(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 -
I feel the "beach shaming" thing needs more nuance. It's not beaches per se but beach culture that becomes a public health risk -- travel there; bars, restaurants & other institutions that are part & parcel of the experience. Way trickier than "open a beach" like a local park.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Meh, after a whole year, if that's the message, the authorities and media should just say that. Highlighting the least risky, in fact extremely safe, portion of a chain of activities has to be the weirdest way to communicate something we would not accept for anything else.
-
-
I do think "beach" is shorthand. It's really hard to say: "Don't drive 120 miles to the sea to share houses & drink in bars." Deeper issue is the entanglement of commerce & public health in ways impossible to untangle in this culture & with abysmal political leadership.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BalkansBohemia @zeynep and
Although I guess if the beach were open but bars closed…which is where we landed in LA…it would have been good form the beginning But I agree. Not equivalent. One was precautionary principle, other was GOP politics. Period.
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.