MacFarlane, Douglas, Li Qian Tay, Mark J. Hurlstone, and Ullrich Ecker. ‘Refuting Spurious COVID-19 Treatment Claims Reduces Demand and Misinformation Sharing’, 30 September 2020. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/q3mkd.

Williams, R., Jenkins, D. A., Ashcroft, D. M., Brown, B., Campbell, S., Carr, M. J., Cheraghi-sohi, S., Kapur, N., Thomas, O., Webb, R. T., & Peek, N. (2020). Diagnosis of physical and mental health conditions in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective cohort study. The Lancet Public Health, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30201-2

Berman, J. Z., & Kupor, D. (2020). Moral Choice When Harming Is Unavoidable: Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620948821

Kuehn, B. M. (2020). Surge in Child Abuse, Harm During COVID-19 Pandemic Reported. JAMA, 324(7), 621–621. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.14433

Online Harms & Disinformation Post-COVID. (n.d.). Retrieved 20 August 2020, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2BmRuXbNhk

The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. (2020). Drinking alone: COVID-19, lockdown, and alcohol-related harm. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 5(7), 625. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30159-X

COVID-19 Medical Misinformation Policy—YouTube Help. (n.d.). Retrieved May 26, 2020, from https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9891785?hl=en#annotations:53lvgpt_EeqmRf84xl6gxA

Lengersdorff, L., Wagner, I., & Lamm, C. (2020, April 20). When implicit prosociality trumps selfishness: the neural valuation system underpins more optimal choices when learning to avoid harm to others than to oneself. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/q6psx

Pieper, D. (2020, May 1). Challenging social systems under the threat of pollution: Replication and extension of Eadeh and Chang (2019). Retrieved from psyarxiv.com/axbj4

Townsend, E., Nielsen, E., Allister, R., & Cassidy, S. A. (2020). Key ethical questions for research during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Psychiatry, 7(5), 381–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30150-4

Janiaud, P., Axfors, C., Saccilotto, R., & Hemkens, L. (2020). COVID-evidence: A living database of trials on interventions for COVID-19. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX

I feel like Vatz is missing something important, though. He starts out by asserting that Blitzer was wrong to say a rhetor is not describing a dangerous situation or an embarrassing situation, only their own perception of their being in danger or their being embarrassed, but those are real forces which shape rhetoric. Even if the rhetor is objectively wrong, that does not preclude the chance that their erroneous perception will shape events in a very real way. The assassination of a president may not cause easily measurable harm to a population, but there are certainly measurable levels of psychic harm that can be visited upon a population that will shift the rhetoric and subsequent events in real ways. Reassurances are not nothing.

DrugScience (formerly Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs)

I'm not so sure this is the case across the board. Our desires don't always serve us.

I sometimes do want gatekeepers to prevent me from hurting myself.

I don't know how to translate this into advice for the next generation of media, though.