https://www.thedenverchannel.com/entertainment/kentucky-gov-apologizes-after-man-seeking-unemployment-named-tupac-shakur-turns-out-to-be-real

FRANKFORT, Ky. — It’s no joke — Tupac Shakur lives in Kentucky and needs unemployment benefits to pay his bills.

Shakur’s name was brought up by Gov. Andy Beshear on Monday night as he spoke about prank claims slowing down unemployment payments, including one filed under the name of the late rapper Tupac Shakur.

The Lexington Herald-Leader reports the claim by Tupac Malik Shakur, who goes by Malik, is legitimate. He worked as a cook in Lexington until coronavirus restrictions shut down restaurants.

(...)

Meanwhile, Beshear personally called Shakur and apologized. Shakur forgave the governor, saying he understands and that mistakes happen.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/09/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-press-briefing.html

In interviews, Republican lawmakers, administration officials and members of his re-election campaign said they wanted Mr. Trump to limit his error-filled appearances at the West Wing briefings and move more aggressively to prepare for the looming recession. Some even suggested he summon a broader range of the country’s leaders, including former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, in an all-hands-on-deck moment to respond to the national emergency.

https://www.insidehook.com/article/news-opinion/david-dunning-armchair-epidemiologists-coronavirus

IH: I wanted to talk to you not only because you co-authored the paper that described the effect named after you, but also because of your tweet after (The New Yorker’s) Isaac Chotiner interviewed the lawyer Richard Epstein —

DD: [Chuckles]

IH: … which you called the “new nominee for most paradigmatic of Dunning-Kruger cases.” What is your sense in this rise of so-called “COVID Influencers” or armchair epidemiologists?

I have been paying attention, yes. It’s prompted me to think about how and when we see examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect in new situations, which this virus certainly is. Very few of us were alive during the last pandemic that broke out so virulently in 1918. So we’re not aware of what we don’t know. We’re grasping to find some sort of certainty and knowledge from whatever thin reeds might be out there. Obviously a virus that kills people is of particular interest, but what’s also of interest to a social psychologist is watching people’s reactions.

Are you surprised by how many people are falling into the trap of the Dunning-Kruger effect?

No, I’m not surprised. I should point out there are two different things happening here. First, there’s the response of people on average. Right now, it looks like social sheltering is much more successful than the experts thought. The short-term pain is tremendous, but the long-term effects seem to be good. Then there’s the response from people who spend a lot of time on social media and the Internet. There, we tend to see more of the extreme cases, the telling cases, the illustrative cases, like the economist you referred to. Those reactions aren’t a surprise to me.

What is it about certain people who feel that if they have expertise in one area, they can apply it to a different area?

The central lesson of our work is that we are all vulnerable to this effect. Different people are vulnerable in different areas. Some are more flamboyant than others … So when there is a new situation, like this virus, there are many unknowns, and unknown unknowns, we are not aware of. But we’re not very good at doing that. We’re not very good at holding down the idea of an uncertain situation. We should be taking it all in, and act according to uncertainty.

The genius of the human brain — which is usually a good thing — is that we’re very good at coming up with ways of addressing new situations. Of course, you could say that every situation is a new situation. This conversation between you and me is a new situation!

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/15/us/trump-radio-show-rush-limbaugh.html

On a Saturday in early March, Donald J. Trump, clad in a baseball cap, strode into the Situation Room for a meeting with the coronavirus task force. He didn’t stop by the group’s daily meetings often, but he had an idea he was eager to share: He wanted to start a White House talk radio show.

At the time, the virus was rapidly spreading across the country, and Mr. Trump would soon announce a ban on European travel. A talk radio show, Mr. Trump excitedly explained, would allow him to quell Americans’ fears and answer their questions about the pandemic directly, according to three White House officials who heard the pitch. There would be no screening, he said, just an open line for people to call and engage one-on-one with the president.

But that Saturday, almost as suddenly as he proposed it, the president outlined one reason he would not be moving forward with it: He did not want to compete with Rush Limbaugh.

No one in the room was sure how to respond, two of the officials said. Someone suggested hosting the show in the mornings or on weekends, to steer clear of the conservative radio host’s schedule. But Mr. Trump shook his head, saying he envisioned his show as two hours a day, every day. And were it not for Mr. Limbaugh, and the risk of encroaching on his territory, he reiterated, he would do it.

...