Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
@Godder I think the old media need to decide what they are. If they are being bankrolled by some entity, be it a person, corporation, or government then don’t expect me to believe they are independent.
They may act independently most of the time, but it’s the times they don’t that define what they really are. And unfortunately, given that they aren’t about to tell us when those times are, the public has to assume they are acting under duress every time the print a story or opinion piece.
For myself I prefer my media to be overtly biased so that I can decide which eye I need to use to read or listen to them. The ones that claim to be unbiased need to have diverse income streams before they have any credibility, which at least advertising tends to provide. But simply replacing a diverse revenue stream with a single one? No thanks.
-
@JC the problem with your last paragraph though is clearly highlighted with the current British system.
It's deeply divided here, and the primary reason is that people are stuck in their echo chambers and only read publications that agree with them. E.g - I decide that Boris Johnson is useless. I follow certain people on twitter, I read the Guardian, I read blogs by Labour supporters, and all I will do is further entrench my position. If I decide Boris is the opposite, I can do exactly the same thing with different people, papers and blogs.
Diverse opinions, journalists in the same publications is absolutely crucial for a well run democracy. You can only get that with independence. The BBC takes huge amounts of criticism from both sides, and that perhaps shows they have it right. Left/Right political supporters may well find this is the only publication they read that actually shows both sides. And as it's not all showing roses for their point of view, they are up in arms about the bias from it.
I'm not saying the BBC is perfect or above criticism - far from it. But it really is the only true mainstream independent source in this country.
Addendum - this is not a go at you. You are clearly smart enough to see the wood from the trees and ensure you are well informed enough. Arguably the most well-informed on TSF.
-
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@JC the problem with your last paragraph though is clearly highlighted with the current British system.
It's deeply divided here, and the primary reason is that people are stuck in their echo chambers and only read publications that agree with them. E.g - I decide that Boris Johnson is useless. I follow certain people on twitter, I read the Guardian, I read blogs by Labour supporters, and all I will do is further entrench my position. If I decide Boris is the opposite, I can do exactly the same thing with different people, papers and blogs.
Diverse opinions, journalists in the same publications is absolutely crucial for a well run democracy. You can only get that with independence. The BBC takes huge amounts of criticism from both sides, and that perhaps shows they have it right. Left/Right political supporters may well find this is the only publication they read that actually shows both sides. And as it's not all showing roses for their point of view, they are up in arms about the bias from it.
I'm not saying the BBC is perfect or above criticism - far from it. But it really is the only true mainstream independent source in this country.
Addendum - this is not a go at you. You are clearly smart enough to see the wood from the trees and ensure you are well informed enough. Arguably the most well-informed on TSF.
@MajorRage I agree with quite a lot of what you say. UK newspapers quite polarised. I tend to read Torygraph at home and Guardian online to get a cross section of views.
BBC is the least partial, but does suffer from two massive drawbacks:
-
In its drive to ensure minority views are represented it substantially underrepresents the majority view. Reviews have revealed that mainstream views get well less than 50% of airtime; and
-
There is a tendency (which may be a result/adjunct of 1) to act as if its reporters know better than the public and to be very condescending to those holding views with which it does not agree.
That said, still my go to for first crack at UK news.
-
-
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Arguably the most well-informed on TSF.
-
so another 5 cases today, a further death, with a 60 yr old man form Rosewood, with underlying health conditions.
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
so another 5 cases today, a further death, with a 60 yr old man form Rosewood, with underlying health conditions.
Shit, that's > 50% increase on yesterday!
-
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12327345
A brief summary of impact on Queenstown - 40% reduction in regional GDP and 25-30% unemployment (currently it's around 1-2%).
-
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12327345
A brief summary of impact on Queenstown - 40% reduction in regional GDP and 25-30% unemployment (currently it's around 1-2%).
I can vouch for the deadness of town. It's seriously eerie. Most houses and apartments are clearly rentals or 2nd homes, as their almost all empty.
Wonder how quickly restaurants and shops can ramp up also given the reliance on seasonal workers and travellers
-
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12327345
A brief summary of impact on Queenstown - 40% reduction in regional GDP and 25-30% unemployment (currently it's around 1-2%).
I can vouch for the deadness of town. It's seriously eerie. Most houses and apartments are clearly rentals or 2nd homes, as their almost all empty.
Wonder how quickly restaurants and shops can ramp up also given the reliance on seasonal workers and travellers
Plenty of seasonal workers still stuck there I think.
Having visitors to spend money is the biggest problem. -
@Crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12327345
A brief summary of impact on Queenstown - 40% reduction in regional GDP and 25-30% unemployment (currently it's around 1-2%).
I can vouch for the deadness of town. It's seriously eerie. Most houses and apartments are clearly rentals or 2nd homes, as their almost all empty.
Wonder how quickly restaurants and shops can ramp up also given the reliance on seasonal workers and travellers
Plenty of seasonal workers still stuck there I think.
Having visitors to spend money is the biggest problem.I dunno mate, I've run and driven these streets (to the supermarket only but a few different routes...😉) every day for the last 5 weeks. There is hardly anyone around, the tracks are deserted, there is never a queue at any of the supermarkets, and I swear 4 out of 5 houses seem empty . I reckon most bailed in the 48hr window they were given, aside from those few backpackers.
Guess they can always come back when they're allowed, but dunno if they all will. -
@voodoo I read reports that it was around 4000 temporary visa holders.
I think it is definitely different in different areas down there. My friends are all at the A-town/Lake Hayes end and are pretty much living life normally. Difference is that they either have land and stock or work in essential services.
There's also a few different groups of residents down there, all in a small area. Holiday homes/ Long term Rentals/ Short term Rentals (ABNB), retired and monied up/Rural/Semi-Rural.
I guess that if you move in the rural and monied retiree part of town not a lot is different. -
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Arguably the most well-informed on TSF.
Of all the ridiculous claims I've put on TSF over the years, and there have been a plethora, I'd certainly stand by this one.
-
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Arguably the most well-informed on TSF.
Of all the ridiculous claims I've put on TSF over the years, and there have been a plethora, I'd certainly stand by this one.
Nominative determinism?
-
Hopefully this sort of thing will become more common. Cindy can't just say blue sky shit without expecting questions to be asked
-
@canefan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Hopefully this sort of thing will become more common. Cindy can't just say blue sky shit without expecting questions to be asked
It does have a tinge of searching for news though. Has anyone complained with reason or been affected by this potential 'misunderstanding'?
To me elimination means elimination of danger...risk levels extremely low....f there is a case then an outbreak is able to be contained quickly.
As long as we can go about our daily lives normally, then that's elimination of threat.
In Risk terminology a risk has become an issue, mitigations have been applied to revert it back and the residual risk is low likelihood/High Impact. Still red but not likely.I have to say I am getting a bit tired of our so called reporters, who having to do their jobs instead of rehashing tweets, have shown very poor skills in finding 'real' stories and keep trying to invent issues to talk about.
-
@Crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@canefan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Hopefully this sort of thing will become more common. Cindy can't just say blue sky shit without expecting questions to be asked
It does have a tinge of searching for news though. Has anyone complained with reason or been affected by this potential 'misunderstanding'?
To me elimination means elimination of danger...risk levels extremely low....f there is a case then an outbreak is able to be contained quickly.
As long as we can go about our daily lives normally, then that's elimination of threat.
In Risk terminology a risk has become an issue, mitigations have been applied to revert it back and the residual risk is low likelihood/High Impact. Still red but not likely.I have to say I am getting a bit tired of our so called reporters, who having to do their jobs instead of rehashing tweets, have shown very poor skills in finding 'real' stories and keep trying to invent issues to talk about.
So you agree with the article then?
Yes, the prime minister is technically correct in epidemiology speak. A Dictionary of Epidemiology, 4th edition, defines elimination as a "reduction of case transmission to a predetermined very low level". However, the prime minister knows very well the general population is not fluent in epidemiological jargon, so up until she decided to tell us on Monday that "elimination doesn't mean zero cases" it's fair to say we've been misled. Whether that was intentional or not, we don't know. The reason we don't know is because our media failed to question the prime minister about it, bar one question that skirted around the edge: "Prime Minister, just on the elimination target, you say this doesn't mean zero cases. Does this mean you're prepared, or, at least, expecting, to have the virus in the country until there's a vaccine?" At least one journalist should have asked the prime minister why she thought it was acceptable to use "elimination" in her public speeches, when her intended meaning of the word is different from the accepted everyday use and understanding. It is fair to say our news media – or at least our political journalists – can do a better job.
I'd agree with that and it looks like you're saying much the same thing.
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@canefan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Hopefully this sort of thing will become more common. Cindy can't just say blue sky shit without expecting questions to be asked
It does have a tinge of searching for news though. Has anyone complained with reason or been affected by this potential 'misunderstanding'?
To me elimination means elimination of danger...risk levels extremely low....f there is a case then an outbreak is able to be contained quickly.
As long as we can go about our daily lives normally, then that's elimination of threat.
In Risk terminology a risk has become an issue, mitigations have been applied to revert it back and the residual risk is low likelihood/High Impact. Still red but not likely.I have to say I am getting a bit tired of our so called reporters, who having to do their jobs instead of rehashing tweets, have shown very poor skills in finding 'real' stories and keep trying to invent issues to talk about.
So you agree with the article then?
Yes, the prime minister is technically correct in epidemiology speak. A Dictionary of Epidemiology, 4th edition, defines elimination as a "reduction of case transmission to a predetermined very low level". However, the prime minister knows very well the general population is not fluent in epidemiological jargon, so up until she decided to tell us on Monday that "elimination doesn't mean zero cases" it's fair to say we've been misled. Whether that was intentional or not, we don't know. The reason we don't know is because our media failed to question the prime minister about it, bar one question that skirted around the edge: "Prime Minister, just on the elimination target, you say this doesn't mean zero cases. Does this mean you're prepared, or, at least, expecting, to have the virus in the country until there's a vaccine?" At least one journalist should have asked the prime minister why she thought it was acceptable to use "elimination" in her public speeches, when her intended meaning of the word is different from the accepted everyday use and understanding. It is fair to say our news media – or at least our political journalists – can do a better job.
I'd agree with that and it looks like you're saying much the same thing.
Nah, I disagree with the last paragraph. It's using semantics to try and generate a story that doesn't exist.
Messages need to be kept simple or they get woolly. She gave the detail verbally.
They seem to imply that anything other than complete annihilation is a shift and people are being tricked.