Media Coverage of COVID -19

[VauxhallandI]

Bench arrest video 'stage-managed by anti-lockdown protesters'

Three people were arrested during an anti-lockdown protest, including the woman seen in the video.

www.bbc.co.uk

A video shared online apparently showing a woman being arrested in breach of Covid rules for sitting on a bench was "stage-managed", police said.
Dorset Police believe the video was planned and recorded by anti-lockdown protestors during a demonstration in Bournemouth on Saturday.
Three people were arrested for failing to give their details and given fixed penalty notices.
The BBC has asked one of the protestors who posted the video to comment.
The force said two of those held were later de-arrested when they confirmed their details in police custody and a third was released when his details were verified - all three were issued fines.
Officers also issued at least seven other fixed penalty notices and 10 dispersal notices.

So it would seem the highlighting of the Police’s behaviour has upset them but the BBC are giving them front page exposure but little exposure of cancelled fines.

I’ve defended the BBC but am now finding their behaviour indefensible

 

[Domh245]

A question I've not seen answered about this graph is are the datasets really comparable? In previous years were hospitals routinely PCR testing tens of thousands of patients for flu even if they were asymptomatic?

Directly comparable, perhaps not, as like you say they weren't intensively swabbing everything to check if they had a flu (although then again given the nature of ICUs it is possible that everyone who went into one is thoroughly checked). However, between the fact it's looking at ICU admissions and cross referencing the absolute number of beds occupied, it's fairly clear that Covid admissions are above what would be expected for flu - I severely doubt that there are many cases of people going into ICU for something completely unrelated but happening to return a positive test for Covid

Unfortunately, baseline omission is a classic way of representing data, it sets off flashing red lights and Klaxons off inside my head that the person who made the graph is either an idiot, or trying to manipulate.

I did find the use of London only to be a little disingenuous too, if you're advocating restrictions for the whole UK, you should use figures for the whole UK.

Surely it sets off a flashing yellow light to indicate they're a Lib Dem!

As for London, that's the (only?) place that's seen the repeated calls of "we're running out of ICU capacity" so I think singling those figures out is OK. Lumping them in with the rest of the country would make it more susceptible to normal noise around the rest of the country - fluctuations of several hundred on the national scale are not unheard of. It's also unrepresentative then of the situation on the ground, so to speak - increasing ICU demand in London can't necessarily be met by sending critically ill patients elsewhere for example.

I think using London figures to advocate for whole UK restrictions is passable too - When you've got a clear example of what happens when you let things carry on unrestricted, it'd be foolish to let the same happen for the entire UK, particularly given how much of a lagging indicator healthcare is. By the time the data shows the dangerous situation developing, it's too late to stop it!

 

[DB]

As for London, that's the (only?) place that's seen the repeated calls of "we're running out of ICU capacity" so I think singling those figures out is OK. Lumping them in with the rest of the country would make it more susceptible to normal noise around the rest of the country - fluctuations of several hundred on the national scale are not unheard of. It's also unrepresentative then of the situation on the ground, so to speak - increasing ICU demand in London can't necessarily be met by sending critically ill patients elsewhere for example.

I think using London figures to advocate for whole UK restrictions is passable too - When you've got a clear example of what happens when you let things carry on unrestricted, it'd be foolish to let the same happen for the entire UK, particularly given how much of a lagging indicator healthcare is. By the time the data shows the dangerous situation developing, it's too late to stop it!

London doesn't exist in a bubble - presenting a few hospitals with shortage of capacity (which happens to some degree pretty much every winter) as demonstrating a national problem is deliberately misusing statistics.

At various times we've had this type of tactic used for various places, with the implication that it will go on to happen everywhere, which it doesn't - peaks differ in different places, and the exponential increase which is often implied rarely happens.

 

[Domh245]

London doesn't exist in a bubble - presenting a few hospitals with shortage of capacity (which happens to some degree pretty much every winter) as demonstrating a national problem is deliberately misusing statistics.

At various times we've had this type of tactic used for various places, with the implication that it will go on to happen everywhere, which it doesn't - peaks differ in different places, and the exponential increase which is often implied rarely happens.

Work in progress, but here's a graph using the same data as the FT showing England ICU bed occupancy and total number of beds 'open'



As of 7 days ago total bed occupancy has exceeded the typical number of beds open, is about 1000 more patients nationally than normal occupancy, and is on an upwards trajectory. "Lack of capacity" probably isn't the right word (occupancy rates are about normal at near 90%), but it's clearly far busier than usual which is quite clearly going to cause issues sooner or later.

That said however (and in relation to your second point), trying to frame it as a London vs National "problem" isn't the right way to look at it. Fully agreed that peaks will occur at different points, which is why it's important to act on what's being seen in London and the SE to prevent it becoming a truly national issue.

 

[Yew]

I think using London figures to advocate for whole UK restrictions is passable too - When you've got a clear example of what happens when you let things carry on unrestricted, it'd be foolish to let the same happen for the entire UK, particularly given how much of a lagging indicator healthcare is. By the time the data shows the dangerous situation developing, it's too late to stop it!

I'm afraid I disagree, we didn't use Nottingham or Manchesters figures to lockdown London, why do it the other way?

 

[Richardr]

A question I've not seen answered about this graph is are the datasets really comparable? In previous years were hospitals routinely PCR testing tens of thousands of patients for flu even if they were asymptomatic?

Asymptomatic, and indeed most symptomatic Covid patients, are not in hospital. As with flu, and most other diseases, only very serious cases will get anywhere near a hospital. Testing and hospital admissions are not connected - see March and April where there was virtually no testing outside of hospitals.

 

[Domh245]

I'm afraid I disagree, we didn't use Nottingham or Manchesters figures to lockdown London, why do it the other way?

Because they neither have populations of nearly 9m nor are hubs with significant travel to/from them across the country in the same way London is (particularly relevant in lockdown 1, less so now), and perhaps mostly because at no point other than the early autumn (when the tier system was largely able to keep a lid on cases) did they have a situation that was worse than London that was cause for a nation lockdown. By the time the third lockdown was called, cases were trending upwards near enough everywhere, and the new more transmissible variant was also well established. Sticking London in Tier4+schools and leaving the rest of the country open and only acting when they reached London level of cases would be downright negligent

 

[DB]

Because they neither have populations of nearly 9m nor are hubs with significant travel to/from them across the country in the same way London is (particularly relevant in lockdown 1, less so now), and perhaps mostly because at no point other than the early autumn (when the tier system was largely able to keep a lid on cases) did they have a situation that was worse than London that was cause for a nation lockdown. By the time the third lockdown was called, cases were trending upwards near enough everywhere, and the new more transmissible variant was also well established. Sticking London in Tier4+schools and leaving the rest of the country open and only acting when they reached London level of cases would be downright negligent

But it's far from clear that the rest of the coutntry would have reached those levels.

 

[initiation]

Asymptomatic, and indeed most symptomatic Covid patients, are not in hospital. As with flu, and most other diseases, only very serious cases will get anywhere near a hospital. Testing and hospital admissions are not connected - see March and April where there was virtually no testing outside of hospitals.

Perhaps I worded this wrong but I mean the number of patients who are in hospital for something else but happen to also test positive. Happy to be corrected but no stats have been made public on this; only the total number of patients who have tested positive (including those post admission). We have idea how many are actually being treated for covid.

 

[Domh245]

But it's far from clear that the rest of the coutntry would have reached those levels.

I think it's pretty apparent that it would, although even if it isn't particularly clear that things would escalate, from a "protect the NHS" point of view you'd be able to make the decision fairly easily, it's not like the difference to businesses between Tier 3 (which most of the country was in pre-lockdown) and the current lockdown are particularly big anyway?

In the interest though of "proving" the likelihood that the rest of the country would also see overwhelmed healthcare, here are trust level data for ICU occupation in South & Mid Essex (formerly mid essex, southend, and basildon trusts before this year)


and East Kent


Both of which were serve areas that were amongst the first to really feel the effects of the third wave. Given that data, I don't think it's a particularly far fetched idea that not putting in some form of more onerous restrictions would result in stretched healthcare

 

[DB]

Both of which were serve areas that were amongst the first to really feel the effects of the third wave. Given that data, I don't think it's a particularly far fetched idea that not putting in some form of more onerous restrictions would result in stretched healthcare

Those are all the SE- it's quite possible that cities which had recently already had high numbers would have fared far better.

Have you read that Stanford paper linked on another thread? It casts severe doubt on whether draconian measures actually achieve anything in these situations.

 

[Bikeman78]

Hold on a minute there - why would Covid wards require any different cleaning? Is that to prevent those patients in Covid wards from catching Covid?

I'm glad I'm not the only one that thought of that.

 

[Domh245]

Those are all the SE- it's quite possible that cities which had recently already had high numbers would have fared far better.

Have you read that Stanford paper linked on another thread? It casts severe doubt on whether draconian measures actually achieve anything in these situations.

Given that London was thought to have had high levels of infection to the point that some were beginning to think that Herd immunity was beginning to kick in, and has subsequently been hit as hard as it has, I don't see any reason to think that we'd see different trajectories elsewhere in the country. Unless of course the Thames Estuary air has some sort of impact on how readily it spreads

The Stanford paper is interesting, although it does show that the various stay at home orders in the UK did likely cause case rates to drop. It isn't clear what constitutes a "more restrictive" NPI under their scheme, and appears to only look at about a months worth of data at the start of the pandemic, so it's not without it's flaws. The most obvious argument against the "less restrictive measures don't work" is to point at London's case rates - if we assume tiers 1 & 2 to be "lrNPIs" then they quite clearly weren't having much of an impact on case numbers as they continued to climb. Even tier 3 looked to be having negligible impact on infections and loathe as I am to say "we must be seen to do something" you can't just sit back and do nothing at that point.

 

[Yew]

loathe as I am to say "we must be seen to do something" you can't just sit back and do nothing at that point.

In the words of Apollo flight director, Gene Kranz, 'If you don't know what to do, do nothing"

 

[Darandio]

If anyone is feeling down on this dreary Monday morning, remind them not to look at the BBC website!

Straight from the front page this morning we have headlines such as:

1. Prof Whitty: Next few weeks will be the worst
2. 'Most dangerous time' of the pandemic, says Whitty
3. The emergency mortuary helping with rising Covid deaths
4. Record number of firms 'set to close'
5. Hospital's oxygen supply in 'critical' situation

Depressing.

 

[Bikeman78]

If anyone is feeling down on this dreary Monday morning, remind them not to look at the BBC website!

Straight from the front page this morning we have headlines such as:

1. Prof Whitty: Next few weeks will be the worst
2. 'Most dangerous time' of the pandemic, says Whitty
3. The emergency mortuary helping with rising Covid deaths
4. Record number of firms 'set to close'
5. Hospital's oxygen supply in 'critical' situation

Depressing.


View attachment 88476

Simple solution, don't read the news! Nothing is going to change for the better in the next few weeks so what's the point?

 

[Darandio]

Simple solution, don't read the news! Nothing is going to change for the better in the next few weeks so what's the point?

Of course, that would be very simple. But there is another news out there and having another front page with such an emphasis on picking out negative headlines whilst burying positive news on lesser viewed areas of the site is depressing. BBC aren't the only one of course but it's kind of what this thread is about.

 

[yorksrob]

Sadly we're subjected to a news bulletin every hour on radio 2.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Are there any news outlets, feeds available that have a fair debate and level approach to this?

 

[kez19]

If anyone is feeling down on this dreary Monday morning, remind them not to look at the BBC website!

Straight from the front page this morning we have headlines such as:

1. Prof Whitty: Next few weeks will be the worst
2. 'Most dangerous time' of the pandemic, says Whitty
3. The emergency mortuary helping with rising Covid deaths
4. Record number of firms 'set to close'
5. Hospital's oxygen supply in 'critical' situation

Depressing.


View attachment 88476

You missed one.... Looking for answers in the life of a killer - COVID or a serial?

Depressing...

Sadly we're subjected to a news bulletin every hour on radio 2.

I usually listen to the World Service and even that is driving me nuts as it feels COVID non stop than add your commercial stations as well.

 

[mralexn]

Are there any news outlets, feeds available that have a fair debate and level approach to this?

TalkRadio is really good, you can also watch it live on YouTube.

 

[VauxhallandI]

TalkRadio is really good, you can also watch it live on YouTube.

Yeah I found them but to be honest its difficult to get in to bed with them as there are some absolute loons on board there!

 

[kez19]

TalkRadio is really good, you can also watch it live on YouTube.

I would suggest TimesRadio is another (gave it a go few nights ago) - its not bad but need to listen more.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Are there any news outlets, feeds available that have a fair debate and level approach to this?

If there are, and they have a YouTube channel, they’ll doubtless be shut down

 

[MikeWM]

Sadly we're subjected to a news bulletin every hour on radio 2.

I miss radio I've not been able to listen to anything since March due to the never-ending propaganda. Even AccuRadio had it last time I tried. At least with the TV you can time-delay and skip it.

 

[kez19]

I miss radio I've not been able to listen to anything since March due to the never-ending propaganda. Even AccuRadio had it last time I tried. At least with the TV you can time-delay and skip it.

The only station for me where its a brief bulletin in less than a few mins is Gold and thats just bearable!

 

[brad465]

Here's an article that for a change seems to break the stereotype about lockdowns causing us to save money, citing a single mum who has paid more in heating and shopping locally as a result of lockdown, while all the luxuries many have saved were never an option for her:

'My spending has gone up, not down, in lockdown'

A study finds that the financial burden on poorer families has increased during the pandemic.

www.bbc.co.uk

There are few benefits from lockdown, but one often touted is that people are managing to save a little money: lower transport costs, fewer shop-bought office lunches, cheaper childcare costs and no foreign holidays.

Single mum Caroline Rice gives a wry smile when asked if she's managed to squirrel away extra cash over the past few months during pandemic restrictions.

"My spending is up," she says. "The heating costs are higher because it's very cold. I'm having to shop locally because of lockdown, where the prices are slightly higher. The nearest Asda is 12 miles away."

The small savings on little luxuries that many people are making - fewer coffees or restaurant meals - were never an option for her in the first place.

Her meagre finances meant the registered child minder, who lives in rural County Fermanagh, was already living week-to-week. Now it seems like day-to-day, she says.

"There's a mental stress, fatigue, in having to check the bank balance every day to see how much I'm down," she says. "My child and I haven't bought any clothes in almost a year."

She's having to home-school her child. Many people wouldn't think twice about printing off their child's maths homework project. Caroline had to write it out by hand because they could not afford the ink.

And she is not alone. A new report on the finances of low-income families during the pandemic says they are twice as likely to have increased their spending.

It says extra costs for food, energy and remote learning equipment have piled financial pressure on the poor.

Sad as this story is, it might be a turning point in attitude towards restrictions if more go through this situation, especially if the effects of being on 80% pay for a long time start to mount up for many. It does seem the winter has made things harder in ways beyond just lower wellbeing as a result of poor weather.

 

[birchesgreen]

To be honest i haven't saved any money from lockdown/WFH either. Any less fuel use has been more than eaten up with increased electric and gas (and probably food too).

 

[brad465]

The Daily Express is well known for essentially bowing in delight to whatever Johnson and the Government says or does (also known as blank-licking). However they do have an article that I discovered, as a result of a tweet by Esther McVey, that says the "year anniversary will raise difficult questions for Boris":

Year anniversary of lockdown will raise difficult questions for Boris

BORIS Johnson has been warned that the year anniversary of of the lockdown will be a moment of reckoning in Britain when people will want answers if he wants to continue to pursue restrictions.

www.express.co.uk

BORIS Johnson has been warned that the year anniversary of of the lockdown will be a moment of reckoning in Britain when people will want answers if he wants to continue to pursue restrictions.​

 

[43096]

I wouldn’t have thought selling off treasured European art to the Middle East for £50m is quite in keeping with such principles either, but that didn’t stop her.

It's entirely in keeping with Communist behaviours, as opposed to theory, as seen in Animal Farm: "Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others".