… and the impression that the vaccine doesn’t work. (I wonder how much that one is relative to an expectation of ‘very occasional breakthrough cases’ that one might also trace to someone’s questionable communication choices.)
I didn’t follow this part. What is “questionable communication choices” referring to? And how is it related either to someone’s expectations around breakthrough cases or their impressions of vaccine effectiveness?
Is this about what media sources they’re exposed to? (It seems like that’s probably not what you meant by “communication choices”, but I’m having trouble coming up with other hypotheses.)
Not totally confident, but I think what Katja meant is that the media/government used the phrase “very occasional breakthrough cases” when they turn out to be more than ‘very occasional’. That, like many things, was a questionable communication choice.
Yeah, I meant that early on in the vaccinations, officialish-seeming articles said or implied that breakthrough cases were very rare (even calling them ‘breakthrough cases’, to my ear, sounds like they are sort of more unexpected than they should be, but perhaps that’s just what such things are always called). That seemed false at the time even, before later iterations of covid made it more blatantly so. I think it was probably motivated partly by desire to convince people that the vaccine was very good, rather than just error, which I think is questionable behavior.
I didn’t follow this part. What is “questionable communication choices” referring to? And how is it related either to someone’s expectations around breakthrough cases or their impressions of vaccine effectiveness?
Is this about what media sources they’re exposed to? (It seems like that’s probably not what you meant by “communication choices”, but I’m having trouble coming up with other hypotheses.)
Not totally confident, but I think what Katja meant is that the media/government used the phrase “very occasional breakthrough cases” when they turn out to be more than ‘very occasional’. That, like many things, was a questionable communication choice.
Yeah, I meant that early on in the vaccinations, officialish-seeming articles said or implied that breakthrough cases were very rare (even calling them ‘breakthrough cases’, to my ear, sounds like they are sort of more unexpected than they should be, but perhaps that’s just what such things are always called). That seemed false at the time even, before later iterations of covid made it more blatantly so. I think it was probably motivated partly by desire to convince people that the vaccine was very good, rather than just error, which I think is questionable behavior.
Ah, got it. Thanks!