India confirms two Nipah cases in West Bengal; region mounts screening, WHO says risk low

Overstating threat by focusing on fear and dramatic language over base rates: Coverage can concentrate on public anxiety, headlines, and worst‑case fatality figures without equal emphasis on low transmission rates, making a serious but contained threat appear more globally dangerous than evidence supports.

Over‑reassurance by echoing official statements without probing uncertainty: Reports may heavily rely on institutional or government claims of control and low risk, with limited discussion of unknowns, data gaps, or independent expert views, which can underplay potential challenges or residual risk.

Selective emphasis on either containment success or external precautions: Narratives can highlight either domestic containment efforts or foreign screening and concern, downplaying the other side, which skews perceptions of how confident or worried different actors actually are about the outbreak.

Appeal to authority without explaining underlying evidence or limits: Frequent invocation of health agencies or officials as definitive sources may replace clear explanation of data, methods, and caveats, encouraging readers to accept conclusions without understanding how robust they are.

Background risk framed mainly through past crises to imply recurrence: References to previous deadly outbreaks and lockdown experiences can imply a similar trajectory for the current event, even when current epidemiological indicators suggest a different and more limited pattern of spread.