So, let me make sure this is right… the thing that everyone wants to grasp at is the autism thing? Is that right?
Like I mentioned, I saw her on Dateline talking the same stuff. According to her website she’s also been on Ellen, CNN, Good Morning America, Canada AM, 20/20, and MSNBC. Are they getting all of your bile too?
ETA: Also, shouting “you go girl” ?!?!?? 1990 called, they want their phrase back.
Yeah, but see, Dateline and Ellen doesn’t have the Godlike powers that Oprah does. And Oprah has a responsibility with her Godlike power over the stupid masses to make the right choices of what they can see on t.v. So, that’s the deal there.
Not so much really. Before giving the anti-vax movement a bully pulpit most people you call “haters” could give rat’s ass about Oprah. It was just another popular daytime talk show with a largely female demographic. The anti-vax nonsense is serious enough it has galvanized people’s option like thebad astronomers.
Well, with me it’s not only the autism thing. I’m not a Secret enthusiast either. However, with the other shows you mention: I’m not a fan of any of them. I’d be interested in knowing how it was covered–it’s a newsworthy issue that needs to be discussed rationally, and if it was covered properly (letting JM have her say, and bringing in others who can show exactly why it’s pernicious nonsense) then I’m happy. I wouldn’t be happy if every reputable show ignored the issue and let anti-vaxers have the whole stage. Somehow I doubt that Ellen brought in any good rebuttals, but I never watch her show either (except for this one time my cousin was in the audience for Mother’s Day and everyone got a zillion prizes because they were all pregnant–it was weird).
Also, I read the Newsweek article and about jumped out of my chair when I got to the bit about what Suzanne Somers is doing to herself. :eek::eek::eek: Those of you who read it will know what I mean. Yes, I think it’s irresponsible to bring Somers on the show and approve of the very scary things she’s recommending (I think saying that you’ve started doing some of it yourself counts as approval).
Oh yeah, well Ellen is GAY!? GAY!? ::nods::
And you go girl!
Sorry, this is a strawman. Oprah is the subject of this thread, and not these other shows.
Additionally, Oprah has a talk show, so comparing here to Ellen is fair, possibly to GMA as well. (I haven’t seen GMA since I left the US, so no idea now.) I’m unfamilar with Canada AM, and so cannot comment. Comparing her show to the other shows listed is apples and oranges.
Further, “this autism thing” is not the thing we are “grasping” at, but the fact that Oprah is allowing a full time platform for JM to tell people not to vaccinate children for whatever reason. Therefore, presumably, some people will believe she is a credible source, and not vaccinate. Thus, it follows that children who would otherwise be vaccinated will fall ill and possibly die. During that time they will infect others - children, adults, everyone. I find this unacceptable. Perhaps its acceptable to you, in which case I submit you have the problem, not me.
I don’t care about the autism thing, she’s not a good interviewer because she’s too wrapped up in herself. She thinks that she’s sooo special. A good interviewer takes the background to her guests for some of the show and she just can’t not be the main event always.
I loved Oprah when she first started having her show she was interesting and interested in other people She was great.
Strawman, another favorite word here on the Dope. You warm the cockles of my heart, you!
Look at me doing the “quote thing” like “you” do. Neato, huh?
Me? I’m fine with letting people make their own decisions after examining information presented to them. I’m not comfortable going under the assumption that people everywhere are out there not immunizing their children because Jenny McCarthy wrote a book saying it’s bad. No, they’re not checking with doctors or other medical professionals in regards to their decision. Nope, nothing but good old Jenny McCarthy for these folks. Oh wait, you said “presumably” (like my quotes?) which means that maybe there might be people who could possibly do that. Let’s protect these small minorities of people who MIGHT make this decision from themselves since they can’t possibly understand. I mean, after all we have to assume that they are going to believe her for no other reason than Oprah had her on TV.
But let’s go ahead and take it one step farther. Since these stupid people are “presumably” unable to think for themselves, let’s make sure they’re doing all of their child rearing correctly. If they’re so stupid that they believe everything on Oprah’s show without thinking AT ALL then they can’t possibly be responsible enough to have decision making on caring for a child.
I’m sorry that mighty Gleena will walk away from this thing thinking that I have the problem and not her. Damn, that hurts bad. Submit away, I’m fine with that.
It’s Doper Antinomianism. Because they understand themselves to be on the side of science and the angels, they are thereby permitted to dispense with the need to prove up their claims. So when JM goes around saying unsubstantiated things, it’s dangerous, and Oprah’s audience, poor benighted fools that they are, are powerless in the face of Oprah’s svengali like hold over their minds. On the other hand, when they go around making unsubstantiated claims about Oprah’s audience, no big whoop. A rather neat epistemological trick, wouldn’t you agree?
Also, the only people who could possibly think Mythbusters is scientific are the kinds of people who confuse Metal Shop with Physics Class.
“Small minorities” not getting vaccinated are a big deal. For disease prevention via vaccination to be maximally effective it has to have an extremely high demographic penetration. Small population pockets of non-vaccinated people can infect large numbers of people and act as powerful disease incubators and vectors.
That is in fact what you did, though. Would you prefer I explained the full concept without using the word? I can, if you like, as you apparently don’t understand it.
Whatever you feel is necessary, but I did directly quote you and I wished for you to see that I’d done so and that I was answering you seriously. I did not use scare quotes, which is what you have done here. If you chose to then use scare quotes to ape what I’ve done to be polite, by all means.
I’m happy that you’re fine with people not vaccinating children for whatever reason. I did use the word presumably, because clearly people are not vaccinating their children at the same rates they did years ago, and I presume that JM is the cause of some of that. I submit to you that “small minority” is up for debate - minority certainly, but given the rates of measles and whooping cough around, I doubt small covers it.
If people are properly educated about the consequences, they might make better choices. Oprah is not even attempting to place a counterargument, therefore she is at fault.
Your slippery slope argument is not worth addressing, because I presume (there’s that word again) that you are bright enough to know it was empty rhetoric when you posted it.
Your ability to use ad homs instead of actual arguments is noted. I ask you the same question, why are you concerned with Ms. Winfrey’s good image? Or are you simply grasping at straws and spoiling for a fight by being contrary?
Astro, I appreciate your effort but I do not need nor want your lessons on vaccination. I did fine in school and when I’m ready to go back for more education, I’ll go to the university.
You seem to be confused. I do not think it is a good thing to go without vaccinations. Not at all, and I haven’t said that at all in this thread. I’m saying that it is ridiculous to think that Oprah is somehow responsible for this apocalyptic vaccination mayhem because she had Jenny McCarthy on her show.
Does your back hurt from jumping to conclusions as much as you do? I said no such thing about being fine with people not vaccinating for whatever reason. Are you out of your mind or are you just reading the words that you want to see and not the words that are there?
Having read that, I remained unconvinced that JM will have a major effect on immunizations in this nation. Will some parents stupidly buy her shit? Well sure. But those parents are stupid; did the kid really stand a chance in the long run?
The kid in question will stand a much better chance in the long run if it doesn’t die of measles. Would you seriously write off a kid because it has stupid parents?
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think JM by herself is capable of anything (possibly, she can remember to breathe if prompted.) I think she is the public face - the spokesmodel, if you will - of the antivax movement, and that some people will take her spoonfed talking points way too seriously. And I firmly believe that there are people planted in the soil that would be walking on it now if it were not for that movement.
And I will admit my bias - I actually had whooping cough recently, which would have been unthinkable prior to the anti-vax movement gaining speed a few years ago. I infected my whole family - except the kid, who’d been vaccinated recently. I won’t bore you with the details except to say that whooping cough + asthma are bad juju.
Are you unable to reply with actual thought, or are you only capable of ad homs?
I see you are also ok with using rhetoric, but not recognising it in others. Fair cop.
I also see you chose not to answer my question.
Are you going to admit that you accused me of something I didn’t say?
PS: You responded to Nzinga without thanking her again for the right to hold Oprah in contempt. You’re slipping
I realised that, see my edit above.
Nzinga and I had a difference of opinion, mostly sorted I see. I’m unsure what your issue is at this stage, or why you have so much wrapped up in people’s opinions of Oprah.
I do see you’re incapable of rational discourse, at least on this topic. Good day.
Oh how you do go on, Ms Gleena. When you jump to conclusions and put words in people’s mouth, it tends to piss people off. You can pretend that sugar wouldn’t melt in your mouth if you want to, but you came in here ready to believe that anyone who doesn’t think Jenny McCarthy should be banned from Oprah automatically believes children should go without vaccines. It appears that it is YOU that has a problem discussing this topic with any type of reason. You are ready to fight so you are ready to assume. So please be careful when finally stepping off that high horse, the ground is farther down than you think it to be.
That is perhaps too strict of a burden of proof. I feel pretty safe concluding that Oprah is somewhat responsible for lack of vaccination, or at the very least, she enables the same.
See for yourself. These are from Oprah’s viewers who care enough to post on her message board.
This goes on for several pages.
I cannot demonstrate that Oprah is the single most proximate cause for this kind of dangerous behavior, but I feel perfectly comfortable believing that she has a nonzero impact. I wouldn’t make this epistemological leap if I were, say, testing a vaccine, but such judgments are all we can go on in the course of everyday life.