Mediaboss Marketing

As the world adjusts to life under lockdown, simulation games have soared in popularity, offering players a welcome distraction from the coronavirus pandemic and a way to stay connected with friends.

A simulation game is any game where the primary goal is sort of replicating everyday life, said Adrienne Shaw, an associate professor in the Department of Media Studies and Production in the Klein College of Media and Communication.

[Simulation games] let you construct a world and you get to be in control of it, said Donald Hantula.

Games like The Sims, in which players create and care for virtual people, and Animal Crossing, which drops players into a virtual village and asks them to make a home for themselves, mimic real life and provide a sandbox individual users can explore however they choose.

A lot of what people like about them is that sort of open-endedness, Shaw said. Theres no particular goal, theres no particular winning of the game. Its just sort of an everyday, ongoing, regular interaction.

Simulation games also put players in charge. You decide what your characters wear, what flowers to plant in your garden and which furniture goes where. It lets you construct a world and you get to be in control of it, said Donald Hantula, associate professor of psychology at the College of Liberal Arts.

This combination of freedom and control has proved especially popular as people try to keep themselves entertained during quarantine. U.S. launch sales for Animal Crossing: New Horizons, the newest instalment in the series, were the best in the franchises history and the game has become ubiquitous on social media. Its a particular favorite with Owls.

Games like Animal Crossing are appealing partly because they arent too demanding. They dont require a particularly high level of investment, which is why I think people also tend to gravitate toward those sorts of games during stressful times, Shaw said.

New Horizons also had the good luck to be released right as people were being told to shelter in place. It happened to be the game that came out, Shaw said. Had a new version of The Sims come out at the same time, or a new, popular other Nintendo franchise, she said, it could have been any one of them.

Simulation games are easy to play thanks to their sense of familiarity. If it takes you a long time to learn how to play a game, that means it takes you a lot longer to actually be able to enjoy it, Hantula said. Games that map very closely onto things we already know are those you can jump in[to] very quickly.

With its emphasis on daily routines, Animal Crossing encourages players to enjoy chores they might avoid in real life. The game makes it rewarding. It makes it fun to do those chores, Shaw said. Your family might thank you for doing the dishes, she said, but you dont get a prize. Animal Crossing rewards you for doing your daily tasks.

More significantly for players during lockdown, simulation games can act as a stand in for the interaction we all lack. Social interaction is crucial for our species. If we dont have it, were going to look for ways to get it, Hantula said.

The immediate substitute for many people was video conferencing. But when you look at someone on a screen, youre searching for all those [non-verbal] cues. A lot like when your cellphone is constantly looking for a Wi-Fi signal, Hantula said. And you know what happens when your cellphone does that? It runs the battery down.

Games arent a perfect substitute for in-person contact either, but they do help. When you physically cant go over to your friends house, Shaw said, having two avatars in a virtual space near each other fulfills some of that want and desire to be physically close.

While the lockdown continues, simulation games will likely remain popular. Shaw knows several people who arent regular gamers but bought Animal Crossing as a way to spend time with their friends. It gives you a fun space to be in that isnt just sitting on Zoom calls and watching Netflix together, she said.

Edirin Oputu

Read the original here:
Sheltering in place boosts popularity of simulation games - Temple University News

December 17 was a busy day for a Bollywood Twitter handle. For hours the handle lampooned one of Indian cinemas biggest living legends. It started with a request to tweet against the Citizen (Amendment) Act. The request soon turned into poking, then verbal stalking and finally ended in a phoney tweet. The idea was to humiliate a public figure into submission. When that failed, a submission was invented by means that was clever, but only by half an old tweet of the star was tweeted as if it was new.

In times as polarised as these, its not uncommon to see people losing their sanity in a debate. Certainly not on social media where you get rewarded for acting insane or so some people think. One ironic result of such behaviour is that people often display the very behaviour they claim to be fighting intolerance, indecency, self-righteousness, public oral lynching. Celebrities are bigger targets of this public lynching because their large following allows more people to watch the public spectacle in pettiness and reward it with likes, shares and retweets. All thats missing is for somebody to stand up and ask the famous Gladiator question: Are you not entertained?

Free speech not forced speech

The December 17 incident wasnt the most despicable behaviour on social media. There are worse examples. That stalking on Twitter stood out for where it came from a Bollywood director whose recent movies have nuanced treatment of characters and topics. How do people whose work celebrates freedom of thought and expression end up denying that freedom to others? How do they become champions of forced speech? Why does winning a battle on social media become so important that people risk losing the war of ideals?

Sure, silence is not always golden. But sometimes it is. It could be somebodys choice over shallowness. It could be about taking time to reflect, waiting to choose the right words or deciding to keep an opinion in private. Each of these are individual rights we need to respect as much as we need to protect the right to speak. Nancy Gibbs, former editor of Time, had said at the peak of the #Metoo movement, Respect for restraint is a harder right to defend in this age of constant contact and brittle trust. If you tug at the right to not speak, you harm the right to speak too. We can admire those who speak out without judging those who do not.

Celebrities deserve less

Celebrities make millions by hawking all sorts of products, some with unproven and even dubious claims like fairness cream. If they can use their status for personal gain why cant they use it to fight for social good? They surely can and they do. Like we dont always agree with the choice of products they endorse, we can disagree with the cause they support, or dont. Michael Jordan was asked to endorse a black politician at the peak of his popularity. He didnt. Taylor Swift and Scarlett Johansson have been trolled for saying or not saying things expected of them.

In India, apart from the Big B, the Khans have been called out for their silence on some issues. Priyanka Chopra was trolled last week for supporting black rights in the US but being silent on human rights violations in India in the past. Bigger stars have often been termed spineless in comparison to a few smaller celebrities who are more vocal in supporting causes. That ignores the reality that smaller stars arent subjected to the kind of scrutiny and misinterpretation that bigger stars are. Besides, understanding issues, picking a side and having the courage to be vocal is an evolutionary process that can take time. Yet people demand consistent behaviour from celebrities and rush to call them villains on social media and attack them in a pack with cultish zeal.

A strange mix of private and public

One reason for such behaviour is the strange blend of private and public life social media offers. Its like holding a loaded gun thats seducing us to pull the trigger every time our emotions run high. In the endless scroll of our smartphone screen we see people lacing views similar to ours with venom and earning hundreds of likes. If self-control isnt exercised in time, your fingers on their own volition will start picking the worst words to express your thoughts. This unique situation of being private at the time of inflicting abuse and getting public acclaim for your choice of abuses can be arousing, even addictive. Its like getting away with murder again and again reputational murder that is. We start playing psychic underworld don that social media allows us to. If theres ever a tinge of guilt, theres the air cover of ideology or cause to justify your conduct.

Theres one self-correcting element to our primal behaviour on social media. It records our words for posterity. It doesnt allow us to erase and run away from our worst behaviour. By acting as a giant global mirror of our worst (and best) conduct it gives us a chance to reflect and lift ourselves up. To fight with force of argument, and only with that. To make a distinction between criticism and insult. As a song of the star subjected to Twitter bullying on Dec 17 reminds us: Aadmi jo kehta hai, aadmi jo sunta hai, zindagi bhar woh sadayen peecha karti hain. (Whatever you say, whatever you hear will stay with you all your life). On social media, even afterlife.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

See the article here:
Losing our minds on social media: There are reasons why being Twitter-happy has become the same as being trigg - Economic Times

When COVID-19 began to crawl across the United States, Americans watched as it transformed the landscape of their communities: Essential stores became lined with tape marks to enforce physical distancing and social media became awash with videos from comic to institutional on how to wash ones hands. Physical distancing and hand-washing were critical tools to stop the spread of COVID-19. Then on April 3, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention issued a recommendation to add one more item: cloth face coverings.

While surgical and N95 masks should be reserved for medical personnel, the CDC advised, individuals in public spaces where physical distancing may be difficult should wear cloth face coverings to inhibit the spread of the virus. Within weeks, cities issued facial covering requirements with varying degrees of severity. San Francisco began asking residents to wear them in lines and in stores, but last month, it instituted one of the more stringent mandates, requiring individuals (with a few exceptions) to wear coverings when outside or within 30 feet of people who do not live in their households.

What changed?

Research and interviews with several epidemiologists indicate that more than any specific piece of research on masks, it was the evolving understanding of the virus that made masks newly relevant. And, that understanding is still evolving.

One of the biggest improvements has been our understanding of asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19, Marie Stoner, an epidemiologist at Research Triangle International, a nonprofit research institute based in North Carolina. This finding has been informed by more and more studies that have come out documenting asymptomatic transmissions and asymptomatic people in the community. Stoner pointed to several studies also cited by the CDC for this finding.

In its recommendation for cloth face coverings, the CDC lists seven different studies published between mid-February and May as the basis for its new mask policy. As opposed to research on the effectiveness of cloth coverings, each study focuses on asymptomatic transmission.

The first study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in early March, reported that a German businessman appeared to have contracted COVID-19 from a visiting business colleague who was not showing symptoms when they were in contact before both tested positive for COVID-19. Another study cited by the CDC found that the viral load of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in an asymptomatic patient is similar to those of symptomatic patients, suggest[ing] the transmission potential of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients.

Because we now know that people can transmit the virus without showing symptoms, this impacts how we must respond to prevent transmission, Stoner said. It is important to limit contact and wear masks because you or someone else might be positive for COVID-19 but not yet showing symptoms.

Because the virus is thought to spread primarily through droplets produced when infected individuals cough, sneeze, or speak, masks, in theory, are meant to catch these droplets. There are also questions regarding the potential spread of the virus through smaller, aerosolized particles that would make the virus airborne.

While research shows that asymptomatic carriers can spread COVID-19, on June 8 the head of WHOs emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove cast doubt on how often that occurs. Talking to reporters at a news conference in Geneva, she said that based on current data, asymptomatic spread seems to be rare. UPDATE: On Tuesday Van Kerkhove walked back on that assertion, the NYTimes reported.

As the body of research on asymptomatic spread continues to grow, there is, so far, little systematic study on the effectiveness of cloth coverings in inhibiting COVID-19s spread.

Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy and a Regents Professor at the University of Minnesota, expressed concern about the lack of research regarding cloth face coverings in a special podcast episode produced by the center. Hes not against cloth coverings, but hes waiting for the evidence to catch up to the advice.

Never before in my 45-year career have I seen such a far-reaching public recommendation issued by any governmental agency without a single source of data or information to support it, Osterholm said in response to the CDCs lack of evidence on the effectiveness of cloth masks. This is an extremely worrisome precedent of implementing policies not based on science-based data or why they were issued without such data.

Osterholm criticized the increasing number of poorly conducted and inadequately reviewed studies getting published in rapid succession. Remarking on the evidence that we do have regarding cloth masks, Osterholm found it to be limited and indirect.

Dr. Lee Riley, division head of Infectious Diseases and Vaccinology at UC Berkeley, believes that a combination of the low rates of COVID-19 in Asian countries and experiments on the filtering ability of different materials prompted a gradual change in the scientific communitys attitude towards facial coverings.

He surmised that mask recommendations began as the CDC and public health officials observed how quickly the pandemic was controlled in Asian countries where wearing masks is a regular practice.

Citing a video from an applied chemistry professor in Japan who tested the efficacy of three types of masks, Riley described how even a covering made from three paper towels folded into six layers was successful in filtering out 80 percent of particles in the airthough there were no SARS-CoV-2 viruses in the air and this test was not a peer-reviewed experiment. In the video, Dr. Tomoaki Okuda of Keio University measured different materials ability to block airborne particles using a Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer.

Osterholm cautioned against such reasoning and experiments as stand-ins for hard evidence. In his podcast, he points to widespread testing, extensive contact tracing programs and quarantine measures in Asian countries as important measures that reduced the viruss spread. He also addressed such lab experiments, noting the lack of evidence for smaller aerosolized particles the size of those potentially exhaled by the infected.

He believes masks could play a role in slowing the epidemic but wants to ask additional scientific questions regarding the viruss spread so the public can make informed choices. One of the most important questions, he said, is how infectious the virus is in the air and how time and dose play a role in infection.

My whole challenge has not been about whether you wear a mask or not, Osterholm said in an interview on Monday. Ill throw the kitchen sink at this if it will help. The challenge is, How well do they work? so that the public knows what level of protection theyre getting.

Two of the epidemiologists interviewed for this article cited a new study, published on June 1 as important evidence regarding the effectiveness of masks in preventing person-to-person transmission.

Dr. Derek Chu at McMaster University in Canada along with researchers from universities worldwide conducted the research in the June study on behalf of the international research team, COVID-19 Systematic Urgent Review Group Effort. The study found that face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection.

Again, however, the study does not evaluate the cloth coverings that most people are using. It did, however, combine results of 172 studies from 16 countries and 6 continents to do a meta-analysis, which means it looked at the data to establish trends. The study found that certain types of institutional-grade masks, as well as physical distancing and eye protection, could reduce the risk of infection. Respirators and N95s were found to be most effective, but disposable surgical masks and similar products (such as reusable 1216-layer cotton masks) also seemed to reduce risk.

Its findings supported physical distancing of 1 m or more and advised that Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. It also cautioned that more study is needed: Robust randomized trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance.

On June 5, just days after the study was published, WHO updated its guidelines on masks recommending for the first time that face coverings be worn in public when physical distancing is difficult. Those over the age of 60, it now advises, should wear medical masks, while others should wear non-medical masks.

The recommendation for non-medical masks came with a caveat: there is not any high quality or direct scientific evidence to support their use, but the recommendation noted that research on asymptomatic transmission, observational evidence regarding mask use by the general public, individual values and the difficulty of physical distancing led WHO to update its guidelines. Its unclear how WHOs Van Kerkhoves new revelations on asymptomatic transmission will impact these guidelines.

For now, its guidance noted that non-medical masks should only be considered for source control (used by infected persons) in community settings and not for prevention.

In contrast to the CDCs recommendation for cloth masks, WHO recommends a three-layered mask composed of an inner absorbent layer (such as cotton) to retain droplets, an outer layer of hydrophobic material (polypropylene, polyester or their blends) to filter and a middle layer made with cotton or hydrophobic material.

WHO also warns that promoting mask use could result in a false sense of security, leading to potentially lower adherence to other critical preventive measures such as physical distancing and hand hygiene and cites the potential for increased self-contamination as people manipulate the masks. Epidemiologists continue to advise that masks be worn in conjunction with other practices, such as physical distancing and regular hand-washing.

Despite CDC and WHO recommendations, there remain plenty of state public health officials who have yet to require masks.

Facial coverings are currently mandated in some capacity in all but two Bay Area counties, though Solano and Santa Clara counties both strongly recommend their use. The term face covering is often loosely defined and includes everything from medical-grade masks to bandanas.

At the national level, 25 states have some kind of facial covering requirement, not including local guidance according to CNET. These requirements vary in severity. Many pertain to businesses and employees doing essential work, but some apply to individuals in public.

The efficacy of masks outdoors is also unclear.

As the weather warms up, beaches, parks and other outdoor spaces are becoming increasingly populated. Protests have also filled the streets with demonstrators. Epidemiologists believe the likelihood of infection is reduced outdoors as wind dilutes virus droplets in the air.

Though being outdoors may decrease risk, many epidemiologists say individuals should still be wary of person-to-person spread when in close contact with others. Moreover, they warn, face coverings, especially cloth coverings, are not a substitute for other critical measures such as physical distancing and good sanitation.

For those confused by changing guidelines, Dr. Arthur Reingold, department head of epidemiology and biostatistics at UC Berkeley, had one message: For a completely new infectious agent, like the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19, the reality is that theres an incredibly fast evolution of knowledge. Virtually every day, new information becomes available that might change our understanding of things. It would be foolish if we didnt change our recommendations as we acquire more knowledge . . . I personally do put faith in what comes from the CDC. There are a lot of really smart, hardworking, well-intentioned people there doing their best to inform the public about how to stay safe.

The challenge, Osterholm said, is that we owe the public a lot more information than either everybody masks or they dont.

We sort through the studies and talk to the experts so that you dont have to. If you havent already, support our reporting today.

Originally posted here:
To mask or not to mask: The evolving science and policy recommendations on masks - Mission Local

Sir Frederick Barclays nephews have said they felt it was necessary and reasonable to bug the conservatory of the Ritz hotel after becoming concerned that their billionaire uncles conduct could potentially damage the familys business empire, according to documents lodged at the high court.

Barclay, 85, and his daughter, Amanda, are suing three of his twin brother Sir David Barclays sons Alistair, Aidan and Howard, and Aidans son Andrew over 1,000 conversations secretly recorded at the Ritz hotel across several months.

The high court has previously heard that the elaborate system of covert recording came to light in January when Alistair Barclay was filmed on CCTV handling the bug placed in the conservatory at the Ritz. Last month, Sir Frederick released the footage to the media and claimed the Ritz was sold for half the market price, with a discussion about a 1.3bn deal with Saudi Arabia-based Sidra Capital allegedly among the recordings.

The written defence, filed on Monday, claims Alistair began the bugging without the prior knowledge of the other defendants including Aidan Barclay, the chairman of the publisher of the Daily and Sunday Telegraph.

Alistair placed an off-the-shelf recording device, which the documents say he bought over the counter from a shop in central London, on 6 November. The defence document claims Alistair resorted to bugging after being troubled about what seemed to him to be a remarkable change in their conduct posing a significant risk of harm to his brothers Aidan and Howard Barclay, to the group, to their interests (that is, of his brothers and the group) and to his own interests. By 13 November all the defendants were aware of the bugging operation.

On Monday, Heather Rogers QC said the defendants felt it was necessary and reasonable to bug the Ritz to protect the family and its business interests. The Barclay brothers empire, which is controlled by Aidan and Howard, also includes the delivery firm Yodel and online retailer Very Group. The 114-year-old Ritz was sold earlier this year by Sir Davids side of the family to a Qatari businessman for about 750m.

The defendants have admitted the recordings contained private and confidential information of the claimants and accepted that Sir Fredrick and Amanda were entitled to general damages for breach of confidence, misuse of private information and breach of data protection laws. The defendants will seek to agree the appropriate damages/compensation with the claimants, said Rogers. However, they deny their actions caused any loss to the claimants economic and/or financial interests.

Sir Frederick and Sir David are no longer beneficiaries of the family trust, and Amanda has been left with a 25% share but no voting power to block any decisions. Aidan and Howard control and run Ellerman Holdings, the holding company for the Barclays UK assets.

As set out clearly in our defence, we do not dispute that the recordings were made and discussed between us, said a spokesman for the defendants. The actions we took were the result of serious concerns about aspects of Sir Fredericks conduct and were taken in the belief that they were necessary and reasonable to protect the Barclay groups business interests from potential damage.

We have never made, and never intended to make, any of the recorded information public. We did not conspire toinjureany businessorfinancial interest of Sir Frederick or Amanda.That was never our intention and there was no conspiracy as alleged. We regret any distress caused to Sir Frederick and Amanda Barclay, but our intention has always been to act in the best interests of the entire family.

View original post here:
Barclay nephews say it was 'necessary and reasonable' to bug Ritz - The Guardian

Humboldt Countys Public Health Officer Dr. Teresa Frankovich have been answering questions since the stay-at-home orders were instituted on a two question per media outlet on a roughly three times per week basis. The Department of Health and Human Services or office takes the questions, and reads them on camera for her response. The resulting video, called a Media Availability, is then provided to news outlets at the end of the day.

Here are some of the main points covered in the June 8th Media Availability session with a summary of answers from Dr. Frankovich, followed by questions we would have liked to ask in response if appropriate. Please note that this is not an exact transcription but a very close facsimile.

Before taking questions submitted by local media, Dr. Frankvich was prompted to address the surveillance testing that the Public Health Department is doing at local skilled nursing facilities.

Dr. Frankovich:

Sure, so again, our skilled nursing facilities or congregate living facilities like assisted living, have some of our most vulnerable residents. Skilled nursing facilities actually have a directive from the state about surveillance testing, and weve been working with them on accomplishing that. So weve just completed another round of surveillance testing for staff, and all ran those this weekend, and everything was negative, which is great. We are also working with the many assisted-living facilities to try and help them access ongoing surveillance testing as well, for their staff, and plan for that as just an additional safety measure going forward.

1 min 10 secs in:

Media Question: On Friday, you mentioned there are still concerns about the possible impacts of the recent protest gatherings. If the case count increases, will businesses that have been certified to reopen (like salons), be asked to close down again for safety? Can you also mention if stylists need to wear gloves?

Answer by Dr. Frankovich:

Yes, of course we are monitoring for case counts, and we do that on going. If the case count increases, I dont expect us to be closing anything right now. I think basically what we would be looking for is our ongoing indicators to suggest that we are heading down a path of too many cases. So simply seeing an increase over baseline is not enough for us to close anything frankly.

We expect to see an increase in cases as we move forward, what we are looking for is kind of the rate of increase and trends over a short period of time, our hospital capacity and our contact tracing abilities all of those things will inform whether we need to take a pause in opening additional new things, which would be our first strategy and then also whether there is actually ever in need to step back, and close things that weve already opened. So I dont see that related to this at present.

In terms of gloves, the guidance provided by the state -and anyone can pull up the guidance online, if they want to take a look at the business they are visiting is using as a template- the gloves are in the guidance are referred to as a possible way, using disposable gloves to be able to address issues of frequent handwashing and things like that so adding on those disposable gloves can help to sort of extend that and decrease the need for as frequent, but it really cant replace handwashing as a strategy for this.

So there is no requirement to use gloves except, if youre doing some of the things that salons normally wear gloves for, for instance for coloring in that type of thing and those gloves would be used.

3 mins 15 sec in:

Media Question: On Friday, you mentioned that campgrounds, hotels and gyms are next to reopen in Humboldt. When do you anticipate nail salons will be allowed to reopen? Please explain the reopening criteria difference between nail and hair salons.

Answer by Dr. Frankovich:

Sure, so first of all, the Governor released a whole bunch of things on Friday, and the questioner is correct- campgrounds, hotels, gyms, day camps, childcare, bars, wineries, all kinds of things are on that list. So what we are doing as we are taking those guidances, we are reviewing all of those from the state, some of them we may actually need a little bit of additional information for our local area, and then were basically putting those in order trying to again, emphasize lower to higher risk as we move forward. And then well plan those time frames accordingly.

So, in terms of nail salons I know that the thought process in this from the states and going forward, and the reason it was initially further down the listing openings is that there isnt any way to completely social distance throughout the interaction. It tends at many times on being a longer interaction, than for instance most peoples haircuts. However, I do think that nail salons can open.

The problem we have right now is we are just awaiting state guidance for it. As soon as the state provides that guidance document, so, for what is needed to do that safely, and again that guidance is produced by Cal OSHA with input from the state health department as well as industry. When that is available will be more than happy to review plans and get those open as well. I dont anticipate a delay in that, we just dont have it in hand.

5 mins in:

Dr Frankovich clarifies the state guidance further:

You know, the state initially provided guidance on child care. In many respects, I actually liked that initial guidance better because I think it was a little bit more specific. And we actually have had some day camps that we have been able to approve because they operated under that child care guidance. And so, going forward again, we will be sort of taking the state guidance and probably amending it a little bit because I think there were some really good points in that initial guidance that came out.

So I know its a little bit confusing and the entities that are already operating under the guidance, you know thats fine, but for newer entities that will be coming on board, we just want to make sure that the guidance looks appropriate for our area.

6mins in:

Media Question: Many services such as hair salons and hotels for tourism are scheduled to reopen this week, can you share an overview?

Answer by Dr. Frankovich:

So, I think we walked through that a bit, but again I just want to point out that the earliest any of the things that the governor put on the listthe earliest that those could open would be June 12. Which is Friday, right? So, we have hair salons are already approved to be open. My hope is that we will have campgrounds ready this week.

In terms of having the guidance up online and having people be able to submit their plans, hotels are an entity that will follow. So I dont have a precise opening date for that yet, for recreational travel. Obviously some hotels are operating right now for essential travel.

6 mins 45 sec in:

Media Question: What businesses and services will remain closed?

Answer by Dr. Frankovich:

So, the things that have been historically more further out, I guess, in Stage 3, included things that are really mass gatherings. And so thats really the big you know, concert venues sporting events with spectators, those kinds of things are meant to be farther down. And again, I know sometimes I think it seems a bit, you know, inconsistent- the guidances. Some of the things that are coming out that involve large groups of people coming into those same space, and so we look at that, and we go, well why cant these other mass gatherings occur right now, but I think its important to remember that the guidance thats out right now for instance, things like restaurants includes a lot of social distancing.

The intent of it is that people going out with family members- were not encouraging people to come into large spaces and interact with everyone in the space- which happens when we were together in, for instance, bars, or were together in concert venues and things like that where we definitely have less of an ability to social distance.

And so those things are meant to come a bit later, whereas these things that are more carefully structured for social distancing and such are able to happen in a little bit sooner.

More here:
Expecting to See an Increase in Cases, Child Care, Testing Staff at Skilled Nursing Facilities, and More from Dr. Frankovich - Redheaded Blackbelt