I'm surprised by the level of straw manning.
I have pointed out that having journalists ask difficult questions of political figures is an important job. I think we would both agree on that.
I have said that I personally found the footage of journalists asking Cummings if he had been to Bernard Castle helpful important in informing my opinion that this probably did happen and wasn't just a malicious accusation. This did turn out to be true - it did happen. At that point we had no way of knowing he would admit to it. I will acknowledge that my coming to the conclusion that this was important was subjective, if you disagree that's fine, but I value a media asking difficult questions of political figures.
Here's the straw man though, I have at no stage said I believe the collective behaviour of those was appropriate or defended the behaviour. In fact I said "I think they should do a better job of social distancing themselves". I believe they could have achieved the same result from a 2m distance.
No. That's another misrepresentation of my position, a common trend recently. Maybe I'm not articulating clearly. I'm not condoning the behaviour of anyone breaking social distancing for any reason - can you show me where I have done this? I'm saying that when the people who create the rules do not follow them it is different because it undermines the entire government message with potentially lethal consequences which make such an act 'worse' than if anyone else does it. Do you think this position is unreasonable?




Reply With Quote