|
|
|
|
|
by pasabagi
1534 days ago
|
|
Well, if you want to downplay it, you can point to a country like Belgium, which has a good GDP, so it's obviously a functional nation (right?), and point out their higher death numbers, then you can say that obviously the response wasn't perfect, but it was 'middle of the EU pack'. Then the opposition has to say why it's not fair to compare death rates with poor eastern european countries, and explain that Belgium is spectacularly dysfunctional, etc, etc, and by that time, the conversation has moved on. It's all a bit wonky and complicated. If the media were doing their jobs, if the opposition was doing their jobs, they would have baked this sort of machinery into the narrative - they are supposed to make stuff like this accessible for normal people. The thing about the parties is it's a bit like if No 10 had their lights on full blast so they could have parties during the blitz blackouts. It's breaking a rule they set in a way that endangers the people around them. There's no way to equivocate or whatever: they broke an important rule, at a very hard time, that they set, for utterly trivial reasons. |
|
It didnt have to be given airtime. Were the media placidly cheerleading as it was two years ago it would likely never even have been investigated.
It was a deliberate choice for the tabloids to blanket us with partygate coverage and to trash Boris's reputation.
It's neither wonky nor complicated. The media are doing their job. Their** job IS to manipulate public opinion on behalf of their owners.
** Except for the BBC and the guardian who are more reactive and generally follow the pack.