Why is it OK for people to sit in the same room together on TV, but not for us to sit in the garden?

[ImaPinkToothbrush]

Just watching Saturday Kitchen. They've changed the format a bit so that there are only two people eating together in the studio, with others joining by video link.

Watching the two blokes sit together at the table drinking wine together... made me wonder... how come they're allowed to do that and we're not?

The same applies to BBC Breakfast news - two presenters sit together on the sofa, at a safe distance apart. From a disease transmission point of view, it's low risk but there's still a risk. But I assume they've been allowed to risk assess it, and consider it ok

Surely therefore we should be allowed to the same? I wouldn't dream of going inside someone's house - but sitting in their garden for a chat at a safe distance? Surely that's less risky than sitting together in a studio?

Media is an essential service and deliveries are also an essential service so they continue. I do agree that sitting chatting in a garden with parents shouldn’t be a problem (and indeed I do this, briefly, when I make deliveries to mine) but if we had that attitude about everything that would probably be ok then there would be a lot more people out and about overall so I do get it.

Morale and some media consistency is very important, especially to the most isolated people.

If I was among the most isolated, unable to see family, friends, go to work and lived alone. Seeing people on TV like this would make it worse. Obviously that's my feelings, and perhaps it helps others in that situation, but I personally would be annoyed by the unfairness of it.

It’s their job - which they are allowed to do. Public service broadcasting is on the essential list anyway.

Because there are morons out there who just do their own thing and the Police don't enforce enough. A £30 fine is pathetic. In Spain it starts at 500euros. So everyone does what they should.
That's why.

Take my neighbours. Two DCs 22 and 19. Both home. Yesterday at the end of the garden there were 4 of this age lying out in the sun playing music. So obviously the 2 DCs had friends round. I know for a fact it is just parents and their DCs, they don't have anyone else to stay.
So if they are doing that now, it would be far worse if rules were relaxed. Some people just cannot be trusted.

Do people still not know the difference between key workers and workers who ‘can’t work from home so can still go to work’ (e.g tv presenters). BOTH are legitimate reasons for people to be mixing with colleagues AT WORK. This doesn’t mean they can then socially mix with others. It’s about reducing risk.

I despair.

It’s their job - which they are allowed to do

I get that they are allowed to do it. My question is why?

Is it because they acknowledge they're at risk but their job is so important that it needs doing anyway (like frontline NHS staff have to.

Or is it because actually the risk is minimal.

If it's the latter (which I believe it is), why can't we do it?

@TabbyStar I completely agree

What does sitting in the garden with family do to maintain the economy?

An ‘intelligent lockdown’ would not work here.

Why? Because we are less intelligent than other countries? Maybe that's what Cummings actually believes!

Or maybe in other countries the law is clearer, the fines for breaking that law are greater, so there is a stronger adherence to the law, and therefore people are more free to make their own choices around lower risk activities. I don't know

What does sitting in the garden with family do to maintain the economy?

Nothing.

What does sitting in a TV studio with other people do to maintain the economy? Some have argued that it helps boost morale.. I agree.

But you know what else would boost morale? Sitting in the garden with family.

Personally my morale would be far greater if I could spend an hour in my parents garden chatting than an hour watching two guys drinking wine together on a Saturday morning.

We have a communal garden.The police were called to this garden as some residents were in it.

The police then told us it was Ok and there is a sign saying Ok if two people over 2m apart or a family group.

So it doesn't make sense really does it

"I feel like we're being treated like morons unable to intelligently assess the risk ourselves." that's correct and the reason is that we have far too many who are unable to intelligently assess the risk ourselves.

We got idiots saying "but if it's just ME doing it that's just one person it can't make much difference" or "but my human rights!"

So we make rules suitable for toddlers.

If you encourage one person to bend a rule intelligently then you will also be responsible for the 100 others who take it as permission to do whatever they like. So think of it as setting an example.

Because we live in a nanny state and accept what those in power tell us to do. Takes two to tango though: can't have a nanny state without a population willing to comply. I truly believe the breaking-lockdown photos early on were a media creation to scare us.

We will look back at this time with horror. Remember the walker chased on the empty moorland with a police drone?

My elderly dad is in sheltered housing, they have been taking a chair out to sit in front of the building on a bit of grass apart from one another. It really helps them to see the others and call across to each other, especially as their lunch group has been cancelled.

If it makes it any better for you, ignore the people that you see and think about the people behind the scenes, the camera men, the sound etc.

Majority of them are self employed or worse a limited company and regardless of what you think about an individual being a limited company they are now not entitled to anything, so need to keep working, the self employed people might be entitled to something but its not going to be anywhere near what they were on.

So by still broadcasting those sort of shows they are keeping those people having at least some money coming into those households

What does sitting in the garden with family do to maintain the economy?

It helps to reduce loneliness and isolation which have well-documented negative effects on health and wellbeing, which reduces spend on public services.

It’s their job - which they are allowed to do

I get that they are allowed to do it. My question is why?

Because keeping the economy going is important to the country- - and people going to work and being paid (even if their job involves sitting at a table drinking wine) helps keep some sort of economy ticking over.

Sitting chatting to your friends generally doesn't help the economy much.

Why does it have to be about the economy, rather than people's wellbeing?

Realistically, you can’t do a long live broadcast from home. The possibilities of the tech failing are too great. Those that have done broadcasts from home are usually doing it with a camera operator and a producer there too. Zoom is ok for guests or talking heads but not really for presenters.

Maintaining the television industry is important because like any other industry it is a huge contributor to the UK economy.

is wellbeing not 'important to the country"?

Why does it have to be about the economy, rather than people's wellbeing?

Because the government get to make the rules, and they care more about the economy.

If you look here, wellbeing is being considered regarding the lockdown, by Wales and other governments-

The framework includes questions to consider before decisions are made around relaxing restrictions.

They are:

Would easing a restriction have a negative effect on containing the virus?
Does a particular measure pose a low risk of further infection?
How can it be monitored and enforced?
Can it be reversed quickly if it creates unintended consequences?
Does it have a positive economic benefit?
Does it have a positive impact on people's wellbeing?
Does it have a positive impact on equality?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-52396683

Everyone is allowed to work under the regulations (unless they could work from home - many jobs cannot be done from home) or if they are in a workplace that has to close eg pub. So that means many of us are forced to work close to others in order to ensure the nation can afford to pay the wages of nurses through the tax revenues generated. We might all starve to death if no one was currently working.

Whereas going to a neighbour to sit in the garden does not generate tax revenue and thus does not save the NHS from penury.

Or is it because actually the risk is minimal.

If it's the latter (which I believe it is), why can't we do it?

Yes. The risk is minimal, that's why very few people have caught it and healthy people aren't dying from it. Wait...

You sitting in a garden improves at most 3 people's wellbeing. It could be argued that these shows improve hundreds of thousands or millions of people's wellbeing.