TM’s top tip

Nah, that can't be right, they were all only temporary measures and definitely not forever.

 

"Could" return is the key point - not will return. That is Plan B and if the NHS is totally swamped.

 

I wouldn't say Talksport is a suitable barometer. They would be 97% in favour of bringing back hanging.

 

The JCVI stated in their review that the medium to long terms effects on children were unknown - on that basis alone it should be held back.

When did become the norm that children are to have medical interventions for wider issues ?

let alone the debate around asymptomatic children and do they actually transmit this virus ?

But again the behaviourists know what they are doing - implementing this in a school setting will ultimately cause unrest between peer groups and between children and their parents & guardians.

It’s just simply offensive.

 

My biggest concern is the skew on data, the security issue is a lesser secondary issue but potentially compounds the skew. The larger skew is much more likely from the failure to control and/or weight the representation of the audience in the first place.

 

I agree with this - Talk Radio listeners basically not being representative of the overall population (same possibly in the other direction with Good Morning viewers)

 

The bottom line is its inaccurate and skewed because of their data collection methodology. It wouldn't be allowed to be used if captured by a polling organisation under online rules for MRA firms.

Its a whole other debate and discussion to go into accuracy and information used by media organisations.

 

At the end of the the day it’s a vaccination offer. It’s not compulsory. People can make their own minds up about what’s best for them.

I suspect plenty of teenagers will decide they want to be vaccinated and will go ahead with it. Probably quite quietly because they want to avoid the attention of the VaCcInATinG YoUr KiDs iS tHe SaMe aS BuRniNg tHeM tO kEep WaRm crowd.

And I also suspect plenty will decide that they don’t want to be vaccinated and will decline it. Again, probably quite quietly because they want to avoid the attention of the YoU’rE a ThReAt tO sOciEtY crowd.

People should be able to make an informed decision about vaccination and all the ‘it contains microchips and is a ploy by the new world order to make us all infertile’ b0ll0cks helps no one be able to do that. And neither does castigating people who are a bit worried about having it.

 

Yes everyone was a CT. I wonder if all Football players will be made to get double jabbed? All in it together so if it gets to the point where you can only get in vaccinated then it's only fair the same is expected of players and staff. Being told to wash your hands is something I never thought we'd need telling to do.

 

The wording of those polls was quite informative. Talk Radio - "Will you vaccinate your children?", whereas GMB was "Are you happy for your child to have a vaccine?". Both are different questions. The first is active - Will *you* do it, are you going to drag your child down to the vaccination station and demand they are done then? The second is passive - are you happy if your child gets a jab. People respond to active/passive questions in different ways.

Because of Gillick competency, the child has the right to make that choice irrespective of their parents views if they can demonstrate sufficient maturity to understand the issues. So there will be kids that go and get it because they think it is the right thing to do - and if nothing else, while the risk of death in that age group is very slim (from infection or vaccine), vaccination also reduces the risks of long covid and other conditions developing after infection. That is a big positive for the kids anyway.

Its interesting though how 59%/91% in those polls were unhappy with vaccinating kids, yet pictures from Ireland last weekend showed long queues of kids with their parents waiting to be vaccinated. The risks/rewards are exactly the same, but one country has a different attitude towards it than their nearest neighbours.

And as for it benefiting the wider society more than kids, we give most kids the HPV vaccine nowadays. Not many of them are at risk of developing cancer as a result of infection, but vaccinating the vast majority severely reduces the risk for the individual and the wider population too.

 

It's inaccurate because its not representative. If they say "twitter users".... its still inaccurate and unrepresentative. They can't say "of their followers" because it can be shared outside of that realm.

Its a very obvious mechanism for misinformation. You conduct a poll to a skewed audience from the getgo and you have a headline that you can leverage for whatever purpose you want.

GMB could do it (and probably do), GMB do it, plenty of others will do it (Reach certainly do), but it's inaccurate because it has inherent bias and no control.

There are reasons there are very strict controls for MR firms, both online and off, and it's a shame that those with the biggest voices, the media, can absolutely bypass them to create content that suits their narrative and agenda.

 

No it won't.

 

It is inaccurate, because it isn't representative. That's the whole crux of it and nothing can stop that from being true. You might look at it and say, ah, it's only "insert name of organisation" but that statistic will be used as gospel by people who have an agenda. Likely the same people who have largely taken part in the first place. It emboldens an agenda, whether we're on the right side of it or not.

It generates inaccurate results which can be used for any purpose anyone sees fit. I'd hope in this day and age where lies by our ruling classes and the media are sadly a multiple occurrence every day that we, the public, might want the data pushed into the mainstream to be robust, accurate and free from bias.

 

And all Twitter accounts are actual real human beings?
GB News has actually been a wonderful exercise in testing the online echo chamber.

Launching a right leaning telly channel based on the online ‘popularity’ of some fairly extreme views has proven the popularity to be at least open to question.

If Nigel can get half a million retweets complaining about migrants, how come only 200 people want to tune in to watch him do it?
(Numbers exaggerated, but you get the point).