The word 'review' is over-used in talking about political leaders taking stock of things. Most leaders dont have the capacity to comprehend much of what they're told or they observe, let alone review. It's mostly for photo-shoots and press releases. That's understandable, but ...
If, separate from the political made-for-media actions, there is also an actual process of review and analysis, then it would be alright to have leaders put in an appearance. But invariably, the photo-shoot and PR is the ONLY kind of review that goes on, and that will never do.
We need professional processes to respond to complex problems. Those require staffing by capable people who are left to do their jobs professionally and with accountability. Such people don't mind working without the spotlight, but they expect their leaders also to be competent.
Many state governments don't have such competence in their political ranks. They get by, nonetheless, presenting authority as a substitute. A superficial media that never asks any level 2 question makes this easier. But in a real crisis the Emperor's New Clothes are plainly seen.
The main reason many leaders don't take questions from the media, especially at public events, is that they don't know the answers. If anything, reviews make this worse, because one is expected to know something at least after the review if not before it !!
It's much easier to finish a 'review' and then make a pronouncement, "I have given strict instruction to ...". Everyone knows what to do after that. Reporters have their 400 words. Cameramen have their pictures. Officials have their files to do and shelve. Swa-ha.
I am sure some leaders have been 'reviewing' the covid situation regularly. It's evident. If you know what I mean.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
