stock here: Here is the "study" that Amazing Polly is ripping apart as Academic Propaganda with the intent of attacking truth so the truth tellers can be discredited.
Then they cite another source who “argues that increasing fact-checking or levels of scientific literacy is insufficient for fighting alternative facts.” To them, anti-maskers “value unmediated access to information and privilege personal research and direct reading over ‘expert’ interpretations.” Bingo! aka No Shit Sherlock!
So, we distrust elites and the medical establishment, preferring instead to get the accurate, hard data ourselves and interpret it in a common-sense, rational way. And we must be stopped, apparently. Oh, the humanity!
And their cite (52) seems to be able to sum it up nicely.....
Hochschild [52] explains the intractable partisan rift in American
politics by emphasizing the importance of a “deep story”: a subjective prism that people use in order to make sense of the world and
guide the way they vote. For Tea Party activists, this deep story revolved around anger towards a federal system ruled by liberal elites
who pander to the interests of ethnic and religious minorities, while
curtailing the advantages that White, Christian traditionalists view
as their American birthright. We argue that the anti-maskers’ deep
story draws from similar wells of resentment, but adds a particular
emphasis on the usurpation of scientific knowledge by a paternalistic, condescending elite that expects intellectual subservience
rather than critical thinking from the lay public
So they call themselves out most perfectly! Tone deaf and hypocritical spring to mind, front and center, balanced and forlorn.
Here is one of the authors of this "study". And you can email him at the link
below. He is the "most frequent co-author" of Gabrielle D Inchoco, and she cites him more than anyone else. Although this looks like Inchoco's first and only article.
below. He is the "most frequent co-author" of Gabrielle D Inchoco, and she cites him more than anyone else. Although this looks like Inchoco's first and only article.
-----------------------------------------
Here is not just one of his favorite tweets but a "promoted tweet"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is a cultural and linguistic anthropologist who explores how people use language and other media to enact expertise in practice, performance, and interaction
--------------------------------------
https://dl.acm.org/profile/99659702519
Email her, but don't be too mean, she is a champion fencer, they brought her in for her only article, this one.
---------------------------------------------------
Her favorite Twitter thread on her blog is "On fighting white supremacy"
"I'm not the posterboy for feminism -- that's not my record. But the next president of MIT, and the next leader of the Media Lab, should definitely be women."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Tanya Is an MIT student, and other than on the Subcommittee on the "Communication Requirement" nothing can be found on her.
------------------------------------------------------------
https://amazingpolly.net/correlator
I was in academic science once. I'd like to think that if I'd stared an epiphany in the face for as long as these people did, I'd have actually *had* the epiphany. Somehow, they didn't -- or at least, none of them are admitting it. So many damaging quotes in the paper. It's almost like someone is blinking at us in morse code.
