensationalist, anxiety-inducing headlines from news websites - particularly ones which desperately want COVID (or some other pandemic) to return in force. Do you remember all of the media frenzy around monkeypox a few months ago? That’s a really good example. There’s this pervasive sense that the press are almost hoping for some horrible new pandemic or for COVID to mutate in a way that makes it much more virulent, just so that they can get more clicks.