Die sichere Blase (Kommentar)

[matrixmann]

Einige Wochen nun schon wohnt man dem Treiben um Corona als Zaungast bei - und mittlerweile weiß man nicht, wessen Verhalten und Denken man schlimmer wiegen soll: Das der Regierung, die nur die Wiedereröffnung ihrer Wirtschaft im Kopf hat, die sich mit dem Maskenball und einer eventuellen Corona-App das nicht in Stein gemeißelte Szenario per

Comments

[matrixmann]

I guess, by using a little bit of logic, you can easily find your indicators for this being not so much a fun or even a hoax.
It's just a matter of if you want to believe or if you already made your verdict and are deeply in a state of "I don't believe in anything anymore that I get told by mainstream media!".
(Specifically in Brazil, I think it was that the different mafia clans that closed off the favelas on their own. So to say, even people from the mafia don't want to die and they feel threatened by corona... )

I must say I've taken a little look into it what's it about with this website called "Swiss Propaganda Research" that is often cited in this context as source for "counterproofs".
You know what?
People who usually cry out loudly about the mainstream media doing propaganda all the time and inventing stories from scratch or stealing photos and video footage from anywhere of the net, those now start to fully believe in a website which doesn't even reveal its sources or writers... It makes you feel like kicked by a horse. It's fucking laughable. "Seriousness of sources" is something different than that. This is in no way better than the other side when they start broadcasting anti-Russia or anti-China agitprop!
I mean, it's understandable in some ways that people who talk about facts or positions which the world doesn't want to hear seek anonymity in order to receive protection for their names and lives and not get fired from their jobs.
But then, in science circles it is like: Citations imply how good your are or how well-renowned you are. Few citations mean you might be a newbe, or a person whose positions are controversial, so the quality of your statements is questionable, may depend on the subject.
So - especially in the corona topic - you need indicators which tell you how fell-foundated the crap is that a platform releases. And a platform which doesn't tell in any way who maintains it, who feeds it with content, that's totally the opposite of that.

[onb2017]

Interesting. I should look into it. But yeah, lots of people are happy to accept anything that just claims to be a "fact". Somehow the word "fact" instantly makes it legit. And another source for their "facts" is some Facebook posts that claim some total BS under the disguise of facts.

[matrixmann]

On the whole, I just browsed briefly about that platform - and, compared to Wikileaks or the previous likes, which you could count as a more "serious" source, you miss the international reputation or mentioning of it. You know, there were people who hat to flee or went to jail for their support to Wikileaks, even though it was a whisteblower platform and the authors were anonymous as well.
But what's it with this platform? Since corona it became at least a bit more famous than before, but still it has no real mentioning in the mainstream press (even Leaks achieved that) and most of the site traffic is said to be from Germany.
Beside that, also it's been found that typical political Switzerland topics are missing too much on it, beside calling itself "Swiss", instead of that it covers German issues very well - too well for a platform that says to address another geographical area actually.

If you ask me... this all appears as loony as starting to believe websites like Inforwars and PoliticallyIncorrect tell the truth.