Your analysis is fair and I think you like to give people the benefit of the doubt which is admirable.Pete_Coach wrote: ↑ I understand what you are saying but I look at it differently.
While you distrust, I look at it that they are pretty well forced into saying something before the media (social and otherwise, social being the worst spreader of bad info) says all sorts of false conjecture or rumour even if some official info is premature. There is so much confusion because of social media misinformation. As (scientific) information became available (which was almost daily and from all over the world), it was released and that only added to the confusion. The amount of misinformation actually validates your comment of thinking people are illiterate.
It is good you have a background in this (99% of the people do not) and you must know that information from authorities (of all levels) was provided as it came to them. I believe the "people in charge" do the best they can with what they have to disseminate to the public.
The news broadcasters have people with background too and it is often contradictory with each other so....the misinformation goes on. Who do you believe? Or want to believe? You need to get valid information from somewhere.
The travel issue (which is he subject) can only be resolved when authorities will allow it...some in some countries say now, other in other countries say later. Which experts are right or, are some just a little more cautious?
My issues lie in some of the information that is now coming out about what decisions were being made in the past and by whom. Also, we have learned that some of the information being given to us was intended to manipulate our behaviour because "it was for our own good" instead of just being straight up honest with us by saying what they did and didn't know or that we were being told to do something because someone in the political arena had failed in their own responsibilities but did not want to admit it. Some people during this crisis spoke with such authority that one listening would have no reason to doubt them or not trust them while other experts took a more cautious approach admitting that there information was limited and that their advice was really based on the best information they had at the time. In the end the truth comes out no matter how hard those in charge try to control it so I think that their reputations and legacy will wear the brunt or benefit of how they treated the public during the crisis well after the crisis has passed.