Read on Twitter
Ok, there’s a lot of layers to this story. I‘m to break down some of the issues in it.
H/T @RyanMarino
@Yahoo @YahooNews @yahooaustralia @marissamayer https://au.news.yahoo.com/amphtml/doctor-shares-surreal-experience-with-coronavirus-patient-in-denial-041350883.html?__twitter_impression=true
H/T @RyanMarino
@Yahoo @YahooNews @yahooaustralia @marissamayer https://au.news.yahoo.com/amphtml/doctor-shares-surreal-experience-with-coronavirus-patient-in-denial-041350883.html?__twitter_impression=true
First, the title:
“Doctor shares 'surreal' experience with coronavirus patient in denial”
Yikes. It’s click bait that suggests the writer had connected with @RyanMarino.
“Doctor shares 'surreal' experience with coronavirus patient in denial”
Yikes. It’s click bait that suggests the writer had connected with @RyanMarino.
The thesis is unclear; however, the narrative is built around a single tweet.
https://twitter.com/ryanmarino/status/1263061764884893696?s=21 https://twitter.com/ryanmarino/status/1263061764884893696
https://twitter.com/ryanmarino/status/1263061764884893696?s=21 https://twitter.com/ryanmarino/status/1263061764884893696
What is clear is that whoever wrote this piece jumped to conclusions.
We don’t know what happened here. We don’t know why the patient doesn’t believe the results. It could be due to the influence of conspiracies but it could also be a result of the president’s mixed messages.
We don’t know what happened here. We don’t know why the patient doesn’t believe the results. It could be due to the influence of conspiracies but it could also be a result of the president’s mixed messages.
Pay attention to how the second tweet is described. It’s unusual.
It would have been more appropriate to embed it in the article. Let the content speak for itself instead of trying to quote it.
It would have been more appropriate to embed it in the article. Let the content speak for itself instead of trying to quote it.
What value does this line add to the article? 
Strange times.
Strange times.
Next, @haithamahmedmd is mentioned.
It’s unclear if @Yahoo @YahooNewsAU reached out for comment, but I highly doubt it.
I have no idea what examples they are referring to here
It’s unclear if @Yahoo @YahooNewsAU reached out for comment, but I highly doubt it.
I have no idea what examples they are referring to here
I’m juxtaposing these two sentences because they are alarming.
The second sentence legitimizes the conspiracy theories...
“Or something of that nature”
The second sentence legitimizes the conspiracy theories...
“Or something of that nature”
I don’t think @STWorg and @skepticscience were saying there were justifiable reasons to reject the pandemic “or something of that nature” lol
I’m also fairly sure they were referring to this article.
Not sure why @YahooNewsAU didn’t just link to it. Does it have anything to do with SEO?
Also, if this is the correct Conversation article, @YahooNews left out two of the authors.
Not sure why @YahooNewsAU didn’t just link to it. Does it have anything to do with SEO?
Also, if this is the correct Conversation article, @YahooNews left out two of the authors.
The piece concludes with a quote from another article.
It’s authored by @RichardEvans36 and worth reading: https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2020/04/why-pandemics-create-conspiracy-theories
It’s authored by @RichardEvans36 and worth reading: https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2020/04/why-pandemics-create-conspiracy-theories
