It's easy enough to guess why this is the case: those who have been inclined to take booster doses are more likely to be heavily exposed to information sources that have tended to portray this as the wise and responsible course; those same sources happen to be all about Ukraine right now. Those skeptics, by contrast, have been learning to discount those same sources and to trust alternative media -- which is more likely to be skeptical of the government here, as well.
(Should you be skeptical of our government's support for Ukraine? The government there has barred opposition political parties -- but not formally neo-Nazi parties who are integrated with their armed forces -- and seized control of the media. Of course, it's wartime; on the other hand, those are totalitarian moves that contrast sharply with the narrative we're seeing in these pro-Ukraine US media sites. Make up your own mind how skeptical to be; I'm not here to tell you that.)
Maybe this all says less about Ukraine, and more about how deep the division is in our own society. Or maybe it says that this division is mostly a product of information choices, and otherwise might not be so deep after all. If it were possible to address that effectively, perhaps we would come together.
Or perhaps not; the divide may be more deeply rooted than where you get your news.
If you're interested in the Ukraine conflict, however, here's CDR Salamander on Russian amphibious operations.
5 comments:
It might be information sources. It might also be just levels of personal skepticism in the present moment. There are people who are solidly in the "if THEY want me to believe it, it must be a lie" camp. It goes out to the extremes. Candace Owens believes the vaccines are pure evil, and also that Russian and Ukrainian are the same language, which is the official Moscow line and complete crap. How much the extreme is bleeding back into the beliefs of the general skeptics I can't tell, but someone pointed out to me over a week ago that the antivaxxers had an unusual number of Russian apologists among them, wondering if there was some underlying connection she had not picked up. I think it's just the reflexive skepticism.
I don't think the unreliability on the sources on one side are the sole cause of this, as the unreliability of skeptic sites has been worse. I have sites I used to like I won't even follow links to at this point. I haven't got the time or inclination to sort through whether this time they are telling the truth.
Each is driving the other.
My actual first thought here would be to see if it's mostly an age confounder.
We know that older people are far more likely to be vaccinated than younger people: 62%-66% if you're 18-39 vs over 90% for those over 65 - though that's first two doses only I believe. I couldn't find anything suggesting the proportions are different for the third dose. We also know that older people likely have more first hand memories of the Cold War: the oldest of the 40 and under group were 10 when it ended.
I saw a suggestion on a survey group I'm on that most people do not actually no what imposing a no-fly zone would mean in terms of an act of war, and that if you clarify that on these surveys support drops precipitously.
Anyway, given those two facts I wouldn't read much in to this unless we see it broken down by age first.
I agree with the gent about the fish fry and lack thereof. I was going to and fro this past weekend through a number of small towns, and fish-fry signs were very common. These are all places that are hanging on despite everything, and in some cases growing a little as people decided that they like small-town life, with all its duties. (You WILL help with the big fundraiser, even if you are not Catholic/Baptist/what have you. Or people will talk. BTDT.)
LittleRed1
As is often the case, I like Bsking's answer better than my own. Ignore me.
Bsking has an excellent point, although the numbers are too stiff to admit that as the whole explanation. If the delta by age is ~30%, that would explain a similar delta in the findings. Something more must be at stake to get to ~70% in the extreme cases.
Still, it's very plausible for around half of the difference!
Post a Comment