Media Coverage of COVID -19

[kez19]

I am surprised that the media do not seem to have picked up on Rishi Sunak's comment towards the end of his conference which was "we must learn to live with it and live without fear", referring to Covid 19. It sounds like good advice to me and contradicts Johnsons doom and gloom.

Or to throw the spanner into it done on purpose, show the other parts but not that...

Which makes me think sometimes as if the media enjoy the doom/gloom than positive stories.

 

[Yew]

As the BBC go on Covid-19, this seems fairly balaced for them

Covid-19: What do scientists think of the PM's plan?

The new coronavirus restrictions have been met with mixed reviews.

www.bbc.co.uk

[Usual Scaremongering above...]

But Paul Hunter, a professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia, said if controlling the epidemic was the only important thing, "we'd go back to the situation in the last week of March". The downside, he said, would be depriving our children of another six months of their education.

"We need to steer a course that minimises economy and educational harms while suppressing the virus as much as possible," he said.

He says that the new measures are unlikely to be enough to bring the epidemic back into decline, though they may make a dent in transmission.

"Is this going to control the virus so it doesn't keep on increasing? Very clearly no," he said. "But the question is, will it make it increase more slowly?"

What's uncertain is how much cases will rise by, and whether protecting vulnerable people will prove possible.

Prioritising jobs - and schools
Prof Carl Heneghan at the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine goes further.

Before the new restrictions were published, Prof Heneghan jointly signed a letter to the prime minister describing the idea of suppressing coronavirus as "increasingly unfeasible".

And, he said, it was leading to "significant harm across all age groups, which likely offsets any benefits".

Instead, Prof Heneghan believes it's time to control the spread rather than suppress it, and accept that cases will rise.

Crucially, he's not disagreeing with his colleagues on the science here. His comments accept a stricter lockdown would bring down cases, at least for a while. And looser restrictions would allow them to rise. But he believes the goal now is to "minimise social disruption" while managing the virus.

If the government rushes into "more measures," he says, "we'll talk ourselves back into a lockdown which, for a whole society, is hugely disruptive".

What about the NHS?
All along, one of the big motivations for keeping cases low has been the need to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. In spring, this meant closing down non-Covid services to prioritise fighting the virus and preventing the spread of infection.

But another fear soon emerged - that the harm from missed cancer operations, screenings and other types of care could offset the benefits of lockdown. Now, doctors' bodies are calling for restrictions to keep cases low, this time in order to also keep other services running.

The Royal College of Surgeons of England said it was essential surgery continued through the winter, unlike during the first coronavirus peak. Its president, Prof Neil Mortensen, said: "The prime minister was right yesterday to stress the importance of protecting the most vulnerable in care homes and hospitals.

"Thankfully, surgery has been able to safely start up again in many parts of the UK... [and] we must keep surgery going safely through the winter months, or tens of thousands will die from other preventable causes," he said.

"So it's a shared responsibility to help keep Covid rates low."

But the British Medical Association's chairman Dr Chaand Nagpaul called on government to go further.

While it was "encouraging that the government has, at last, recognised the need for more stringent measures to control the virus's spread" he said, there were a "a number of further actions which the government could take to prevent a second peak," including stopping an unlimited number of households mixing.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

The Observer are reporting on opinion polls showing Labour overtaking the Tories and Johnson facing a ‘revolt’ over the renewal of emergency powers this coming Wednesday https://www.theguardian.com/politic...es-revolt-over-forcing-through-covid-measures

In a sign of Tory unrest over both the extent of restrictions to counter a second wave of Covid-19 and the way parliament is being bypassed, the chair of the backbench 1922 committee, Graham Brady, is winning wider support for an amendment calling for MPs to be allowed to debate and vote upon any new measures before they are implemented.

 

[bramling]

The Observer are reporting on opinion polls showing Labour overtaking the Tories and Johnson facing a ‘revolt’ over the renewal of emergency powers this coming Wednesday https://www.theguardian.com/politic...es-revolt-over-forcing-through-covid-measures

Quite right too. These measures should be being subject to debate and voting. It’s a complete disgrace that it’s hot happened to date.

 

[brad465]

The Observer are reporting on opinion polls showing Labour overtaking the Tories and Johnson facing a ‘revolt’ over the renewal of emergency powers this coming Wednesday https://www.theguardian.com/politic...es-revolt-over-forcing-through-covid-measures

Quite right too. These measures should be being subject to debate and voting. It’s a complete disgrace that it’s hot happened to date.

There is also this report suggesting Labour might get onboard with the backbench amendment, although are also considering their own:

Coronavirus: Support grows for rebel MPs over law

Labour hints it could back Conservatives trying to increase MP scrutiny over lockdown restrictions.

www.bbc.co.uk

Labour is "very sympathetic" to a bid by Conservative MPs to increase parliamentary scrutiny over coronavirus restrictions in England, shadow justice secretary David Lammy has said.

Tory Sir Graham Brady wants MPs to have a say on changes to lockdown rules.

Ex-Commons Speaker John Bercow and Steve Baker, a former Brexit minister, have also spoken in favour of the move.

The government says it wants to work with MPs while ensuring ministers can react quickly to suppress the virus.

It has also said MPs will get the chance to vote retrospectively on the 'rule of six', which puts a limit on the number of people at social gatherings.

Mr Lammy told the BBC's Andrew Marr he was "very sympathetic" to the amendment.

"We need more transparency... and we should be debating the regulations and rules for the country," he said.

However he avoided committing support to Sir Graham, pointing out that Labour would table its own amendment and would wait and see if it was selected by Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle this week.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Quite right too. These measures should be being subject to debate and voting. It’s a complete disgrace that it’s hot happened to date.

Absolutely.
Boris has a big majority but some measures might have needed tweaking in order to pass. Without proper scrutiny, we’ll never know.
If MPs had been given the opportunity to vote on face coverings in shops, even those in favour might have seen the folly and inconsistency of exempting the shop workers, which has now been addressed

 

[Yew]

Does anyone have a transcript of this article?

Lockdown failed. We must follow the Swedish model and learn to live with Covid

The latest rise in infection should be more of a 'second bump' than a second wave and the response must be proportionate

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Mojo]

I knew a second lockdown was on the cards before we’d had the first one. In mid-March my team at the University of Edinburgh modelled a lockdown that ended in June and was followed by a slow, initially imperceptible rise in cases over the summer, culminating in a second lockdown in late September.

We knew that scenario was likely because we knew that a lockdown is a short-term fix, not a long term solution. However cautiously we relaxed restrictions the time would come when the epidemic started to take off again. In the UK, that time is now.

This is not mid-March though. Back then cases and deaths were doubling every 3-4 days. In mid-September, cases are doubling every 7-14 days and deaths even more slowly. This too was expected; the way we are living now does not permit the virus to spread as easily as before, so this should be more of a second bump than a second wave.

Some kind of response is called for, but it must be proportionate. One suggestion is a ‘circuit breaker’, the social distancing version of a short, sharp shock to drive down incidence over a two-week period. The virus would bounce back in time but we’d have bought a few weeks.

It is profoundly disappointing that six months into this pandemic, having rejected every alternative proposed, we keep coming back to lockdown, a strategy that is visibly failing around the world. If we must go this route, let us at least avoid earlier mistakes. The March lockdown was too harsh, failed dismally to protect those who most needed protecting, and had no exit strategy. A circuit breakermust be targeted to minimise disruption, especially to health care provision and education, but also to business and services; it must focus on protecting the elderly and frail; and it must be time-limited, come what may.

We should set some ground rules too. First, we deploy only evidence-based interventions, unlike the rule-of-six in England which unnecessarily applies to children, who play a minor role in transmission, and outdoor activities, which are very low risk. Second, we have a clear plan for using the time we have bought; for instance, to build testing capacity. Third, we agree on a long term strategy that does not involve a crippling on-off cycle of circuit breakers until whenever we might get a vaccine. We must not allow the cure to become worse than the disease.

That long term strategy has to be a risk-based approach to living with Covid-19. This is a very unpleasant virus but, for the great majority of people, not nearly so unpleasant that we should contemplate shutting down society to deal with it. We can help individuals assess the risk to themselves and the people around them, enable everyone to mitigate those risks while ensuring that the most vulnerable are protected, and thereby minimise the need for government-led interventions. Would that work? It seems to be working in Sweden.

Prof Mark Woolhouse is Chair of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh. He is a member of the UK SPI-M advisory group and of Scotland's Covid-19 Advisory Group. He is writing in a personal capacity.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Does anyone have a transcript of this article?

Lockdown failed. We must follow the Swedish model and learn to live with Covid

The latest rise in infection should be more of a 'second bump' than a second wave and the response must be proportionate

www.telegraph.co.uk

Here ya go:

Lockdown failed. We must follow the Swedish model and learn to live with Covid
The latest rise in infection should be more of a 'second bump' than a second wave and the response must be proportionate
Mark Woolhouse19 September 2020 • 11:30am
The latest rise in infection should be more of a 'second bump' than a second wave and the response must be proportionate



I knew a second lockdown was on the cards before we’d had the first one. In mid-March my team at the University of Edinburgh modelled a lockdown that ended in June and was followed by a slow, initially imperceptible rise in cases over the summer, culminating in a second lockdown in late September.
We knew that scenario was likely because we knew that a lockdown is a short-term fix, not a long term solution. However cautiously we relaxed restrictions the time would come when the epidemic started to take off again. In the UK, that time is now.
This is not mid-March though. Back then cases and deaths were doubling every 3-4 days. In mid-September, cases are doubling every 7-14 days and deaths even more slowly. This too was expected; the way we are living now does not permit the virus to spread as easily as before, so this should be more of a second bump than a second wave.
Some kind of response is called for, but it must be proportionate. One suggestion is a ‘circuit breaker’, the social distancing version of a short, sharp shock to drive down incidence over a two-week period. The virus would bounce back in time but we’d have bought a few weeks.
It is profoundly disappointing that six months into this pandemic, having rejected every alternative proposed, we keep coming back to lockdown, a strategy that is visibly failing around the world. If we must go this route, let us at least avoid earlier mistakes. The March lockdown was too harsh, failed dismally to protect those who most needed protecting, and had no exit strategy. A circuit breaker must be targeted to minimise disruption, especially to health care provision and education, but also to business and services; it must focus on protecting the elderly and frail; and it must be time-limited, come what may.
We should set some ground rules too. First, we deploy only evidence-based interventions, unlike the rule-of-six in England which unnecessarily applies to children, who play a minor role in transmission, and outdoor activities, which are very low risk. Second, we have a clear plan for using the time we have bought; for instance, to build testing capacity. Third, we agree on a long term strategy that does not involve a crippling on-off cycle of circuit breakers until whenever we might get a vaccine. We must not allow the cure to become worse than the disease.
That long term strategy has to be a risk-based approach to living with Covid-19. This is a very unpleasant virus but, for the great majority of people, not nearly so unpleasant that we should contemplate shutting down society to deal with it. We can help individuals assess the risk to themselves and the people around them, enable everyone to mitigate those risks while ensuring that the most vulnerable are protected, and thereby minimise the need for government-led interventions. Would that work? It seems to be working in Sweden.
Prof Mark Woolhouse is Chair of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh. He is a member of the UK SPI-M advisory group and of Scotland's Covid-19 Advisory Group. He is writing in a personal capacity.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I know local news websites as known for dodgy headlines but I think Bristol Live have taken the biscuit with this one.

"Reaction as new lockdown measures put in place in Bristol".

To clarify, there are no local restrictions for Bristol, the actual article is just about the recent nationwide changes. Utter joke of an attempt to get clicks.

 

[brad465]

How about this for a collection of papers tomorrow which seem to attack the Government (in one form or another):

 

[Class 33]

Richard Madeley talking a lot of sense on Talk Radio. Worth a watch/listen....

 

[nlogax]

Richard Madeley talking a lot of sense on Talk Radio. Worth a watch/listen....

I struggle to take him seriously in his continued guise as the real Alan Partridge, but yes he does talk a lot of sense there. I imagine that most people are coming around to similar opinions.

What worries me is that this whole process has done the square root of bugger all for the good name of science in our country. While I don't disbelieve the science involved here for a moment, it's up to politicians to interpret and apply that scientific guidance and steer it in the wider context of a (mal?) functioning economy. Governments and politicians have and will be the eternal factor in any national perception of incompetence but this situation has left science looking exposed as the major scapegoat for what's gone wrong.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Governments and politicians have and will be the eternal factor in any national perception of incompetence but this situation has left science looking exposed as the major scapegoat for what's gone wrong.

Did always seem, even back in March, that "the Science" was being set up as the potential fall guy to deflect away the blame from the Government for all their various shortcomings, mixed messages and general incompetence in dealing with the pandemic.

 

[adc82140]

Thing is, "the science" as a singular concept doesn't exist. It never has done. You have "the science" according to Chris Whitty, and you have "the science" according to Carl Henegan. They are both highly intelligent, highly qualified people, at the top of their field, but they disagree massively on the topic of Covid. Therefore how can the less intelligent in the Cabinet ever claim to be following the science? No wonder they are all so confused.

 

[DustyBin]

BBC News have just excitedly reported that over 1 million people are now known to have died OF Covid-19 worldwide, but the real figure is likely to be far higher. Please decriminalise non-payment of the licence fee, this organisation needs reforming from top to bottom or closing down altogether. Utter trash reporting.

Sorry to rant but I’m so annoyed, this needs to stop.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

My eyes have been opened by the media coverage of the pandemic, particularly the lack of balanced coverage, especially by the BBC.
This potential decriminalisation of non-payment of the licence fee cannot come soon enough

TV licence fee evaders will no longer face prison

Failure to buy a TV licence will be decriminalised and replaced with fines enforced in the civil courts and by bailiffs under government plans.Ministers are expected to announce the change as soon as next month with non-payment being treated as a “civil debt” in the same way it is for people who do

www.thetimes.co.uk

Failure to buy a TV licence will be decriminalised and replaced with fines enforced in the civil courts and by bailiffs under government plans.

Ministers are expected to announce the change as soon as next month with non-payment being treated as a “civil debt” in the same way it is for people who do not pay their utility bills.

 

[trebor79]

My eyes have been opened by the media coverage of the pandemic, particularly the lack of balanced coverage, especially by the BBC.
This potential decriminalisation of non-payment of the licence fee cannot come soon enough

TV licence fee evaders will no longer face prison

Failure to buy a TV licence will be decriminalised and replaced with fines enforced in the civil courts and by bailiffs under government plans.Ministers are expected to announce the change as soon as next month with non-payment being treated as a “civil debt” in the same way it is for people who do

www.thetimes.co.uk

Not sure that's a good thing from an evaders point of view. At present you can just tell them to piss off because they almost never have a warrant. I suspect it's cheaper/easier to get a warrant for a civil matter...
Mrs Trebor pays our licence fee, but I suspect those who don't are in for a surprise.

 

[brad465]

More backlash against the Government continues on the front pages:

Wednesday's national newspaper front pages

Sky News takes a look at the stories making a splash in Wednesday's national newspapers.

news.sky.com

I think the headlines in particular about missed breast scans are particularly important, as this highlights how our Covid response should never have been at the expense of any other health problem, while personally I would not be surprised (sad though it may be), if 2021 sees a scandal emerge out of this because excess deaths occur in those other conditions.

 

[trebor79]

"The Fool of 6" very good! Metro headline is also a decent pun.
Good to see that the media is starting to highlight the collateral health (and economic) damage from all of this. You hear people say "yeah but Cancer isn't contagious". True, but many cancers are very treatable if caught early, but are a guaranteed death sentence if diagnosis and treatment is too tardy.
Never mind controlling the virus, government is losing control of the messaging and I view that as a good thing.

Unusually there's been no detail about tomorrow's briefing. I do wonder if it's going to be rather different from what is generally expected. I wouldn't be terrifically surprised if there was a calm explanation from the scientists that it's not running out of control, the NHS has plenty of capacity and therefore we continue as we are for the time being.
I'd be very surprised if there was some loosening of the more insane measures, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility, although that's more likely to come later after stage setting tomorrow.

Having said all that I suspect it'll be doom and gloom and more nonsense like telling us all to wear facemasks outside (which I will not do, sunflower lanyard and that'll be the last time I wear a mask in any setting thank you very much).

 

[NorthOxonian]

"The Fool of 6" very good! Metro headline is also a decent pun.
Good to see that the media is starting to highlight the collateral health (and economic) damage from all of this. You hear people say "yeah but Cancer isn't contagious". True, but many cancers are very treatable if caught early, but are a guaranteed death sentence if diagnosis and treatment is too tardy.
Never mind controlling the virus, government is losing control of the messaging and I view that as a good thing.

Unusually there's been no detail about tomorrow's briefing. I do wonder if it's going to be rather different from what is generally expected. I wouldn't be terrifically surprised if there was a calm explanation from the scientists that it's not running out of control, the NHS has plenty of capacity and therefore we continue as we are for the time being.
I'd be very surprised if there was some loosening of the more insane measures, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility, although that's more likely to come later after stage setting tomorrow.

Having said all that I suspect it'll be doom and gloom and more nonsense like telling us all to wear facemasks outside (which I will not do, sunflower lanyard and that'll be the last time I wear a mask in any setting thank you very much).

On the one hand, I share your pessimism (even though masks outside really isn't going to do much for transmission - and having no escape from them isn't going to help people's mental states). But on the other I think it's possible we might see a change of tack. With ministers meeting with Graham Brady and others, and conscious of their worsening PR (as exemplified by post 1039), I think we'll see more of a move to transparency and focusing on giving reasons for measures, not just imposing them.

 

[DustyBin]

I do wonder if the newspapers can sense the change in public mood.... I do also wonder, and I’m probably being rather naive here(!) if some journalists are starting to struggle with their consciences....

 

[Skimpot flyer]

In some ways, if they were stupid enough tomorrow to mandate face coverings in any additional settings, in, for example, offices or worse, outdoors at all times, surely surely that would finally be the tipping point where (sane) people just absolutely refuse to dignify this lunacy any longer?
It comes to something when a former TV Presenter is talking more sense than the person ‘leading’ the nation...

LOCKDOWN DOESN'T WORK just delays the inevitable RICHARD MADELEY

WHEN, oh when, are we going to come to our senses and stop playing this ridiculous game of hide-and-seek with the coronavirus?

www.express.co.uk

 

[brad465]

In some ways, if they were stupid enough tomorrow to mandate face coverings in any additional settings, in, for example, offices or worse, outdoors at all times, surely surely that would finally be the tipping point where (sane) people just absolutely refuse to dignify this lunacy any longer?
It comes to something when a former TV Presenter is talking more sense than the person ‘leading’ the nation...

LOCKDOWN DOESN'T WORK just delays the inevitable RICHARD MADELEY

WHEN, oh when, are we going to come to our senses and stop playing this ridiculous game of hide-and-seek with the coronavirus?

www.express.co.uk

Not to mention that his opinion against a Government action has made it into the Express of all papers.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I do wonder if the newspapers can sense the change in public mood.... I do also wonder, and I’m probably being rather naive here(!) if some journalists are starting to struggle with their consciences....

A journalist at The Sun could run a picture of Boris with the headline
DROP THE DEAD DONKEY

?

Not to mention that his opinion against a Government action has made it into the Express of all papers.

Hitler wasn’t available

 

[Andyh82]

There is always a stories against the government and their handling of the crisis on the front pages, remember testing, care homes, schools etc.

What you are trying to show, and failing, is some sort of consistent revolt against the lockdown measures, but that isn’t there to see.

Two are pointing out delays in other Health services, and the other three ridiculing the PM for not knowing the exact rules. None are suggesting a relaxation of measures.

At the moment this is only found in specific stories often from columnists on page 12

There is a risk this forum is becoming a bit of an echo chamber, post the stories that reflect your view, ignore those that don’t, and come to the conclusion everyone thinks the same

 

[Freightmaster]

What you are trying to show, and failing, is some sort of consistent revolt against the lockdown measures, but that isn’t there to see.

Two are pointing out delays in other Health services, and the other three ridiculing the PM for not knowing the exact rules. None are suggesting a relaxation of measures.

At the moment this is only found in specific stories often from columnists on page 12

There is a risk this forum is becoming a bit of an echo chamber, post the stories that reflect your view, ignore those that don’t, and come to the conclusion everyone thinks the same

So in your opinion, how bad would things have to get before the media (and by association the general public)
started to "consistently revolt" against the never ending restrictions and lockdowns??


...or are you implying that the public are so brainwashed by all the fear and propaganda of the past few months
that they will remain complaint indefinitely, irrespective of how it affects them mentally/financially?

MARK

 

[Bantamzen]

There is always a stories against the government and their handling of the crisis on the front pages, remember testing, care homes, schools etc.

What you are trying to show, and failing, is some sort of consistent revolt against the lockdown measures, but that isn’t there to see.

Two are pointing out delays in other Health services, and the other three ridiculing the PM for not knowing the exact rules. None are suggesting a relaxation of measures.

At the moment this is only found in specific stories often from columnists on page 12

There is a risk this forum is becoming a bit of an echo chamber, post the stories that reflect your view, ignore those that don’t, and come to the conclusion everyone thinks the same

Whilst it is true that there are still some people firmly committed to lockdown measures, you would be kidding yourself if you think there is no change in how the public at large is feeling about them. More and more people are coming to the conclusion that none of what is being done is actually working, and that will soon start to become visible. The media's primary job is to try to sell their product and/or to generate income through advertising. To this end they respond to what they believe to be the public mood. So at the start of the crisis they sensed that people where afraid for their granny's lives, so they played on this and magnified these fears to try to maximise their readership. But now clearly sections of the media sense a mood change, they sense the growing anger at more and more pathetic attempts by governments to defeat a virus through vain political gesturing.

I am no fan of how the media have helped whip up the hysteria levels that seem to have become the norm, but it would naïve at best to think that they are not reflecting a change in mood. But don't take my word for it, sit back and watch how people react when queuing outside stores goes from being an annoyance but at least in good weather to standing outside as the rain / hail / snow comes at people sideways. Wait to see how increasing restrictions on social activates get ignored & how anger grows as authorities try to crack down on them. Wait to see how continued restricted access to healthcare starts to have a serious affect on people's health, wait to see what happens when furlough protection ends and millions of jobs are on the line. I think you'll find that the so-called echo chamber is a little more connected to reality that you like to believe.

 

[Andyh82]

I think Beth Rigby sounds like she is eager for a second lockdown, so the mood hasn’t changed everywhere

 

[Richard Scott]

I think Beth Rigby sounds like she is eager for a second lockdown, so the mood hasn’t changed everywhere

Ok, perhaps someone should suggest to her that she pays wages for all the people who've lost their jobs, accept public services will get worse due to lack of funding and in addition she'll see greater tax rises and probably a drop in pension. Will she be so keen then?