Last night, BBC Reporting Scotland’s Graham Stewart almost told us the facts:
The prevalence of the virus in Scotland may be much lower than it is in England, but cases here have nonetheless doubled over recent weeks. Today 2 464 new cases were reported. That’s up 327 on yesterday and represents 15.2% of all those tested.
Yes, yes, dad. We know. It’s still a lot. No house parties. You don’t have to keep telling us. How much lower is it than in England? Tell us?
Say the prevalence of the virus in Scotland was higher, say twice as high, you’d tell us wouldn’t you? So why not tell us how much lower it is? It’s not a secret is it?
Wait, I’ve found it:
So, the daily average over the last 7 days is 188 per 100 000 in Scotland and 476 in England? That nearly three times higher! Wow, isn’t that big news?
Is there a graph to show that? Oooh, here’s one showing the total increase over the last 7 days:
Why didn’t you use those data Graham? Not in the public interest? You don’t trust your viewers. They’d think Nicola was managing things better than Boris?
Nearly two years ago in a rare communication a BBC Reporting Scotland reporter had a go at responding to my then recent piece on how a BMA study undermines their agenda on NHS targets:
Stewart tweeted back to me defending his show’s repeated presentation of the actual percentage meeting waiting time targets and reminding ‘citizens’ of the level of failure:
Do you think citizens can judge performance in suppressing a virus? If not, why not?