Editorial memory hole

Vincent J. Curtis

14 Oct 22

RE: The high cost of pandering to extremism. Spectator editorial 14 Oct 22.

It would be nauseating were it not so laughable for the Spectator to editorialize about pandering to extremism, especially on the matter of vaccinations.  The Spectator was at the forefront of demonizing those who refused vaccination.  It was “a pandemic of the unvaccinated!” cried the Spectator.  Wear a mask!  Masks prevent the spread!

Of course none of this was true.  When the data started to show that healthy people under the age of sixty were at greater risk from the vaccine than from COVID, the Spectator suppressed the information.  9Misinformation!) When it became clear that the vaccines didn’t stop infection or prevent spread, the Spectator suppressed the information.  (Mustn’t contradict the experts in charge!) It unquestionably supported the “booster” when it was obvious that, at best, a booster lasted only two to three months and then left the person more vulnerable to infection than an unvaccinated person.  The Spectator never published the fact that the media age of death from COVID was greater than the average life expectancy. The Spectator was all in on demonizing the people who turned out to be right.

Same with masks.  How a mask that did not seal closely to the face was supposed to seal out viruses was never explained, but the Spectator went all in on mask mandates – mandating the useless because it made COVID Karens feel righteous.

When it came to propagating hatred against a minority opinion the Spectator was out front.  And this was all pointed out in real time; but the editors paid no attention.  Progressivism is always right, even when it’s not.  That’s why there’s a memory hole.

-30-