Comments on: Everyone needs to think about what they’re doing and saying

By: Craig McGill

Craig McGill — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:02:52 +0000

It depends on what the PR goal was. I agree that, from a societal point of view, it is irresponsible, but if the aim was short-term gain for the prof, giving him a buzz phrase then it’s a job well done. Very rarely does any walk of life – PR, politics, machinery, industries – concern itself with the greater and long-term good.

By: Brendan

Brendan — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:56:58 +0000

If so it’s grossly irresponsible PR.

I agree about the word ‘could’. Having said which, 8% mortality is still fairly scary, don’t you think?

The bird flu scare didn’t bother me much. I couldn’t see how one could die as a result of being sneezed on by a chicken. But 8% mortality is slightly worrying. The UK population is around 60 million, so that would be just a shade under 5 million popping their clogs.

Fortunately it does seem to be quite mild outside of Mexico for whatever reason. But yes, you’re right – in theory we ‘could’ all be instantly wiped out by a large foot squishing the earth but it’s not likely to happen.

By: Craig McGill

Craig McGill — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:49:14 +0000

Brendan, it may well be that the PR involved think it was better to get the catchy phrase out there and follow it up by using it all the time/write a book with the title.

The danger in this whole scenario has been the overplay of the word ‘could’ as in ‘could kill us all’. So far it’s a flu virus with less than 8% fatality rate which is hardly horrific (unless you are in the 8%) for a virus.