Jump to content

coronavirus


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

I read an interesting point just now that I'm as a guilty of as anyone.

People will say they have no trust in 'the media' - and they will say this when asked - yet will have some groups within that that they do trust and trust probably more than they should.

The classic one we all know is people in America who will say they don't trust media elites but will then believe everything Fox tells them.

Meanwhile, I get grumpy about 'the media' whilst tracking stories on the FT.

yes we all have some form of bias, many of us hidden aspects, especially if we instantly respond often without a analyses or some underlying strategic intent behind a story or position offered by say a politician.

e.g. At press conf the other day with the senior military commander outlining the army's involvement. In particular PPE logistics.  I assume this was to help take the heat away from PPE logistics as its harder to criticise  a organisation that holds wide respect.  So when he/they say its unprecedented we listen more... and means when we criticise we critising them when it comes to logistical problems. 

So then you focus your criticism on preparedness, knowing that we had huge stockpiles.  

Of course others area's to pick on with PPE but it helps narrow were to focus criticism where you think you can better defend.

e.g. when somebody says following scientific advice. It's hard to critise where their is a general consensus in the scientific community.  So you have to undermine whether its really scientific advice but rather  the advice is being massaged by some advisors. 

Of course it could just be simple without thought comment. Never-the-less theirs is strategic intent often....

The key is analyse and thoughtful thinking, which most of us don't make an effort with.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 7.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 minutes ago, redjonn said:

maybe but I guess first task is to create the capability. It seems they are doing so. We can argue it was slow etc... but to get to the capability is an achievement as many said it couldn't be done..

Obviously not sufficient just having the capability and for sure questions should be asked about how going to ensure usage of the tests... or if in order to achieve usage we are just filling the testing just to make use of... as distinct from a logical rational as whom is being tested and why.

I have no problem holding politicians to account, especially in an informed debate/discussion.  In the main the questioning at press conference is merely sound bite stuff either looking for a sensational headline or to front a news item slot with the question from their own journalist even where the question is merely a repeat of another journalist.   

Objective searching questions have been very rare.  

 

I actually think that the media questions part of the conference should be cut off and pushed to the news channels tbh, its how they are in Scotland. The questions from the media can relate to articles they are doing or for clarification on certain points, this isn't PMQ's and ultimately they can ask what suits their publication/channel. Because of that they are not often asking stuff that may interest many of us. It's why I think parliament is important in this process and we should stop giving air time on BBC One to a softly-softly Q&A that isn't probing and comes across as no more than propoganda. The only need this serves is the journos who need certain answers, and ultimately that's what it is for. It's then up to us to read or watch those sources. And they certainly don't need to be objective. 

On the testing capacity, I agree, and my issue is with the lies that come out of Hancock's mouth when he gets defensive. The demand was there, they weren't providing the tests through channels that would meet the demand. It appears they have drastically stepped up capacity, it will be interesting to see the ramp up this week, as he has set himself a clear target that he can't now lie about like he did with his 25k target. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bob8 said:

Normally when people say they do not trust the media, they think they are brilliant at critical thinking. In reality, it means the shop around to find what agrees with them.

The thing is that there is very little in the way of impartial journalism these days. Everything is an opinion piece. It’s only natural that people will read the things that affirm their own opinion.

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ckn said:

I think this must be one of those "let's leak it and see how it flies" things.

I've seen a couple of comments today saying that this will do nothing but make the majority happy at the expense of the minority. For example, lonely people, older folk with few friends/family left and so on, it'll just increase their feelings of worthlessness if they can't add 10 people to the list, or are blocked because the people they'd like to add to it are already at their maximum number of households/friends.

I was talking about this option a few days ago, so I think another country is doing it as I must have read about it. 

In reality though as people's lists of 10 can't all be the same, you are ultimately going to be exposed to dozens of people, plus some of those will be working, going to supermarkets etc. It may be a reduction in contact for many, but maybe not in reality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A thought provoking article by Sky on next steps for the country

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-will-government-accept-a-level-of-death-to-get-uk-going-again-11977931

I just don't see how social distancing is possible with a return to daily life. People already struggle to deal with this in supermarkets, when i go out for a walk. Commuting on public transport is incompatable, a lot of workplaces either have large open plan offices or manufacturing plants at close quarters, together with enclosed environments in restaurants and shopping malls. Remember the lockdown and social distancing was only brought in to flatten the curve and prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed. Finding the balance is going to be tricky but one thing is for sure, governments cannot afford for the economies to continue to be obliterated both from a financial, human and societal impact.

Whilst I can quite conceive games behind locked doors for sometime, is the return of physical sport any higher risk than being in open plan offices, trains, planes or restaurants that will have to reopen in the coming months

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Derwent said:

The thing is that there is very little in the way of impartial journalism these days. Everything is an opinion piece. It’s only natural that people will read the things that affirm their own opinion.

I have to say this is why I found myself reading (and paying for) the FT and Economist. Most of it is not opinion and that which is is clearly marked. It helps but isn’t essential that on many - but definitely not all - issues we have similar beliefs even if they are more trusting of business than I will ever be. (For similar reasons, in normal times, I listen to the World Servic news in preference to anything else).

I’ve pretty much given up on the sites that are filled with opinion-havers-for-coin.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

A thought provoking article by Sky on next steps for the country

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-will-government-accept-a-level-of-death-to-get-uk-going-again-11977931

I just don't see how social distancing is possible with a return to daily life. People already struggle to deal with this in supermarkets, when i go out for a walk. Commuting on public transport is incompatable, a lot of workplaces either have large open plan offices or manufacturing plants at close quarters, together with enclosed environments in restaurants and shopping malls. Remember the lockdown and social distancing was only brought in to flatten the curve and prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed. Finding the balance is going to be tricky but one thing is for sure, governments cannot afford for the economies to continue to be obliterated both from a financial, human and societal impact.

Whilst I can quite conceive games behind locked doors for sometime, is the return of physical sport any higher risk than being in open plan offices, trains, planes or restaurants that will have to reopen in the coming months

True, the lock down wasn't to stop any one ever getting Covid 19 again. It was as you say to stop the NHS from being overwhelmed. 

Someone needs to move first, as if people want to wait until Christmas than alot of sporting clubs just won't exist anymore. 

There will never be a time when people aren't going to be safe entirely, but at some point we have measure a risk/reward balance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

A thought provoking article by Sky on next steps for the country

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-will-government-accept-a-level-of-death-to-get-uk-going-again-11977931

I just don't see how social distancing is possible with a return to daily life. People already struggle to deal with this in supermarkets, when i go out for a walk. Commuting on public transport is incompatable, a lot of workplaces either have large open plan offices or manufacturing plants at close quarters, together with enclosed environments in restaurants and shopping malls. Remember the lockdown and social distancing was only brought in to flatten the curve and prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed. Finding the balance is going to be tricky but one thing is for sure, governments cannot afford for the economies to continue to be obliterated both from a financial, human and societal impact.

Whilst I can quite conceive games behind locked doors for sometime, is the return of physical sport any higher risk than being in open plan offices, trains, planes or restaurants that will have to reopen in the coming months

I think there's going to be different geographic scenarios too. London and the wider London commuting area is different to the rest of the UK - both in terms of scale and density of commuters.

How the phased restart comes about is going to be another thing with differences in opinion and no real clear answer. Its extremely reliant upon public adherence to guidance and rules as Sweden and the USA have contrastingly shown.

The point about flattening the curve is essential, its about making sure the hospital admissions are manageable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ckn said:

I think this must be one of those "let's leak it and see how it flies" things.

I've seen a couple of comments today saying that this will do nothing but make the majority happy at the expense of the minority. For example, lonely people, older folk with few friends/family left and so on, it'll just increase their feelings of worthlessness if they can't add 10 people to the list, or are blocked because the people they'd like to add to it are already at their maximum number of households/friends.

Be interesting to see how such a scenario would be enforced/monitored. 10 is probably a number plucked out of the air that 'they' think will be acceptable to most, a bit like the 5 fruit and veg a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

....

On the testing capacity, I agree, and my issue is with the lies that come out of Hancock's mouth when he gets defensive. The demand was there, they weren't providing the tests through channels that would meet the demand. It appears they have drastically stepped up capacity, it will be interesting to see the ramp up this week, as he has set himself a clear target that he can't now lie about like he did with his 25k target. 

Just on the testing, and ignoring any goals set for current testing and whether achieve or not.

I would have thought the purpose is to help with lifting of restrictions. That is the Test, Track, & Trace not so much about how many we test now or on April 30th. All be it is an opportunity to question/hold to account over hitting targets. Never-the-less the broader aspect is that we can Test, Track and Test so we don't have to go into any sort of cross UK lock-down again.

That is we need to continue to increase capability beyond 100k and more locally to enable us to live with the virus in our midst for a good while.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

The germans are miles ahead of us. 

After all, It can be true that the Germans are far ahead of us *and* that lots of Germans will still die.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think there's going to be different geographic scenarios too. London and the wider London commuting area is different to the rest of the UK - both in terms of scale and density of commuters.

How the phased restart comes about is going to be another thing with differences in opinion and no real clear answer. Its extremely reliant upon public adherence to guidance and rules as Sweden and the USA have contrastingly shown.

The point about flattening the curve is essential, its about making sure the hospital admissions are manageable.

Not sure Sweden's a great example. 2.5 times as many deaths as the combined total of the other Scandinavian countries and 3x deaths per capita than the next most affected. But hey, as that country's health advisor said, many were the old and vulnerable in care homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Not sure Sweden's a great example. 2.5 times as many deaths as the combined total of the other Scandinavian countries and 3x deaths per capita than the next most affected. But hey, as that country's health advisor said, many were the old and vulnerable in care homes.

Sweden is an example of a country that has implemented social distancing and has generally followed the rules.

Flattening the curve for them was possible that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an echo in here...

Anyhoo, how would the other national papers respond, apart from the Mirror and Guardian?

Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

A bit political?

 

 

10 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Not at all. This section is for factual material. The political section is for fake news.

Posts you’re referring to have been moved. It’s getting tiring now.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

20k+ deaths in just 51 days... ?

20,000+ hospital deaths. This isn't even the cumulative total with care home and community deaths included.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

20,000+ hospital deaths. This isn't even the cumulative total with care home and community deaths included.

Adding 50% is still the conservative option to cover out of hospital deaths. Unsubstantiated but credible views that it’s higher than that. 

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a couple of weeks the ONS figures that include all covid deaths will be higher than hospital deaths even though obviously they’ll still be a couple of weeks behind. I wonder if more media sources will start using that number rather than the hospital figures. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, gingerjon said:

I have to say this is why I found myself reading (and paying for) the FT and Economist. Most of it is not opinion and that which is is clearly marked. It helps but isn’t essential that on many - but definitely not all - issues we have similar beliefs even if they are more trusting of business than I will ever be. (For similar reasons, in normal times, I listen to the World Servic news in preference to anything else).

I’ve pretty much given up on the sites that are filled with opinion-havers-for-coin.

A mate of mine who was an unreconstructed Marxist used to buy The Economist every month. He reckoned it was the best source of objective information on British capitalism you could get your hands on.

"I'm from a fishing family. Trawlermen are like pirates with biscuits." - Lucy Beaumont.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.