Some snippets from a podcast, and I found it relevant to some of my bugbears regarding the daily British press briefings.
Do you think the press / political commentators have done a good job on reporting on the crisis so far?
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Some snippets from a podcast, and I found it relevant to some of my bugbears regarding the daily British press briefings.
Do you think the press / political commentators have done a good job on reporting on the crisis so far?
The public deserve accurate information and honesty about the situation. If we don't get it, the media is right to point out errors. It should also seek to be critical, both of Westminster and the Senedd, where warranted.Originally Posted by chris lee
Pity the media hasn't been this proactive over the last few years
You see a questioning of the role of the media in that clip, I see two people using the current crisis to push a political agenda. We're all guilty to different degrees of applying our prejudices and views to any situation. For me, this atrticle;-
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...r-nose-growing
although a bit over the top in some regards, hits the target far more often than your video clip does - the daily briefings we get are just scripted propaganda to a degree and I would say that, if anything, the media needs to be more "critical" in their questioning than it has been up to now.
2 interesting stories over the past few days which speaks to role media play:
- Matt Hancock says 100,000 tests target met. His initial verbal statement seems to suggest 100,000 tests was the target, the government twitter page suggests 100,000 people was the initial target, the numbers are massaged to include tests posted, the 100,000 tests a day happens once (twice?) before dropping back below that.
How successfully has the media reported that? I bet there are thousands who have heard 100,000 target met and haven't heard anything else.
Steve Baker (Tory MP) tweets that Dominic Cummings' influence has the media amplifying government messages. Does 100,000 matter or are we just talking about this small detail obsessively when should be talking about overall picture which media is not describing well enough to average person?
- Sunday Times headline suggests over-70's will continue to be asked to shield, Matt Hancock tweets that they were never asked to unless having specific health condition. His tweet reads that "the clinically vulnerable, who were asked to stay in lockdown for 12 weeks, emphatically do not include all the over 70's" but even in this tweet correcting a headline has got it wrong: the clinically extremely vulnerably do not include all over 70's (group asked to shield) but the clinically vulnerable (group asked to take greater care when social distancing) do include all over 70's.
Again, how well are the media communicating what's actually going on to ordinary person, but also how well are the government?
To summarise, to be critical of the media for becoming adversarial is wrong just as long as they're doing so to scrutinize and provide clear picture of events, but accuracy needed and highlighted clarifications needed where there information becomes unclear. However, there are those in government who want media to be seen as "gotcha merchants" because media (perception of and flaws in system) can be used to protect politicians - an Irish meme the other day suggesting UK media using good news stories like Colonel Tom to distract from valid criticism of UK actions.
How well are the media doing on reporting on crisis? Not always as well as I would like (some fantastically detailed and researched articles aside) but my reasons are not the same as those thinking it's all too negative or unsupportive. Or so says the unnamed government source.
Correction: to be critical of the media for becoming critical is wrong just as long as they're doing so to scrutinize and provide clear picture of events.
However, there are those in government, and in the media, who want media to be seen as "gotcha merchants" because media (perception of and flaws in system) can be used to protect politicians.
Seems like the term "gotcha" is becoming the new "fake news" in that you can shout it at someone asking a valid question. We're already seeing it happen here and in the US
Aggressive questions asked by snowflakes then, isn't that a contradiction in terms?
- Sunday Times headline suggests over-70's will continue to be asked to shield, Matt Hancock tweets that they were never asked to unless having specific health condition. His tweet reads that "the clinically vulnerable, who were asked to stay in lockdown for 12 weeks, emphatically do not include all the over 70's" but even in this tweet correcting a headline has got it wrong: the clinically extremely vulnerably do not include all over 70's (group asked to shield) but the clinically vulnerable (group asked to take greater care when social distancing) do include all over 70's.
I don't quite get your point here. The 2 groups mentioned are different, and what they were asked to do was different, there is nothing wrong with it.
The extremely vulnerable (people with underlying health concerns) of any age were asked to "shield" for 12 weeks.
The clinically vulnerable (People who might be more suseptible to the virus) which includes old people (anyone over 70), because it is killing them disproportionally) were asked to take greater care when social distancing even if the did not fall into group 1..
The two 'groups' are quite disctinct and quite different.
There is a difference between total isolation sheilding and taking extra care social distancing.
She's stating the bleedin' obvious. If the Govt. hasn't reached it's target on testing, or Care homes aren't getting PPE, whilst there should be questions asked - and answered - I really hope when this is over and the economy is wrecked with 4-5 million long term un-employed , serious questions are asked about the wisdom, ethics, and advice-taken, about the whole approach..
2 points, shouldn't privately run care homes that make old folks sell their homes to pay the fees be supplying their own PPE and will they be held to account for failing, just as people want the government (rightly) to be held to account?
And the other point is how long are you going to wait before it can be said the 4-5 million you conjecture on can be classed as "long-term"?
Care Homes are outside the NHS, run privately for profit. They should have been sourcing PPE themselves, not waiting the Govt. to supply. Re pt. 2, I think it's going to be years not months. The UK is more dependent on the service, hospitality, retail sectors than most countries. There isn't going to be much left of it unfortunately..
That's the spirit! It's a relief to hear you sounding so upbeat. I was getting worried about you. After all, just a fortnight ago you were predicting that the only people working by the end of this year would be those in the public sector and there wouldn't be any money available to pay them. I'm glad your outlook is becoming a bit more positive.
Public sector work? *whistles*
Everyone is wise after the fact, we're still dealing with mass uncertainty about covid-19. Scientific views change seemingly every day - an kids transmit or not? Are German figures accurate? So on, so on...
I doubt any government has handled it perfectly or could.
What's needed now is to balance the risks to remove the lockdown as efficiently as possible.
Even now, some people can't resist a public sector dig - will you be applauding the NHS workers on Thursday?
Battered cod, carrots, fresh broad beans, fresh asparagus, homemade hollandaise.
Don't forget the chips.
The media like the opposition parties have been no where near critical enough. Hopefully Starmer steps up soon as it looks like they are scared of looking like they are trying to get political gain from this.
We are almost certainly going to be the worst hit country in Europe.
The press need to step up and hold this lot to account. It seems only Piers Morgan has the bottle to do this so far.
It is a mixed picture, but generally the media (or at least the media that get invited to the daily press conferences and dominate the print and broadcast world) have been too passive and too unchallenging. There are exceptions - even in the BBC - but not enough.
The media's job is to hold to account, not merely report what the government say
I'm surprised anyone thinks the BBC and ITV are anywhere near holding the government to account, nevermind the way some of the newspapers are behaving. The frontpages of the Sun and Mail would make a dictatorship blush
Private Care Homes dont make old folks sell their homes.
no they just want payment and they don't care how the 'client' gets the money.
My newsagent, credit card company and local supermarket are exactly the same.
we all see the people in the media and who we know personally who tell the tale of having to sell mum and dad's home to pay for their care. So if the care homes are taking the money they should be responsible for the care they are charging for, where ever the money comes from. And that should include adequate PPE.
I am not suggesting the Governemt tells them to "Get your own" and let the people die if they don't, but when everything quietens down they should be held accountable just as the government should
Maybe we should also examine our own values whereby we farm off our old folk to care homes to the degree that we do.
How are we expecting thousands of individual care homes across the UK to procure enough PPE for their staff when our own Govt. (with their connections and finances) are failing to procure enough for the areas that they're responsible for?
I think we're all in agreement that private care homes should be funding it themselves, like any other business should be, but I don't think we can expect all of these separate businesses to be able to source their own PPE at this time.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote