When it comes to spreading disinformation about climate change or the risks of smoking, I can clearly see how it protects economic interests (e.g. the value of the assets of the fossil fuel industry or the tobacco industry). I therefore understand that these lies are (have been) regularly pushed by people who do not necessarily believe in them.
But what are the strategic considerations behind the active spread of anti-vax theories? Who gains from this? Is it just an effective topic to rile up a political base? Because it hits people right in the feels? Is it just a way to bring people together on one topic, in order to use that political base for other purposes?
Or is anti-vax disinformation really only pushed by people who believe it?
Not only that, but this whole thing has become a hot-button issue, and any time that happens, all logic and scientific facts are the first thing to go.
For example, there are people that are allergic to certain vaccines. That is a fact. They are a small amount of the population, but they do exist, and they will die or get really sick if they get whatever vaccine.
Try telling that to someone who blindly follows the media’s crushing message of “All vaccines are good. Anyone who doesn’t get a vaccine is a stupid, poor redneck” They will not be able to hear it. They will think you’re anti-vaxx.