Covid-19

[FactualFrank]

As a novelty factor initially you will see pub trade pick up again in certain places, town pubs (some) do tend to be busy on a typical Fri/sat night, it's a case of waiting & seeing what happens when it's eventually lifted, I see positives & negatives, i did miss that particular evening as I was working the late shift so getting a last round in wasn't factored into the equation, the drug trade will still be the same I should imagine, people still seem to be snorting & smoking I've noticed & drinking off licence alcohol. It will be completely different for some people not wanting to go into the line of fire & for some people it won't be a problem until it strikes.

I expect the novelty would soon wear off, and you'll have half the people who normally go to the pub, still unsure and hesitant.

[quoonbeatz]

I'd stop reading those newspapers if I were you.
It's no wonder people are pulling you up for posting nonsense if those are your sources

I don't read any of those rags, just a two second Google of 'boris coronavirus packing', to check how it had been reported, gave me that info, but nice try.

[paulatky]

I don't think the paper misquoted him, I think he was so confident (mistakenly) that it would be 3mths & everything would be back to normal, the press advisor's also would have also recommended him not to panic the public to reassure them, lots of gullible people were under the impression that after 3mths the virus wouldn't be a threat because of that statement.

To say “turn the tide in 3 months” clearly ,to me anyway, did not mean the virus would be beaten in that time.

[paulatky]

I expect the novelty would soon wear off, and you'll have half the people who normally go to the pub, still unsure and hesitant.

A lot of people with families/elderly relatives will still be very reluctant to put their loved ones at risk by going out to the pub again and even going back to work.

[quoonbeatz]

I don't think the paper misquoted him, I think he was so confident (mistakenly) that it would be 3mths & everything would be back to normal, the press advisor's also would have also recommended him not to panic the public to reassure them, lots of gullible people were under the impression that after 3mths the virus wouldn't be a threat because of that statement.

Which is exactly the point, his words gave all those gullible people (which is a lot when you factor the circulation/hits of the rags mentioned) the impression that we'd beat the virus, it would be gone, etc.

He should have just been honest.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

To say “turn the tide in 3 months” clearly ,to me anyway, did not mean the virus would be beaten in that time.

Would probably help if they stopped using war analogies for this disease.

[taio]

Which is exactly the point, his words gave all those gullible people (which is a lot when you factor the circulation/hits of the rags mentioned) the impression that we'd beat the virus, it would be gone, etc.

He should have just been honest.

If we turn the tide in 12 weeks he will have been correct. Let's see where the trend is in 8 weeks. I don't see any dishonesty in what he said; just an important message to influence behaviour. It complements the highly used (for the same reason) strapline: "stay at home, protect the NHS, save lives."

[quoonbeatz]

If we turn the tide in 12 weeks he will have been correct. Let's see where the trend is in 8 weeks. I don't see any dishonesty in what he said; just an important message to influence behaviour. It complements the highly used (for the same reason) strapline: "stay at home, protect the NHS, save lives."

at what point are you expecting the virus to have been sent packing?

[paulatky]

Which is exactly the point, his words gave all those gullible people (which is a lot when you factor the circulation/hits of the rags mentioned) the impression that we'd beat the virus, it would be gone, etc.

He should have just been honest.

Grumps thought it would be 3 weeks and the lockdown lifted. As you say many people did.
What he said was the lockdown restrictions would be reviewed in 3 weeks time not lifted. That 3 weeks is up today.

[taio]

at what point are you expecting the virus to have been sent packing?

I don't know but not within 12 weeks. As you say only gullible people took what Johnson said to mean that. Did you think he meant it would have been sent packing within 12 weeks?

[thatdberight]

Would probably help if they stopped using war analogies for this disease.

like

You're right.

"a war against an invisible enemy”
"The obvious and widely drawn parallel has been, as so often in Britain, the second world war."
"the country was now waging “war” on the virus"
"we face a war against coronavirus and must mobilise accordingly"

Macron, The Guardian, Moon Jae-in, Draghi respectively.

But they're not Tories so they don't get the benefit of your tired, lazy, chippy response.

[taio]

Would probably help if they stopped using war analogies for this disease.

I think such analogies are right and are also intended as a call to action and rallying call for the public to come together through collective effort. We have seen brilliant examples such as hundreds of thousands of people signing up to be volunteers and businesses stepping up to manufacture equipment to help the cause - the sort of response we saw in the second world war. The messaging will be being influenced by very bright communication and marketing experts.

[quoonbeatz]

I don't know but not within 12 weeks. As you say only gullible people took what Johnson said to mean that. Did you think he meant it would have been sent packing within 12 weeks?

Nope, point is we aren't likely to send it packing. Keep up.

[quoonbeatz]

You're right.

"a war against an invisible enemy”
"The obvious and widely drawn parallel has been, as so often in Britain, the second world war."
"the country was now waging “war” on the virus"
"we face a war against coronavirus and must mobilise accordingly"

Macron, The Guardian, Moon Jae-in, Draghi respectively.

But they're not Tories so they don't get the benefit of your tired, lazy, chippy response.

Not sure why you're making it party political.

[taio]

Nope, point is we aren't likely to send it packing. Keep up.

We will in time. Why are you saying 'keep up'? Sounds a bit tetchy.

[Grumps]

Grumps thought it would be 3 weeks and the lockdown lifted. As you say many people did.
What he said was the lockdown restrictions would be reviewed in 3 weeks time not lifted. That 3 weeks is up today.

NO HE DIDN'T!!!!
You asked on a thread why everyone was mentioning 3 weeks following the PMs announcement, all I did was say it was because the prime minister had mentioned it. I made no comment either way whether it would be 3 weeks or longer
I've asked you many times to STOP TELLING LIES ABOUT Me, but you seemingly seem unable to stop.

[thatdberight]

Not sure why you're making it party political.

Because it's that which underpins some of the criticism. Even when people say it's not, their previous stances speak for themselves.

[CombatClaret]

You're right.

"a war against an invisible enemy”
"The obvious and widely drawn parallel has been, as so often in Britain, the second world war."
"the country was now waging “war” on the virus"
"we face a war against coronavirus and must mobilise accordingly"

Macron, The Guardian, Moon Jae-in, Draghi respectively.
But they're not Tories so they don't get the benefit of your tired, lazy, chippy response.

Not great examples when both the second and third quotes are commenting on other peoples words. And while I find the FT does have good unbias reporting at times I would hardly lable it a left wing source.

[Spijed]

Damning article in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... bMhrq-Yd8M

"If there was any chance of that interrogation happening, it was made even less likely by Boris Johnson’s illness. The nation’s tragedy became secondary to his infection. It is understandable that the hospitalisation of a nation’s premier – a unique and destabilising event – should concern the media and government. But Johnson’s illness was folded into a larger, editorialised narrative about his martyrdom and indefatigability, turning his sickness and recovery into a virtue of character. And as that hagiography was being enthusiastically written in large parts of the press, the stories of the thousands of dead and grieving were buried under daily updates of the prime minister’s “high spirits” from his ICU bed."

[CombatClaret]

Damning article in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... bMhrq-Yd8M

"If there was any chance of that interrogation happening, it was made even less likely by Boris Johnson’s illness. The nation’s tragedy became secondary to his infection. It is understandable that the hospitalisation of a nation’s premier – a unique and destabilising event – should concern the media and government. But Johnson’s illness was folded into a larger, editorialised narrative about his martyrdom and indefatigability, turning his sickness and recovery into a virtue of character. And as that hagiography was being enthusiastically written in large parts of the press, the stories of the thousands of dead and grieving were buried under daily updates of the prime minister’s “high spirits” from his ICU bed."

The PM is not a hero for getting the virus. This is three days old now so add a couple thousand more coffins: PM to scale.

EVRw3muWkAAcMWA.jpg (202.81 KiB) Viewed 2985 times

[Devils_Advocate]

James O'Brien's take on the govt and govt mouthpieces strategy around the Covid crisis. It goes with out saying this is just one man's opinion and a partisan and political one at that but some of the points do amuse me as I have seen some of it in action both on here and definitely across wider social media

The tactics are clear:

1) Pretend that idiots wishing harm on PM are representative of all govt. critics. (Ignore all examples of harm being wished on govt. critics.)

2) Orchestrate pliant MPs & client journalists in ‘quote tweet’ pile-ons against the most effective criticism.

3) Insist that the govt. has ‘followed the science’ without explaining what science.

4) If pushed on 3, argue that explaining the science will ‘embarrass our allies’.

5) Wibble about ‘national cycles’ when asked why the govt. failed to learn from stark foreign examples.

6) Repeat 5 when asked to explain unflattering comparisons with Germany, Ireland etc

7) Introduce pithy but vacuous slogans into public discourse so that blindly loyal forelock-tuggers at least have something to shout into the ether. See ‘population density’ & ‘herd immunity’.

8) Try to move the debate away from scrutiny of deeply flawed lockdown messaging towards one about when lockdown should end.

9) Blame govt. failures on doctors & nurses; WHO; Public Health England; civil service; China; the Boogie.

10) If all else fails, refuse all interviews.

[thatdberight]

Not great examples when both the second and third quotes are commenting on other peoples words. And while I find the FT does have good unbias reporting at times I would hardly lable it a left wing source.

The third quote directly quoted Moon - his word was "war". Not sure what your point is. I never labled(sic) the FT anything; in fact I didn't even mention them.

[dsr]

James O'Brien's take on the govt and govt mouthpieces strategy around the Covid crisis. It goes with out saying this is just one man's opinion and a partisan and political one at that but some of the points do amuse me as I have seen some of it in action both on here and definitely across wider social media


10) If all else fails, refuse all interviews.[/i]

I think they should move straight to point 10. After all, if there is a choice for what the people in power should be doing - reviewing the past to see whose fault it was, or working for the future to minimise the damage - then I'd vote for the latter. How much of the PM's and the cabinet's time should be spent on apportioning blame?

[thatdberight]

Not great examples when both the second and third quotes are commenting on other peoples words. And while I find the FT does have good unbias reporting at times I would hardly lable it a left wing source.

If you'd prefer something more direct from one of The Grauniad's leading ****-stirrers instead of the one where they argued that hopefully all these deaths will at least lead to a shift to the left in British politics, I'm happy to oblige.

Screenshot_20200413-133815.jpg (142 KiB) Viewed 2926 times

[CombatClaret]

If you'd prefer something more direct from one of The Grauniad's leading ****-stirrers instead of the one where they argued that hopefully all these deaths will at least lead to a shift to the left in British politics, I'm happy to oblige.

At least they file it under opinion, not the front page splash.

[Spijed]

James O'Brien's take on the govt and govt mouthpieces strategy around the Covid crisis. It goes with out saying this is just one man's opinion and a partisan and political one at that but some of the points do amuse me as I have seen some of it in action both on here and definitely across wider social media

The tactics are clear:

1) Pretend that idiots wishing harm on PM are representative of all govt. critics. (Ignore all examples of harm being wished on govt. critics.)

2) Orchestrate pliant MPs & client journalists in ‘quote tweet’ pile-ons against the most effective criticism.

3) Insist that the govt. has ‘followed the science’ without explaining what science.

4) If pushed on 3, argue that explaining the science will ‘embarrass our allies’.

5) Wibble about ‘national cycles’ when asked why the govt. failed to learn from stark foreign examples.

6) Repeat 5 when asked to explain unflattering comparisons with Germany, Ireland etc

7) Introduce pithy but vacuous slogans into public discourse so that blindly loyal forelock-tuggers at least have something to shout into the ether. See ‘population density’ & ‘herd immunity’.

8) Try to move the debate away from scrutiny of deeply flawed lockdown messaging towards one about when lockdown should end.

9) Blame govt. failures on doctors & nurses; WHO; Public Health England; civil service; China; the Boogie.

10) If all else fails, refuse all interviews.

And sadly, the government see protecting their vote share equally as important as saving lives.

[CombatClaret]

I think they should move straight to point 10. After all, if there is a choice for what the people in power should be doing - reviewing the past to see whose fault it was, or working for the future to minimise the damage - then I'd vote for the latter. How much of the PM's and the cabinet's time should be spent on apportioning blame?

Questions should be asked and answers demanded when resulting actions and reactions can still save lives.

[RingoMcCartney]

James O'Brien's take on the govt and govt mouthpieces strategy around the Covid crisis. It goes with out saying this is just one man's opinion and a partisan and political one at that but some of the points do amuse me as I have seen some of it in action both on here and definitely across wider social media

The tactics are clear:

1) Pretend that idiots wishing harm on PM are representative of all govt. critics. (Ignore all examples of harm being wished on govt. critics.)

2) Orchestrate pliant MPs & client journalists in ‘quote tweet’ pile-ons against the most effective criticism.

3) Insist that the govt. has ‘followed the science’ without explaining what science.

4) If pushed on 3, argue that explaining the science will ‘embarrass our allies’.

5) Wibble about ‘national cycles’ when asked why the govt. failed to learn from stark foreign examples.

6) Repeat 5 when asked to explain unflattering comparisons with Germany, Ireland etc

7) Introduce pithy but vacuous slogans into public discourse so that blindly loyal forelock-tuggers at least have something to shout into the ether. See ‘population density’ & ‘herd immunity’.

8) Try to move the debate away from scrutiny of deeply flawed lockdown messaging towards one about when lockdown should end.

9) Blame govt. failures on doctors & nurses; WHO; Public Health England; civil service; China; the Boogie.

10) If all else fails, refuse all interviews.

James Obrian, a man for whom actually being on the winning side of a Eu parliamentary election, general election and referendum is just a dim and distant memory.

Obrian has a very much abbreviated strategy around the Coronavirus crisis

1, Steal a wage by never letting a good crisis go to.waste.

[thatdberight]

At least they file it under opinion, not the front page splash.

I think you might be posting on the wrong thread now. No idea where these latest exchanges are going or what you think you're responding to.

[thatdberight]

Questions should be asked and answers demanded when resulting actions and reactions can still save lives.

Yes. Although not just "save lives". "Lead to a better outcome".

[Devils_Advocate]

I think they should move straight to point 10. After all, if there is a choice for what the people in power should be doing - reviewing the past to see whose fault it was, or working for the future to minimise the damage - then I'd vote for the latter. How much of the PM's and the cabinet's time should be spent on apportioning blame?

What if Philip Schofield and Holly Willoughby wanted to do the interview would that be ok?

[dsr]

Questions should be asked and answers demanded when resulting actions and reactions can still save lives.

Of course they should. But is James O'Bren the man who knows what questions to ask?

[ksrclaret]

You've caught the usual suspects with that post, Devils_Advocate.

Good work.

[CombatClaret]

Of course they should. But is James O'Bren the man who knows what questions to ask?

He's probably spoken to directly and listened to the concerns and opinions of more Nurses, Doctors, Keyworkers, Recoverees & Widows than most MPs or Toby Young.
So while he is not the arbiter of judgement I would hope he could distill some of the above into some constructive questions yes.

[thatdberight]

by Grumps
Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:32 pm
Forum: The Bee Hole End
Topic: Covid-19
Replies: 6830
Views: 125787
Re: Covid-19
Let's hope that 3 weeks total lock down will be enough to flatten the infection rate peak and give the NHS sufficient time to prepare. Anything beyond 3 weeks is (imo) going to be extremely difficult for the government to control as people become increasingly restless and impatient to get back to normal.

All he says is that lockdown will become increasingly difficult. Only an idiot would disagree with that.

[thatdberight]

And sadly, the government see protecting their vote share equally as important as saving lives.

Or, to put it another way, the government in a democracy can only do what the electorate wants it to.

Is that something you disapprove of?

[Grumps]

by Grumps
Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:32 pm
Forum: The Bee Hole End
Topic: Covid-19
Replies: 6830
Views: 125787
Re: Covid-19
Let's hope that 3 weeks total lock down will be enough to flatten the infection rate peak and give the NHS sufficient time to prepare. Anything beyond 3 weeks is (imo) going to be extremely difficult for the government to control as people become increasingly restless and impatient to get back to normal.

It was always going to be much longer than 3 weeks.
The clue was in the chancellor’s help for businesses and individuals when he said it would be for “ 12 weeks or as long as it takes”

Well, you've reached an all time low now paul
I didn't think that I'd posted that
It was by mala176 or similar
I did reply to it, but didn't write it
Please do me a favour and clear off

[paulatky]

With companies having to give 45 days notice if they are planning to make more than 100 people redundant , an announcement as to wether the furloughed scheme is to be extended beyond 12 weeks will need to be made very soon.

[quoonbeatz]

Because it's that which underpins some of the criticism. Even when people say it's not, their previous stances speak for themselves.

If you say so, I don't really keep up with people's allegiance. Better to be like me and not have any allegiance but I guess if it's ingrained in you that much, you'll try and pass any criticism off as 'Tory bashing'. Shame really as this isn't the time for party politics.

[quoonbeatz]

We will in time. Why are you saying 'keep up'? Sounds a bit tetchy.

Not tetchy all bossman, you're good sport!

[Lord Rothbury]

He's probably spoken to directly and listened to the concerns and opinions of more Nurses, Doctors, Keyworkers, Recoverees & Widows than most MPs or Toby Young.
So while he is not the arbiter of judgement I would hope he could distill some of the above into some constructive questions yes.

Does anyone place any worth into what O,Brien has to say after his involvement in the Carl Beech (Nick) fiasco.

[Grumps]

He said he hoped 3 weeks would be enough.
We all hoped it would be enough but some of us knew it would not be enough and there were a number of clues. As I said the Chancellors furlough scheme and Boris’s “ will turn the tide in 12 weeks”

IT WASN'T MY POST YOU PRAT.

[paulatky]

IT WASN'T MY POST YOU PRAT.

Sorry Grumps it wasnt your post. Its difficult searching back and your name was linked to it.
Apologies for that but I am sure you mentioned 3 weeks somewhere.

[thatdberight]

If you say so, I don't really keep up with people's allegiance. Better to be like me and not have any allegiance but I guess if it's ingrained in you that much, you'll try and pass any criticism off as 'Tory bashing'. Shame really as this isn't the time for party politics.

Good try. But that's not what I've done. I've highlighted one comment by a poster (which you liked) about something as trivial as whether allusions to a war are inherently unhelpful. On a number of other points where useful issues were discussed, I've happily said that the government should be held to account now (where helpful) and later (where the full story is known).

I think you over-estimate your impartiality.

[thatdberight]

by Grumps
Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:32 pm
Forum: The Bee Hole End
Topic: Covid-19
Replies: 6830
Views: 125787
Re: Covid-19
Let's hope that 3 weeks total lock down will be enough to flatten the infection rate peak and give the NHS sufficient time to prepare. Anything beyond 3 weeks is (imo) going to be extremely difficult for the government to control as people become increasingly restless and impatient to get back to normal.

It was always going to be much longer than 3 weeks.
The clue was in the chancellor’s help for businesses and individuals when he said it would be for “ 12 weeks or as long as it takes”

I just checked that. It's not even Grumps' post.

You're a liar.

[Grumps]

Sorry Grumps it wasnt your post. Its difficult searching back and your name was linked to it.
Apologies for that but I am sure you mentioned 3 weeks somewhere.

I pointed out above where I mentioned 3 weeks, you obviously didn't read it, you'd rather make up posts to make things fit your obvious dislike of me.
Guess it shows what lengths you're willing to go to.

[tim_noone]

NO HE DIDN'T!!!!
You asked on a thread why everyone was mentioning 3 weeks following the PMs announcement, all I did was say it was because the prime minister had mentioned it. I made no comment either way whether it would be 3 weeks or longer
I've asked you many times to STOP TELLING LIES ABOUT Me, but you seemingly seem unable to stop.

Hes like a dog with a bone.....needs to move on now.

[paulatky]

I pointed out above where I mentioned 3 weeks, you obviously didn't read it, you'd rather make up posts to make things fit your obvious dislike of me.
Guess it shows what lengths you're willing to go to.

I will go back and try to find your post about 3 weeks. It may have been in a thread about the PL restarting.I think I queeried about where you got 3 weeks from and you replied that the PM had said it. Maybe you can find that post quicker than I can

[Grumps]

I will go back and try to find your post about 3 weeks. It may have been in a thread about the PL restarting.I think I queeried about where you got 3 weeks from and you replied that the PM had said it. Maybe you can find that post quicker than I can

I've told you at least 4 times... You asked where people had got 3 weeks from... All I did was tell you it was because the pm said it... No further comment.
If you Carnt find it, use someone else's post and put my name to it.

[duncandisorderly]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=46212&p=1238904#p1238904

Here it is! I don't know why paulatky has got thistles in his fanny about it mind.