"The Pandemic is Over!"
-
@Mik said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
I saw the whole interview last night. He did really well, but I had one problem with it - 60 Minutes has a long history of convenient editing. 95% of the interview was not a shot of both men talking. It was a shot of the interviewer asking the questions, then of Biden answering them. That sort of scenario can be manipulated such that teleprompters can be used, retake after retake until he gets it right.
CBS has long been a mouthpiece for the Democratic party, and 60 Minutes has been shown to be less than credible journalism.
Absolutely. Certain things—scenarios, cinematography, editing, etc—make for good TV. They do an excellent job mining the overlap between "makes for good TV" and "makes us look credible." Every now and then those two also overlap with "good journalism," but it's rare.
-
@Mik said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
I saw the whole interview last night. He did really well, but I had one problem with it - 60 Minutes has a long history of convenient editing. 95% of the interview was not a shot of both men talking. It was a shot of the interviewer asking the questions, then of Biden answering them. That sort of scenario can be manipulated such that teleprompters can be used, retake after retake until he gets it right.
CBS has long been a mouthpiece for the Democratic party, and 60 Minutes has been shown to be less than credible journalism.
Absolutely. Certain things—scenarios, cinematography, editing, etc—make for good TV. They do an excellent job mining the overlap between "makes for good TV" and "makes us look credible." Every now and then those two also overlap with "good journalism," but it's rare.
@Aqua-Letifer said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
Certain things—scenarios, cinematography, editing, etc—make for good TV. They do an excellent job mining the overlap between "makes for good TV" and "makes us look credible." Every now and then those two also overlap with "good journalism," but it's rare.
This seems a very clear and succinct analysis. Once a viewer understands this, and applies his informed judgment (like Mik above), and then shares his insights with the offending program, we can be on the way to fixing the divide between "good TV" and "good journalism".
We just need the good journalists, if any are left, to stay alive long enough to help out with this.
-
What is your objection to his statement? An outbreak can be intensive without being a pandemic, can't it? "Pandemic is over" doesn't have to mean COVID never happens anywhere, does it?
I don't know. I'm just asking.
@Catseye3 said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
What is your objection to his statement? An outbreak can be intensive without being a pandemic, can't it? "Pandemic is over" doesn't have to mean COVID never happens anywhere, does it?
I don't know. I'm just asking.
Words have meaning. The definition of a Pandemic is based on 1) prevalence and 2) prevalence on multiple continents.
COVID is far more prevalent now than it was when it was declared a Pandemic, and it's certainly even more widespread. No the pandemic is still going on. It's people's Give A F#$% levels that are lower.
-
I saw the whole interview last night. He did really well, but I had one problem with it - 60 Minutes has a long history of convenient editing. 95% of the interview was not a shot of both men talking. It was a shot of the interviewer asking the questions, then of Biden answering them. That sort of scenario can be manipulated such that teleprompters can be used, retake after retake until he gets it right.
CBS has long been a mouthpiece for the Democratic party, and 60 Minutes has been shown to be less than credible journalism.
@Mik said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
I saw the whole interview last night. He did really well, but I had one problem with it - 60 Minutes has a long history of convenient editing. 95% of the interview was not a shot of both men talking. It was a shot of the interviewer asking the questions, then of Biden answering them. That sort of scenario can be manipulated such that teleprompters can be used, retake after retake until he gets it right.
CBS has long been a mouthpiece for the Democratic party, and 60 Minutes has been shown to be less than credible journalism.
I watched last night. Scott Pelley said "And I wonder..." about 5x. I normally count how many times he uses that phrase when asking a question during an interview.
I think it's fair to say the pandemic is over and we're now in a lingering phase of vaccinations, probably annually. There's essentially nothing our family wants to do that we can't because of COVID. Wow that was a poor sentence.
-
Or it could go the other way, if the original pandemic declaration was wrong.
Whatever it was, the stupid political overreaction to it seems to be over.
@Copper said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
Or it could go the other way, if the original pandemic declaration was wrong.
Whatever it was, the stupid political overreaction to it seems to be over.
If the stupid political overreaction saved a single human life, it was worth it.
Education is extremely important.
-
Apparently, a lot of folks did not like Pelley's softballs.
-
Wait one fvcking minute! This has a huge impact on his Student Loan Forgiveness plan. The COVID EMERGENCY is the justification he's using for the forgiveness plan. If he's on TV two months before the plan takes place stating the emergency is over, he has just undermined his legal defense.
-
Wait one fvcking minute! This has a huge impact on his Student Loan Forgiveness plan. The COVID EMERGENCY is the justification he's using for the forgiveness plan. If he's on TV two months before the plan takes place stating the emergency is over, he has just undermined his legal defense.
-
@Copper said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
Or it could go the other way, if the original pandemic declaration was wrong.
Whatever it was, the stupid political overreaction to it seems to be over.
If the stupid political overreaction saved a single human life, it was worth it.
@Horace said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
@Copper said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
Or it could go the other way, if the original pandemic declaration was wrong.
Whatever it was, the stupid political overreaction to it seems to be over.
If the stupid political overreaction saved a single human life, it was worth it.
The correct measure is net lives, that is lives saved by the overreaction minus those killed by the overreaction. And please sort by political affiliation and skin color.
-
@Horace said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
@Copper said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
Or it could go the other way, if the original pandemic declaration was wrong.
Whatever it was, the stupid political overreaction to it seems to be over.
If the stupid political overreaction saved a single human life, it was worth it.
The correct measure is net lives, that is lives saved by the overreaction minus those killed by the overreaction. And please sort by political affiliation and skin color.
-
I changed from treating it as pandemic to treating it as endemic a while ago. Doesn’t mean I don’t keep a respectful amount of risk management practices in place. It’s obviously a bit arbitrary when one declares the pandemic phase ‘over’.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
I changed from treating it as pandemic to treating it as endemic a while ago. Doesn’t mean I don’t keep a respectful amount of risk management practices in place. It’s obviously a bit arbitrary when one declares the pandemic phase ‘over’.
@jon-nyc said in "The Pandemic is Over!":
I changed from treating it as pandemic to treating it as endemic a while ago. Doesn’t mean I don’t keep a respectful amount of risk management practices in place. It’s obviously a bit arbitrary when one declares the pandemic phase ‘over’.
I was hoping for a Mission Accomplished sign.
-
I changed from treating it as pandemic to treating it as endemic a while ago. Doesn’t mean I don’t keep a respectful amount of risk management practices in place. It’s obviously a bit arbitrary when one declares the pandemic phase ‘over’.
