(I remain a big fan, but...) Your headline and your main theme enthusiastically assert that both sides have eaten their own brains. I don't think the caveat at the end gets you off the hook. There really is almost no comparison, but you made it.
-
-
Replying to @froomkin
Thank you! I feel like I'm examining one piece of a puzzle in a newsletter, and make that clear at top and the bottom. On the almost "no comparison": on some things (like muzzling the CDC) I agree. On other things like closing parks? What's the measure? Level of harm? Dynamics?
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Park closures were a policy mistake followed by corrections in light of accumulating evidence. It wasn't a disinformation issue.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @beyerstein @froomkin
That's not exactly correct, but that's part of the part two of the trifecta. The evidence was clear and overwhelming about a year ago, and many parks are still closed and beaches shamed, to this day. "Accumulating evidence" has become part of the face-saving denial, imo.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Are there any statistics on how many parks are closed due to COVID and what jurisdictions they're located in?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @beyerstein @froomkin
I have not done the study, but I wrote about the science of not closing parks/beaches exactly one year ago, and I've been flooded with examples from all over the country, and the world, since. And beach-shaming continues to this day. This is not "waiting for evidence".
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Big liberal cities and states with robust COVID responses are reopening their city and state parks after initial closures: NYC, LA, SFO, Chicago, etc. This is evidence of being receptive to the evidence.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
The other question is how many of these park closures are due to outdoor COVID transmission concerns, as opposed to concerns about staff safety in the indoor parts of their jobs, or funding cuts.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @beyerstein @froomkin
I honestly don't think those are very plausible answers at this point.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Why not? We've got tons of cash-strapped local governments.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
So, a year into a pandemic, local governments are doing something that is a clear threat to public health, despite knowing this, merely because they are short on staff and the thing in question is keeping a park open as normal? I'd like to see an example or two.
-
-
Park closures due to budget shortfalls have been known to happen even when there isn't a pandemic. Just because park is closed, you can't assume that it's because of COVID transmission.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Oregon is keeping some parks closed that would otherwise have been reopened because they don't have the money:https://bit.ly/2Puthqr
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.