4 ms·
The question your posing for the author is how thorough s/he would have to go into the details to capture his/her audience. I don't know exactly the audience bu
by Tarsul 6y ago
The question your posing for the author is how thorough s/he would have to go into the details to capture his/her audience. I don't know exactly the audience but I know that the argument (s)he makes is more than enough for me. As I've followed the news especially regarding US, UK, Sweden and [as a good example - for now!] Germany and just nod along when I read the quote. It has been pretty clear to the avid (real) newsreader how much impact letting it spread has (and going out of lockdown when the R0 has not sufficiently subsided). We can currently watch in awe how the second wave manifests in Europe because we did not react fast enough when the numbers shot up again... I mean the pattern is always the same. It's not exactly rocket science...
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoThe question I'm posing is whether the hypothesis is well-specified and true, not whether it's persuasive to the target audience. I think the target audience largely follows your "can I nod along to it" heuristic, but underspecified hypotheses are the easiest to nod along with, because they'll continue to make sense no matter what data you see. If a second wave hadn't manifested in Europe, nobody would see that as a contradiction; they'd just say "well, ok, Europe must have done the right things then".