Covid 19 and the Media

[Andy_Faber]

Sorry Andy...

...from Tricky’s ‘don’t forget the BAME attempts to whip it up’ and reference to ‘Ethnics’ (!), through GP’s ‘but more BAME men die - well that’s newsworthy, because, erm...they shout louder maybe’ to your own, ‘WHY has it become newsworthy...It does no one any favours, distorts issues and increasingly pisses normal folk off’...the tone on here has been dubious tonight.

I’m not sure what ‘normal folk’ means and this may just be a case of ill chosen words, but there’s an unpleasant whiff of old white guys indulging in casual racism on here tonight. I’m used to it from one source. Surprised, disappointed and hope I’m wrong where the other two are concerned.

You're wrong about me. GP can stick up for mimself

My maybe badly worded comment 'why has it become newsworthy' maybe should have said 'why has it become more newsworthy' (than other distinguishing features), because for sure it did/has. Being male/old/overweight/a smoker are other distinguishing features that it is apparent the scientists are addressing with equal vigour, BUT THE PRESS AREN'T, they are only interested (lets be more precise, mostly interested by a massive margin) in whats happening with the BAME issue - and, scared of 'causing offence', the politicians respond in kind. It shouldn't MATTER who shouts loudest, who has the most effectively run pressure groups etc, concern should exist for all in equal measure but it doesn't. I care deeply about BAME specific issues as the guy two mid-twenties BAME lads look up to as a proxy dad but unlike many I haven't grown blinkers. Note, its being pushed on Newsnight as a I write this, the interviewer pushing BAME only, the scientist pushing back a more widespread response...

'Normal folk'? that's a tricky (sic) one, I'll come back to you on that one, one explanation per eve is enough

[Ram59]

Sorry Andy...

...from Tricky’s ‘don’t forget the BAME attempts to whip it up’ and reference to ‘Ethnics’ (!), through GP’s ‘but more BAME men die - well that’s newsworthy, because, erm...they shout louder maybe’ to your own, ‘WHY has it become newsworthy...It does no one any favours, distorts issues and increasingly pisses normal folk off’...the tone on here has been dubious tonight.

I’m not sure what ‘normal folk’ means and this may just be a case of ill chosen words, but there’s an unpleasant whiff of old white guys indulging in casual racism on here tonight. I’m used to it from one source. Surprised, disappointed and hope I’m wrong where the other two are concerned.

Aren't you the English teacher RA?

Technically speaking, normal, could be deemed to be the correct adjective to describe a white person in this country, although sometimes the tone would suggest otherwise.

The words, standard and usual appear in the definition of normal and when talking about the population of Britain, you could describe the standard or usual person to be found in Britain as being white.

Somebody who's described as not normal can be disparaging though. Typically, people with learning difficulties are described as not normal.

So you have to interpret what the writer means when they say normal and I don't think that as many as you claim, are being racist.

[mistaram]

So what are you suggesting?
Is it the black plague now? Like AIDS was described as the gay plague?

Yet HIV infected hetro***uals, just as easily. Turns out the gay community, being highly promiscuous, was fuelling the fire.
Now this is a virus. It doesn't discriminate on skin colour/ ***/height/ ***ual preferences.
The weak and infirm are the most at risk, we know that when it is contracted.

But it is still a virus, so why do Ethnics make up more infected?
You answer it if you can.
I doubt its got bugger all to do with how much money you have in the bank.
Probably more to do, in your own social activities and what state your bodies in.

Tricky don't ramble just answer the question , Why is there a higher percentage of BAME inhabitants if you don't know just say you don t know not hard

[Trickytreesreds]

Tricky don't ramble just answer the question , Why is there a higher percentage of BAME inhabitants if you don't know just say you don t know not hard

Nobody bloody knows, because there is no answer you can pin down to one thing.

Obesity - no KFC jokes?
Smoking- love of ganja?
Social arrangements? how many live in a house/ prayers
Lack of following the rules- social distancing/ close knit communities
Not owning a car, but refusing to stop using public transport
Genetics? marrying into family or close neighbours over years

I have no idea.
But to scream as the left do, that it is all down to poverty and being a social underclass is quite frankly bollox and political point scoring.
It is a virus. It doesn't discriminate, but give anything an avenue to thrive and it will seize it.

Cue the abuse............................................. ....

[Trickytreesreds]

Here's more of the expert bollox.

According to this,
It has the Japanese at the highest risk of infection, yet the Italians are at the bottom?

Last time I looked, the Italians were doing the worst in Europe.
Also the Japanese aren't exactly in the socially deprived catagory either.
https://www.eturbonews.com/542533/co...ians-revealed/


So keep fishing

[mistaram]

...and that's a fundamentally interesting question, WHY has it become newsworthy? What lurks beneath that drives the press (amongst others) to do that? It does no-one any favours, distorts issues and increasingly pisses normal folk off

No Andy it doesn't piss normal folk off Only people it pissess off are those who don't like th government to be questioned

[Ram59]

https://www.hsj.co.uk/exclusive-deat...027471.article

Hopefully, I've worked out how to do a link for the first time. If it hasn't worked, could one of you experts do it for me please?

This is quite an in depth report about NHS deaths with covid. To summarise, there are 3 main findings from the statistics :

1, BAME deaths are disproportionately high
2, Front line staff working in intensive care are non existent.
3, NHS staff as a proportion of the working population is low.

[ramAnag]

Aren't you the English teacher RA?

Technically speaking, normal, could be deemed to be the correct adjective to describe a white person in this country, although sometimes the tone would suggest otherwise.

The words, standard and usual appear in the definition of normal and when talking about the population of Britain, you could describe the standard or usual person to be found in Britain as being white.

Somebody who's described as not normal can be disparaging though. Typically, people with learning difficulties are described as not normal.

So you have to interpret what the writer means when they say normal and I don't think that as many as you claim, are being racist.

Ram, firstly I haven’t described Andy, or GP, as ‘racist’. I described them as possibly indulging in ‘casual racism’. I’ll define what I mean by that if you like, but there is a huge difference.

Your defence of the word ‘normal’ is more alarming. By definition you are suggesting that Andy’s use of the word ‘normal’ includes being ‘white’ which, knowing him to the extent that I do, I actually doubt.

Common opposites of ‘normal’ are ‘abnormal’, ‘unusual’ or even the insensitive ‘subnormal’ which was once, as you suggest, commonly applied to children (and adults) of particularly limited ability.

I’ve never heard it used sensibly in relation to race and I’d suggest it’s more commonly applied to ability or behaviour or, as a euphemism for ‘people like us’...to introduce the word ‘normal’ into a discussion on ‘race’ opens a whole new can of worms.

[ramAnag]

You're wrong about me. GP can stick up for mimself

My maybe badly worded comment 'why has it become newsworthy' maybe should have said 'why has it become more newsworthy' (than other distinguishing features), because for sure it did/has. Being male/old/overweight/a smoker are other distinguishing features that it is apparent the scientists are addressing with equal vigour, BUT THE PRESS AREN'T, they are only interested (lets be more precise, mostly interested by a massive margin) in whats happening with the BAME issue - and, scared of 'causing offence', the politicians respond in kind. It shouldn't MATTER who shouts loudest, who has the most effectively run pressure groups etc, concern should exist for all in equal measure but it doesn't. I care deeply about BAME specific issues as the guy two mid-twenties BAME lads look up to as a proxy dad but unlike many I haven't grown blinkers. Note, its being pushed on Newsnight as a I write this, the interviewer pushing BAME only, the scientist pushing back a more widespread response...

'Normal folk'? that's a tricky (sic) one, I'll come back to you on that one, one explanation per eve is enough

Surely, Andy, it’s become ‘more newsworthy’ because it is so far more inexplicable.

Being elderly/overweight/a smoker/a drinker are ‘conditions’ which are universally disadvantageous when considering our ability to fight off all illness and disease and therefore its ‘newsworthiness’ is reduced.

Although, as I have said, I can think of a couple of examples where there appears to be a correlation between race and disease, it is not usually the case and yet, where Coronavirus is concerned, there is evidence to suggest the existence of such a correlation.

Given that situation I have no problem with the BAME community fighting their own corner anymore than I have an issue with female victims of abusive partners drawing attention to the impact of the ‘lockdown’ on their particular plight. Nor do I find it difficult to understand why both ‘stories’ are considered ‘newsworthy’.

Hope that’s cleared that up and thanks for not overreacting to my original assertion. Off to shine a torch down my throat and inject myself with disinfectant now.

[Ram59]

Ram, firstly I haven’t described Andy, or GP, as ‘racist’. I described them as possibly indulging in ‘casual racism’. I’ll define what I mean by that if you like, but there is a huge difference.

Your defence of the word ‘normal’ is more alarming. By definition you are suggesting that Andy’s use of the word ‘normal’ includes being ‘white’ which, knowing him to the extent that I do, I actually doubt.

Common opposites of ‘normal’ are ‘abnormal’, ‘unusual’ or even the insensitive ‘subnormal’ which was once, as you suggest, commonly applied to children (and adults) of particularly limited ability.

I’ve never heard it used sensibly in relation to race and I’d suggest it’s more commonly applied to ability or behaviour or, as a euphemism for ‘people like us’...to introduce the word ‘normal’ into a discussion on ‘race’ opens a whole new can of worms.

As I've said, you have to understand the context of the use of the word. 'Abnormal' sounds derogatory, but if I said that the intelligence of Albert Einstein was abnormal and that he was not normal, it wouldn't be any slight against him.

There are plenty of people out there who I wouldn't class as normal, average is probably a better word, but it doesn't mean that I'm being disrespectful to the rest.