zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. Americ+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-02-14 10:43:02
Then The WHO should be saying "we can't eliminate the possibility of a lab origin because China is engaging in a massive coverup and won't let us investigate anything" rather than "Laboratory contamination can be excluded because...".
replies(1): >>buran7+v2
2. buran7+v2[view] [source] 2021-02-14 11:10:59
>>Americ+(OP)
If that is indeed their conclusion then yes, it should say that, perhaps in a somewhat less biased phrasing. In a similar vein, the Reuters title might be called "US government with extremely poor transparency track record raises deep self-serving hypocritical concerns over international report that doesn't paint US enemy in a bad enough light".
replies(1): >>Americ+E3
◧◩
3. Americ+E3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:24:31
>>buran7+v2
Media biases are a different issue. The WHO’s problem is that it’s supposed to be a politically neutral internationally governing body, and It’s conduct during the pandemic has lead many people to believe that it is operating according to a political agenda. The damage The WHO (and other public health institutions) have done to their trustworthiness has already had will continue to have serious consequences going forward. Anti-vaxx has never been so popular.
[go to top]