politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The helter-skelter world of WH2020 Democratic nomination betti
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The helter-skelter world of WH2020 Democratic nomination betting
!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var e in a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var t=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-"+e)||document.querySelector("iframe[src*='"+e+"']");t&&(t.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][e]+"px")}})}();
Comments
-
Hopefully this is Sanders turn in the sun, Icarus style.0
-
No polls in the US since Friday. I know Nevada is tough to poll, but come on...0
-
3rd, like, umm, Klobuchar, or maybe Buttigeig?0
-
Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...1
-
The current assumptions are:eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.0 -
There is that.BluestBlue said:Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...
The trouble is that he might also be seen to be the best of a bad lot.0 -
They are trying to kill the BBC.Sandpit said:
The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.TOPPING said:
That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.Theuniondivvie said:
I hope he continues with the political stuff.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.1 -
The exact quotation (HVI PIII, act V Sc VI) is:Nigelb said:
‘Why, what a peevish fool was that of Crete,
That taught his son the office of a fowl!
An yet, for all his wings, the fool was drown'd.’
I was taking poetic licence to make it match the comment better.0 -
I think the only way for Bloomberg to get it would be some epic stitch-up at the convention. The Dem base won't accept him, not just because he's a plutocrat - and a former Republican! - but because of all the -ism stories about him that are now in full flow.Casino_Royale said:
There is that.BluestBlue said:Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...
The trouble is that he might also be seen to be the best of a bad lot.0 -
This is quite funny (or maybe I just have a strange sense of humour):
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/feb/17/british-ecj-could-sue-eu-eleanor-sharpston
0 -
Third like Eadric?0
-
So now take a sell betting position on the world’s principal stock markets?eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=200 -
Casino_Royale said:
There is that.BluestBlue said:Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...
The trouble is that he might also be seen to be the best of a bad lot.
The issue is that none of the others can currently credibly claim to be able to beat Trump0 -
I suspect it’s cock-up rather than conspiracy. China muzzled the doctor because it didn’t want the headlines or embarrassment of another virus outbreak it thought was hugely exaggerated. Not because it manufactured it.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
Now it isn’t a secret anymore it will use all measures it believes it needs to in order to contain its spread, and human rights won’t even feature.
The images of medical kidnap vans - and welded apartments where we have no idea who’s still inside - are chilling.0 -
The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
0 -
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.
0 -
A. It’s difficult to report from within China generally and certainly from Hubei.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
B. Media knows that the Chinese are lying but struggle to report that while still maintaining access.
C. As your (1) to (5) suggests, it’s complicated and the media struggles with complicated. Whining Britons on cruises provide human interest (but no depth).
D. The British public is not interested in the potential liquidity issues for Chinese SMEs and the follow-on possibilities for that.
0 -
My guess that these are people who cannot get back to their houses because of the lock down (and possibly fear that they have the virus). Whether they are alive or dead or a bit of both is hard to tell.eadric said:
Agreed. This may all disappear. Inshallah. But to address your points..DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. Thend their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
1. This implies that all countries will have to do what China is doing. Massive and oppressive quarantine. Will they be able, or willing?
2. Yes. But it could also be optimistic, we still don't even know the incubation period. It was thought to be 14 days. Now some say it could be a month.
3. Let's hope so
4. I read an estimate that a vaccine is 18 months away. Too long
5. Who knows?
ALSO, is the death toll accurate? Look at this video. I have no idea if it is "true". It purports to show the streets of Wuhan, with bodies in bags just lying on the pavement. If it IS real it is horrifying. And even if it isn't, there are enough scary videos out there to make anyone quail. They can't all be fake.
https://twitter.com/Amy78404357/status/1229404854084407303?s=200 -
The doctor was muzzled because that’s what the Communist Party does. It’s the parable of the scorpion and the frog.Casino_Royale said:
I suspect it’s cock-up rather than conspiracy. China muzzled the doctor because it didn’t want the headlines or embarrassment of another virus outbreak it thought was hugely exaggerated. Not because it manufactured it.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
Now it isn’t a secret anymore it will use all measures it believes it needs to in order to contain its spread, and human rights won’t even feature.
The images of medical kidnap vans - and welded apartments where we have no idea who’s still inside - are chilling.0 -
Of course. I'm just relieved it wasn't my defective memory.ydoethur said:
The exact quotation (HVI PIII, act V Sc VI) is:Nigelb said:
‘Why, what a peevish fool was that of Crete,
That taught his son the office of a fowl!
An yet, for all his wings, the fool was drown'd.’
I was taking poetic licence to make it match the comment better.0 -
I will laugh if the answer turns out to be miracle mineral solution.
I take it inoculation is also being experimented on as an option.0 -
According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.Nigelb said:
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.1 -
On topic: A nice illustration of why it's usually a good idea to lay the favourite in markets like this. Of course this means lay the temporary over-hyped favourite in an unstable market, get out of your position when sentiment changes, rinse and repeat to build up a position over time; it doesn't mean (as some have interpreted it) as lay the favourite once the shape of the market becomes clear.
So should we be laying Sanders and Bloomberg now? As I write the best lay prices for Dem nominee on BF are 2.54 and 3.75, implying that you can bet against the nominee being one of those two at around 3.0 (2/1). Is there a 67% chance of one of these two getting the gig? I'd say not, but DYOR.0 -
As do I.DavidL said:
According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.Nigelb said:
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.0 -
Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.eadric said:
As a betting site we should certainly be looking at the implications of corona for upcoming elections etcIanB2 said:
So now take a sell betting position on the world’s principal stock markets?eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
eg I reckon coronavirus makes a Trump re-election more likely, just because he is seen as being "against open borders", "tough on migrants", and so on.
These will be increasingly popular opinions.
On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...0 -
Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.
Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!6 -
Singapore certainly seems to be one country up to the fight: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/coronavirus-under-new-stay-home-notice-all-returning-from-china-not-allowed-to0
-
I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.viewcode said:
They are trying to kill the BBC.Sandpit said:
The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.TOPPING said:
That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.Theuniondivvie said:
I hope he continues with the political stuff.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.
The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.
I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.
Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).
Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.0 -
Shares in Anglo-French biotechnology group Novacyt have surged by over 50% today, after the company launched a molecular test to clinically detect the coronavirus.
Novacyt believes this is the first such test to be certified in the EU, following its earlier launch of a ‘research only’ [RUO] test on 31 January.
This new test can be used directly by laboratories and hospitals for the testing of patients, without needing to be validated by clinician, the company says.
...
"As with our research use only test, it can produce a result in less than two hours, with the added efficiency of being able to transport the test at ambient temperatures eliminating the need for cold chain shipping."
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2020/feb/17/japans-economy-shrinks-at-fastest-pace-since-2014-fuelling-recession-fears-business-live0 -
Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?SandyRentool said:Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.
Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!
0 -
Yes I suspect this might be the case too.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.viewcode said:
They are trying to kill the BBC.Sandpit said:
The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.TOPPING said:
That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.Theuniondivvie said:
I hope he continues with the political stuff.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.
The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.
I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.
Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).
Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.
The strength of the BBC is much more than the talent in front of camera/behind microphone.0 -
I have a gene which compels me - and I mean that, there is no choice involved - to counter any comment arguing a Trump win is likely with one that argues the opposite, i.e. he is toast.eadric said:As a betting site we should certainly be looking at the implications of corona for upcoming elections etc
eg I reckon coronavirus makes a Trump re-election more likely, just because he is seen as being "against open borders", "tough on migrants", and so on.
These will be increasingly popular opinions.
So here, yes, I see that, closed borders could look attractive to many in a world ravaged by a new and aggressive disease, but OTOH, the US economy taking a dive due to global China COVID induced slowdown - this might not be so great for an incumbent.0 -
And some of that BBC Radio talent in on crazy money e.g. Nolan on the graveyard shift on R5 is on stupid money, £400k I believe. Jeremy Vine was on a similar before he took a pay cut, down to £300k.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.viewcode said:
They are trying to kill the BBC.Sandpit said:
The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.TOPPING said:
That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.Theuniondivvie said:
I hope he continues with the political stuff.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.
The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.
I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.
Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).
Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.0 -
Just love Tim Minchin's StormRobD said:
Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?SandyRentool said:Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.
Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!
"'It's a miracle! Take physics and bin it!
Water has memory! And while it's memory of a long lost drop of onion juice seems Infinite
It somehow forgets all the poo it's had in it!'2 -
There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.eadric said:
Maybe, or maybe not?logical_song said:
The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously
https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20
There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/0 -
It’s the Japan story that’s by far the most worrying - it confirms that the virus has made it out of China, and the rest of the world is going to struggle to contain it without resort to the sort of methods used by the Chinese authorities.eadric said:
A global slowdown seems inevitable nowkinabalu said:
I have a gene which compels me - and I mean that, there is no choice involved - to counter any comment arguing a Trump win is likely with one that argues the opposite, i.e. he is toast.eadric said:As a betting site we should certainly be looking at the implications of corona for upcoming elections etc
eg I reckon coronavirus makes a Trump re-election more likely, just because he is seen as being "against open borders", "tough on migrants", and so on.
These will be increasingly popular opinions.
So here, yes, I see that, closed borders could look attractive to many in a world ravaged by a new and aggressive disease, but OTOH, the US economy takes a dive due to global China COVID induced slowdown - this might not be so great for an incumbent.
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1229407958683000833?s=20
How will that play out in elex? Dunno0 -
Japan really struggling:
"The guidelines urge people to stay home if they have symptoms. If symptoms grow serious, they are advised to call a special consultation center set up by the government.
“How patients go see a doctor is a crucial factor,” Takaji Wakita, the head of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, said Sunday. “What we’ve come to know so far is there are many who only went through mild symptoms. … Those with mild symptoms are advised not to visit an outpatient doctor but call the consultation center.”
The guidelines advise that people seek a consultation if they have a fever of 37.5 degrees or above for four days or more, experience difficulty breathing or feel severe drowsiness. Medical staff at the center will then advise which hospitals a caller should visit for treatment."
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/02/17/national/japan-covid19-guidelines/#.Xkqm43v7TIU
Sounds more like a focus on treatment than containment to me.0 -
Not sure I believe that video showing allegedly dead people in the street in China. You would expect a lot more rats, animals etc to be swarming around etc etc. Looks like, as somebody said, people sleeping in the streets.logical_song said:
There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.eadric said:
Maybe, or maybe not?logical_song said:
The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously
https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20
There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/
However, I think it is almost 100% certain the Chinese government is lying about the numbers. It is in their interests.
What does worry me is the comment this was developed in a state-run lab, which is also possible. If so, there has to be a (fair) chance it was designed as a biological warfare weapon designed to inflict maximum casualties.0 -
Nah. If it was designed for that purpose it would be far, far more lethal. Most of those in the UK diagnosed are now home. Cured.MrEd said:
Not sure I believe that video showing allegedly dead people in the street in China. You would expect a lot more rats, animals etc to be swarming around etc etc. Looks like, as somebody said, people sleeping in the streets.logical_song said:
There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.eadric said:
Maybe, or maybe not?logical_song said:
The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.eadric said:fpt for Morris
Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously
https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20
There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/
However, I think it is almost 100% certain the Chinese government is lying about the numbers. It is in their interests.
What does worry me is the comment this was developed in a state-run lab, which is also possible. If so, there has to be a (fair) chance it was designed as a biological warfare weapon designed to inflict maximum casualties.0 -
Chris Evans seems to have taken a fair chunk of Radio 2's breakfast audience with him. In principle it is easier to measure the worh of radio presenters (at least of the DJ sort) because it is just them, and audience figures can easily be compared with their rivals broadcasting at the same time and also with their holiday stand-ins.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.viewcode said:
They are trying to kill the BBC.Sandpit said:
The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.TOPPING said:
That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.Theuniondivvie said:
I hope he continues with the political stuff.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.
The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.
I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.
Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).
Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.0 -
The salaries at Radio were the standout story from the publication of pay levels, in an area in which the Beeb had little competition for presenters they were paying way over the odds.FrancisUrquhart said:
And some of that BBC Radio talent in on crazy money e.g. Nolan on the graveyard shift on R5 is on stupid money, £400k I believe. Jeremy Vine was on a similar before he took a pay cut, down to £300k.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.viewcode said:
They are trying to kill the BBC.Sandpit said:
The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.TOPPING said:
That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.Theuniondivvie said:
I hope he continues with the political stuff.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.
The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.
I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.
Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).
Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.
I can see both sides to the ‘talent’ debate, I think that there are very few true ‘talents’, and most of the rest are easily replaceable and don’t need to be on £300k or more. I’d single out the likes of Andrew Neil, and Mark Kermode from radio.0 -
-
Yes, it's called the nocebo effect.RobD said:
Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?SandyRentool said:Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.
Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!0 -
I'm just not going to bother doing that Opinion this afternoon. What's the point?eadric said:
Yes, as flu goes it actually isn't that bad. Almost certainly nowhere near as lethal as SARS, MERS or avian flu.DavidL said:
Nah. If it was designed for that purpose it would be far, far more lethal. Most of those in the UK diagnosed are now home. Cured.MrEd said:
Not sure I believe that video showing allegedly dead people in the street in China. You would expect a lot more rats, animals etc to be swarming around etc etc. Looks like, as somebody said, people sleeping in the streets.logical_song said:
There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.eadric said:
Maybe, or maybe not?logical_song said:
The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.eadric said:fpt for Morris
Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously
https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20
There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/
However, I think it is almost 100% certain the Chinese government is lying about the numbers. It is in their interests.
What does worry me is the comment this was developed in a state-run lab, which is also possible. If so, there has to be a (fair) chance it was designed as a biological warfare weapon designed to inflict maximum casualties.
It's the extreme infectiousness which is the worry, and the chaos and fear that causes.
I realise I am spreading fear here, btw, but we are all grown up and I believe we can cope.0 -
Ba boom Tish!eristdoof said:
Yes, it's called the nocebo effect.RobD said:
Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?SandyRentool said:Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.
Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!0 -
I thought the Right was about "aspiration" not fear of maggots?BluestBlue said:Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.
On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...0 -
It looks to me, and you can call me Dr Suspicious if you like, as though Lady Hodge is not altogether enthused with the idea of Corbyn remaining at the top of the Labour Party.Richard_Nabavi said:0 -
The Islingtonites definitely think that their very unusual and specific version of a foreign policy agenda is anything but loathed outside north London and a couple of universities.Richard_Nabavi said:0 -
Probably all this is dog-whistling on both sides. It seems unlikely that Corbyn wants any frontbench role given he was reported as hating being leader and that is without illness and old age.Richard_Nabavi said:0 -
From a BBc report into a stage collapse in Pakistan
"[The stage] was almost 7ft [3m] " …. No wonder we have such appalling school results in maths.0 -
I think 2 is the key. Indeed, I think the way it's spreading across Japan suggests that there are many people with only very mild symptoms, or who are perhaps completely asymptomatic.eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
This is both a positive and a negative. It suggests it will be extremely hard to stop via traditional containment, as many more people have the virus than we think. On the other hand, it suggests that fatality rates are probably dramatically lower than the 1-3% reported so far.0 -
Personally, I aspire to avoid maggots...kinabalu said:
I thought the Right was about "aspiration" not fear of maggots?BluestBlue said:Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.
On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...
1 -
It is possible but it is nowhere near as likely as the Occam's Razor explanation, that COVID 19 originated in a mammal species (causing only minor symptoms) and infected one or a few humans who work closely with animals.eadric said:
I find it hard to believe that the Chinese were developing a biotoxic super-weapon which went rogue. That DOES sound like total bullshit.logical_song said:
There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.eadric said:
Maybe, or maybe not?logical_song said:
The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.eadric said:fpt for Morris
It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.
It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).
How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?
The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).
I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.
1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.
2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very
3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack
4. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20
Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously
https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20
There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/
But can I believe that a medical lab, researching animal viruses (after SARS and MERS) accidentally allowed inter-species transfer? Yes. Why not. It's just as likely as the idea it came from people in Wuhan market eating bat soup.0 -
I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please4 -
Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.0 -
Depends what coverage you're watching I suppose. Most coverage I've seen regarding Flack has been coverage talking about mental health issues, support groups that are available like the Samaritans, symptoms, how to cope etc - giving advice and support to people that have issues rather than paying overly much attention to Flack herself.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please
I don't see that as a bad thing. If the coverage you're seeing is just about Flack herself then switch over to something less trashy.0 -
Cue robust rebuttal from ydoethur.FrancisUrquhart said:...
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
0 -
I am not sure I had heard of Caroline Flack before hearing the tragic news of her suicide. I think it should be a big story, but not for the reasons that it is.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please
The sad fact is that no-one ever thinks of the psychological pressure of the accused, whether they are guilty or innocent, but particularly for the innocent. Processes drag on for months and months. Everyone thinks of the "victim", though the pressure on the accused, particularly the wrongly accused can be horrendous. Imagine what it must have been like for those accused by Carl Beech! Horrendous.1 -
We're really flexible.kinabalu said:
I thought the Right was about "aspiration" not fear of maggots?BluestBlue said:Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.
On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...1 -
I think it would be fair to say that Glen O'Hara isn't exactly a fan of the current government, and not much more of a fan of the alternatives:
https://publicpolicypast.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-crookedness-of-crooked.html
0 -
I don't remember anywhere near such a response when the likes of Andrew Adonis and Crispin Blunt followed a similar path to Schofield. I am not sure it got more than the briefest of mentions in the press.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please0 -
If you, and the other many millions, stop reading the Mail Online, the Express and even the Guardian has two stories on its online front page, then I'm pretty sure the problem goes away.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please0 -
Indeed. That said, if you wanted something to spread quickly and engulf the world, a virus that is highly infectious but shows no symptoms for a couple of weeks or more, before presenting itself with a high mortality rate, would be one good way to do it.eristdoof said:
It is possible but it is nowhere near as likely as the Occam's Razor explanation, that COVID 19 originated in a mammal species (causing only minor symptoms) and infected one or a few humans who work closely with animals.eadric said:
I find it hard to believe that the Chinese were developing a biotoxic super-weapon which went rogue. That DOES sound like total bullshit.logical_song said:
There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.eadric said:
Maybe, or maybe not?logical_song said:
The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.eadric said:fpt for Morris?s=20
Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously
https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20
There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/
But can I believe that a medical lab, researching animal viruses (after SARS and MERS) accidentally allowed inter-species transfer? Yes. Why not. It's just as likely as the idea it came from people in Wuhan market eating bat soup.1 -
If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.DavidL said:
According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.Nigelb said:
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.0 -
Can't say that I have really noticed.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
0 -
SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.Sandpit said:
The salaries at Radio were the standout story from the publication of pay levels, in an area in which the Beeb had little competition for presenters they were paying way over the odds.FrancisUrquhart said:
And some of that BBC Radio talent in on crazy money e.g. Nolan on the graveyard shift on R5 is on stupid money, £400k I believe. Jeremy Vine was on a similar before he took a pay cut, down to £300k.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.viewcode said:
They are trying to kill the BBC.Sandpit said:
The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.TOPPING said:
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.
The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.
I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.
Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).
Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.
I can see both sides to the ‘talent’ debate, I think that there are very few true ‘talents’, and most of the rest are easily replaceable and don’t need to be on £300k or more. I’d single out the likes of Andrew Neil, and Mark Kermode from radio.
It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.
MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?1 -
If some students don’t understand the offer making system then I would politely suggest that perhaps university is not the correct route for them.FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
More seriously, what are their teachers telling them? It is no more complicated than some PR voting systems.
Post exam entry would be great for schools as they wouldn’t be our responsibility any more. I’m not sure that would help disadvantaged students, although that might be offset by the elimination of state schools tendency to under predict grades compared to the fee paying sector.0 -
That does not follow - if they are indeed so exceptionally good at appearing plausible, then believing them does not imply you would believe anyone.rcs1000 said:
If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.DavidL said:
According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.Nigelb said:
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.
0 -
16% capital growth last year on moderate/low risk. #justsayingrcs1000 said:
If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.DavidL said:
According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.Nigelb said:
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.0 -
Some are using the death of Flack as an opportunity to push their agenda against certain media outlets, following on from accusing them of them being racist and causing Meghan Markle to leave the UK.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
0 -
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.0 -
Because most people have no idea who they are.FrancisUrquhart said:
I don't remember anywhere near such a response when the likes of Andrew Adonis and Crispin Blunt followed a similar path to Schofield. I am not sure it got more than the briefest of mentions in the press.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please0 -
Yes. This has been floated a number of times before, including by Gove / Big Dom, but many universities hate it as it messes with their summer vacations.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
Basically you adjust when A-Levels are taken to be earlier in the year, then get results back to kids early summer and they then apply.0 -
Abolish interviews, personal statements and all that biased, time-consuming, labour-intensive, and subjective malarkey and then randomly assign applicants who pass the exams to places. It would take a few seconds on the Met Office's new computer from the last thread.FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.0 -
His writing is all tinged with, “things would be marvellous if that Blair chap was with us still”. He and John Rentoul have the same, minority interest, obsession.Richard_Nabavi said:I think it would be fair to say that Glen O'Hara isn't exactly a fan of the current government, and not much more of a fan of the alternatives:
https://publicpolicypast.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-crookedness-of-crooked.html0 -
When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.0 -
I was just poking fun at my old profession.DavidL said:
16% capital growth last year on moderate/low risk. #justsayingrcs1000 said:
If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.DavidL said:
According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.Nigelb said:
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.
The reality is that as a PM you get hired for two reasons: (1) you produce decent investment returns, and (2) you can talk plausibly about pretty much anything going on in the world economy, and can relate it to how incredibly well positioned the fund is.
My only advice for anyone investing money is this: most portfolio managers have a style bias. They may not know it themselves, but they will prefer tech stocks, or oil stocks, or growth stock, or emerging market exposed stocks, or whatever. When their style is in favour, they'll perform well. When their style goes out of favour, they'll perform poorly. The number of PMs who can spin on a sixpence, and hate social media stocks one meeting and love them the next is pretty small. And the number of investment committees that realise that the ability to change one's mind is an asset and not a liability is close to zero.0 -
More interesting perhaps is that Boris's spiritual home, the Telegraph, seems to be having doubts.matt said:
His writing is all tinged with, “things would be marvellous if that Blair chap was with us still”. He and John Rentoul have the same, minority interest, obsession.Richard_Nabavi said:I think it would be fair to say that Glen O'Hara isn't exactly a fan of the current government, and not much more of a fan of the alternatives:
https://publicpolicypast.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-crookedness-of-crooked.html0 -
Considering the Beeb doesn't bother to charge its viewers or raise ad revenue from its viewers etc what difference does it make whether the viewing figures go up or down?TheWhiteRabbit said:SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.
It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.
MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?
If the Beeb is producing MOTD because its "culturally significant" or something like that despite the fact that all highlights are available for free on YouTube anyway then what difference does it make how many viewers its getting? How is it less culturally significant just because it has a different presenter?0 -
And very few other countries do that. The way we do it is the norm.FrancisUrquhart said:
Yes. This has been floated a number of times before, including by Gove / Big Dom, but many universities hate it as it messes with their summer vacations.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
Basically you adjust when A-Levels are taken to be earlier in the year, then get results back to kids early summer and they then apply.0 -
Yep, same for me back in 2010. I assume it’s still the same system now.logical_song said:
When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.
I don’t see any downsides in applying after results, if anything it gives more perspective in considering your options.0 -
Benchmark?DavidL said:
16% capital growth last year on moderate/low risk. #justsayingrcs1000 said:
If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.DavidL said:
According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.Nigelb said:
Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.DavidL said:
The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.
Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.0 -
That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...logical_song said:
When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.0 -
I am not sure what MOTD USP is these days. Highlights are available for free hours before (and full game if you subscribe to Sky) , the analysis provided isn't particularly insightful i.e. it isn't TIFO football, StatsBomb or even Gary Neville.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering the Beeb doesn't bother to charge its viewers or raise ad revenue from its viewers etc what difference does it make whether the viewing figures go up or down?TheWhiteRabbit said:SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.
It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.
MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?
If the Beeb is producing MOTD because its "culturally significant" or something like that despite the fact that all highlights are available for free on YouTube anyway then what difference does it make how many viewers its getting? How is it less culturally significant just because it has a different presenter?
Long gone are the days when it was THE only place you could see footage of a match.
And after the next lot of rights, I wouldn't be surprised if we start to see even more real time coverage / barely delayed video. The idea of 3pm tv black-out again is going to go the way of the dodo.
Seeing how successful Red-Zone is for NFL, they EPL would be idiots not to operate its own version of that. They have already basically tested it with the Amazon deal.0 -
What kind of universities do that? Oxbridge? Russel Group? Former polys?Fysics_Teacher said:
That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...logical_song said:
When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.0 -
Indeed, and it’s only a matter of time until the 3pm blackout rule goes away too, as the war against the internet is only going to end in the internet winning.FrancisUrquhart said:
I am not sure what MOTD USP is these days. Highlights are available for free hours before (and full game if you subscribe to Sky) , the analysis provided isn't particularly insightful i.e. it isn't TIFO football, StatsBomb or even Gary Neville.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering the Beeb doesn't bother to charge its viewers or raise ad revenue from its viewers etc what difference does it make whether the viewing figures go up or down?TheWhiteRabbit said:SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.
It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.
MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?
If the Beeb is producing MOTD because its "culturally significant" or something like that despite the fact that all highlights are available for free on YouTube anyway then what difference does it make how many viewers its getting? How is it less culturally significant just because it has a different presenter?
Long gone are the days when it was THE only place you could see footage of a match.0 -
Mostly the last.Gallowgate said:
What kind of universities do that? Oxbridge? Russel Group? Former polys?Fysics_Teacher said:
That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...logical_song said:
When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.
30 odd years ago Oxford had fourth term entry where you took three entrance papers and had a interview: if they liked you you got a two E offer.
They don’t do that any more.0 -
Choosing which Uni's to apply to is dependent upon more than academic grounds. Going back 60 years my sister had the choice of London or Nottingham. Nottingham was the choice, because, as my mother said, she'd have to live away from home and learn to cope with world.Fysics_Teacher said:
If some students don’t understand the offer making system then I would politely suggest that perhaps university is not the correct route for them.FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
More seriously, what are their teachers telling them? It is no more complicated than some PR voting systems.
Post exam entry would be great for schools as they wouldn’t be our responsibility any more. I’m not sure that would help disadvantaged students, although that might be offset by the elimination of state schools tendency to under predict grades compared to the fee paying sector.
Both my sons did what I did; went to the first place which accepted them. Granddaughter One is currently applying to do a taught PhD and her choice is likely to be made on ease of travel from where she and her beloved are living.0 -
In Germany, only the admin deals with the university admissions not the Lecturers/Profs, so actually the academic staff in the UK could benefit, and the admin staff are not really bound by term/holidays like the teaching staff are.FrancisUrquhart said:
Yes. This has been floated a number of times before, including by Gove / Big Dom, but many universities hate it as it messes with their summer vacations.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
Basically you adjust when A-Levels are taken to be earlier in the year, then get results back to kids early summer and they then apply.
It's not a big problem to organise a change at the HE level, it is at the school/college/exam level that the whole system would need to be totally overhauled.
The German system works because the Abutur (equivalent to A-level) results are out sometime in May. The major difference that allows this quick turnaround, is that the teachers mark the exams themselves, with random checking by other schools to make sure the teachers aren't just giving out undeserved As.0 -
The Toby Young method?Fysics_Teacher said:
Mostly the last.Gallowgate said:
What kind of universities do that? Oxbridge? Russel Group? Former polys?Fysics_Teacher said:
That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...logical_song said:
When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.Gallowgate said:
How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.
30 odd years ago Oxford had fourth term entry where you took three entrance papers and had a interview: if they liked you you got a two E offer.
They don’t do that any more.0 -
The main source of this is Sky and BBC news on an hourly repeat cycleTOPPING said:
If you, and the other many millions, stop reading the Mail Online, the Express and even the Guardian has two stories on its online front page, then I'm pretty sure the problem goes away.Big_G_NorthWales said:I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.
Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible
I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please
I am not saying it should not be covered, just that it is excessive
I am not referring to print media by the way0 -
I’ve seen a lot of students decide based on the quality of the night life they were expecting.OldKingCole said:
Choosing which Uni's to apply to is dependent upon more than academic grounds. Going back 60 years my sister had the choice of London or Nottingham. Nottingham was the choice, because, as my mother said, she'd have to live away from home and learn to cope with world.Fysics_Teacher said:
If some students don’t understand the offer making system then I would politely suggest that perhaps university is not the correct route for them.FrancisUrquhart said:Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change
If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.
More seriously, what are their teachers telling them? It is no more complicated than some PR voting systems.
Post exam entry would be great for schools as they wouldn’t be our responsibility any more. I’m not sure that would help disadvantaged students, although that might be offset by the elimination of state schools tendency to under predict grades compared to the fee paying sector.
Both my sons did what I did; went to the first place which accepted them. Granddaughter One is currently applying to do a taught PhD and her choice is likely to be made on ease of travel from where she and her beloved are living.0
