Do case rates falling fast make no sound on Pacific Quay?

In the National yesterday:

Scotland’s national clinical director has described how the country’s Covid-19 case rate is “dramatically falling”. Speaking to the BBC‘s Today programme, Professor Jason Leitch said: “We had five out of the top 10 local authorities in the UK, now we have none in the top 150.

He’s correct, look at this fall to almost the lowest rate, starting 26 days ago:

Note, he’s speaking to a UK radio show, not BBC Scotland, but look at those jumping out headlines.

In any normal media world, journalists would pounce on those words from a national clinical director, no less, and splatter them across the front pages.

Not so in Scotland:

BBC Scotland, not a word.

The Herald, no mention.

And, the Scotsman, look at that top story!

STV, nope.

But BBC UK?

They were excited and talking about this on news broadcasts and on Newsnight, after only 5 days yet BBC Scotland, after 26 days, still has other things to tell us.

Even the Times of London, in its Scottish section can tell us about the optimistic trend:

You know what to do.

9 thoughts on “Do case rates falling fast make no sound on Pacific Quay?

  1. Indeed, an entirely appropriate title to describe the output of HMS Sarah Smith.

    When you spin back on this site through the many BBC Scotland articles appraised, not a single one of them has anything positive to say about anything related to Scotland’s condition, not so much glass half-full as what glass ?

    Even the title of their latest promo ” Covid in Scotland: Nicola Sturgeon optimistic major restrictions will end” implies luck rather than expectation, with a “Live” article on the FM’s Covid Update in 2nd place, and now in 5th place ranking their entirely bogus “Covid App” story.

    However, no better is the BBC’s tack illustrated than from Indyref Two’s excellent comparative of what David Wallet Lockjaws interpreted the FM saying only yesterday, versus what was actually said:

    Anything Nick (He said nothing) Robinson can spin, PQ can edit better eh ?

    Liked by 2 people

  2. BTW “major shielding study” – (ABC Scotland nice negative headline) is deeply flawed and applies to the first wave.
    Vast majority of shielders had severe respiratory disease and no mention is made of whether they were in care homes or had home care visits.
    Headline seems to imply that shielding doesn’t work.
    It does if you do it right!

    Liked by 6 people

      1. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-94630-6#Abs1

        Unfortunately Carers and Care Home residence not mentioned.

        Those in these circumstances would have less control over their shielding. Although the stats in the survey indicate results of shielding were not great extending it to more people would have helped.

        Survey does not cover how well the shielders were able to apply the rules.

        The BBC headline was obviously chosen to undermine the anti covid effort and imply that shielding does not work.

        Of the 26,747 shielded group, 18,147 (55.78%) had severe respiratory disease, 5349 (16.44%) were on immunosuppressive therapies, 2491 (7.66%) had specific cancers, 1245 (3.83%) had received organ transplants, 475 (1.78%) were on renal dialysis, and less than five were pregnant and had severe heart disease.

        Like

        1. Again what we have is taking a report and scanning it top select data which, when presented out of context and without the caveats of the researchers mentioned, seems to support the malign political aims of the Herald and much of the other media.

          Since the study was in the West of Scotland this is taken to imply that it was only there that such a failure existed. Everywhere else, things were ‘ticketty-boo’, as they always are, unless the media are wanting to attack the EU, France, African Countries, China, etc.

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Our colonial media excel in “looking the other way”.

    In the dead wood forest, apparently, there is no one to see “good news”.
    Soon, there will be no readers for the dead wood product.

    Like

  4. O/T sort of! Today the BBC News website’s Scotland page, in its daily marketing support for newspapers, reproduces the front page of the Scottish Sun. Its main story is about an assault on a priest at prayer in St Mary’s Cathedral, Edinburgh by a thug with a bottle.

    Presumably because it’s sometimes quite difficult on the BBC’s website to read the front pages beyond the headlines and sub-heads, the BBC always provides its own summary in an adjacent text box.

    I happened to be able to read a bit more of the Sun’s page today and then I read the BBC’s summary. Each refers to comments by Deputy FM John Swinney on the assault.

    The Sun tells us Mr Swinney said this: “This was terrible, frightening and totally unacceptable”.

    The BBC summary tells us: ‘It (i.e. the Sun) reports that Deputy First Minister John Swinney described the bottle assault as “an unacceptable incident”.’

    Does the latter not rather misrepresent and understate what the DFM is reported to have actually said? Does the BBC’s version not present what could be regarded as an inappropriately mild reaction? And in any event, it is NOT what is actually quoted prominently in the Sun! So a trivial example but also arguably indicative of a wider and deeper malaise within BBC Scotland.

    By the way, I’m holding on to the view (just about) that being an ‘alert reader’ does not mean one’s paranoid!

    Liked by 2 people

  5. it is almost like there has been an edict from on high stating that on no account should there ever be broadcast an SNP ”good” story or any optimistic story showing the Scottish Government in a ”good light ” .
    Thank God we have an impartial BBC that comes down hard on any suggestion of ‘partiality’ from the likes of Emily Maitlis .

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.