I’m not the only one by the way who this this was potentially confusing. Nope. And there wll be continued confusion for ages yet.
There is a great gap between the level of information that the public, media etc demand and the ability of a sizeable % of both to understand what that data means. Your isn't the only post that rails about inconsistent data. There's a whole set of threads that attempt to simplify it, it's been gping on since the beginnibgn of lockdown.
One point is that the data changes, quite regularly, depending on a whole range of factors, including sher amount of data, better data collection, understanding of the disease etc etc. Some see those changes as inconsistency others as necessary adjustments.
Another is the multiple data sets. As here with the different 'weeks'. They are necessary due to things we often have no knowledge of. The reporting week will be to accommodate weekends, some other data collection points etc etc. to the analysyst it doesn't matter. They deal with the data set they work with. To onlookers it seems odd and causes confusion.
But I keep coming back to one point: no matter how obvious Joe Public may think a perceived flaw is there are people whose whole lives is spent using that data. They will know far more than Joe does. Yet SM listens to Joe. Why is that?
Instead of getting annoyed that it doesn't make sense to you, sniping back at posters who snipe at you, you could try pen and paper. Like my attempt at trying to explain above. Sometimes going back to basics helps.
Basically, it doesn't matter if you/we don't understand it. There are plenty of experts around the world who do and the data is meant for them, not us. That we (in general) have recently found that such data has always been there, free to access, doesn't mean the data will change to make it more accessible to us. That isn't its purpose. You just have to accept that you either will or will not understand some/all of its complexities and move on!