I am writing you this letter to raise concern about the poorly written article dated 07.05.2020, “thousands of new coronavirus cases days after state’s stay-at-home order lifted”. In case of this article, there is a failure due to lack of critical thinking and poor research. It has been observed that the clients mostly rely on the press as they believe that authentic and accurate information can be obtained from the press media. As the current situation has led the public to be highly concerned over the Covid-19 infection, they rely on the press to know the updates. This can be considered as one of the examples of media biases. An analysis upon the appropriateness and accuracy have found that there is no adequate data related to epidemic and public has been provided with misinformation.
The article conveys that it was a mistake to move to the phase of re-open due to which the situation is getting worse. There are mainly two ways through which the readers of this current article has been misinformed and misguided. First, as the incubation period is higher and also there is a lag in testing, the previously developed policies cannot be matched with the current situation. Second, it is very misleading to use “new cases” term as this metric fails to account with increases in the testing. Though there was enough information that any increase in the cases of death cannot be considered apparent for some weeks after the policy has undergone changes, there was an attempt from the mainstream outlets to attach new cases and death in the actions of reopening taken under considered currently in Florida, Texas and Georgia. This is likely to increase the spike in the new cases. Therefore, tying these cases with current situation can be considered as incorrect. It has also been observed that the members of the press have continued to combine reporting of the cases coming recently with the actual growth rate of the death.
As depicted above, it has been raised by the press at the initial stage that there is a lack of testing which is forcefully matched with the current situation in the article that is not possible as the policies applied in the initial phases differs highly from the policies required to be taken under consideration in the current situation. Relating to the previous data charts with the new one may lead to biased interpretation of the actual situation which is misleading. The new cases are also required to be considered besides of the current policy changes along with the reports regarding the testing and treating the affected people. Providing incorrect and inadequate information to the readers will increase confusion only.
The above stated argument can be supported by the recently published charts by The New York Times and Axios that demonstrates there is an indication of large increase in new cases around the country. Interestingly, New York has been excluded from the data. The mentioned outlets along with the press members used the chart wrongfully so that their claims can be justified. The claim regarding the increased cases of Covid-19 has then been supported with these charts in a wrong manner. The charts do not provide clear information regarding the massive increase in the testing across the country. Applying the same data relates to the increase in testing. Apart from that, it has been depicted that it is clearly indicated through positive rates of testing, the actual number of new cases is decreasing.
These outlets have once raised concern to increase the number of tests as there was a lack of testing. The same data has been interpreted in different manner in the current context where concern has been raised for increase in the new cases. The current discussion has demonstrated mainly two instances of wrongful interpretation of the data regarding the increase in the new cases where mostly holds the responsibility to convey misleading information to the readers. This is leading to increase confusion and it seems that the cases are increasing and situation is getting worse, though consequences are unintended for providing false claims.
The information presented in a way that implies that the measures taken under consideration for dealing with the pandemic were not effective enough. This might lead the readers to increased confusion and behavioral changes that is not expected in the current situation. It is highly required to work more on the effectiveness of the measures taken under consideration. However, the way cases have been presented mostly directs the readers not to focus on other aspects but only on the re-opening phase. Additionally, the article also indicates that the red states that are the republican majority are considering moving with the phase of opening. However, this tend to lead the readers to constant confusion and hard to extract the actual information regarding the reopening phase and dealing with the situation.
One of the quotes in the article puts forward that “other states have also seen spikes in new cases and deaths as they reopen, lifting stay-at-home orders and loosening social distancing restrictions.” The statement is largely opinionated and has the potential to mislead the readers into an unnecessary situation of panic. A clear absence of critical thinking and sensible journalism are key short comings within the article, which warranted an extensive reply discussing how improvements could be made.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the current analysis has provided an understanding how the representation of the new cases in the mentioned article has wrongfully depicted the new cases. There are two areas of issue found in the article among which the mostly important is disregarding the changes in the policies taken place over time. The article is misrepresenting the information through assimilating the previous charts with the new ones despite of being informed about the policies taken under consideration and their effectiveness in applying in the the current situation to deal with the same effectively.
Article link: https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/496216-texas-sees-thousands-of-new-coronavirus-cases-days
Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Management Assignment Help
5 Stars to their Experts for my Assignment Assistance.
There experts have good understanding and knowledge of university guidelines. So, its better if you take their Assistance rather than doing the assignments on your own.
What you will benefit from their service -
I saved my Time (which I utilized for my exam studies) & Money, and my grades were HD (better than my last assignments done by me)
What you will lose using this service -
Unfortunately, i had only 36 hours to complete my assignment when I realized that it's better to focus on exams and pass this to some experts, and then I came across this website.
Kudos Guys!Jacob "
Proofreading and Editing$9.00Per Page
Consultation with Expert$35.00Per Hour
Live Session 1-on-1$40.00Per 30 min.
Doing your Assignment with our resources is simple, take Expert assistance to ensure HD Grades. Here you Go....