For all the panel: A live COVID data communication question was the point at which leaders led with vaccination numbers over infection numbers. The intention was to warn/frighten the public at first and then encourage the public and give it a sense of optimism. and the timing of this messaging varied from State leader to State leader. Or is it ever possible to use data without "intent" and does that limit the value of data for its ability to paint the true picture.

Thank you to all of the panellists and hosts! please feel free to connect with me if we are not already friends: linkedin.com/in/christine-elmer

I'll stay offscreen as I'm multitasking... but still keenly listening to the answers! I have no questions at the moment

Data is one, albeit important, source of information

Amazing sketching Matt, as always

Thank-you Christine!

Thank-you Christine!

I believe explanatory captions are important for any visualisations/graphs/charts so that people have multiple ways of understanding the information.

Great question Anon!

That's a fascinating and fabulous insight Inga, illuminating the people within the data

Q-anon?

Thanks heaps Inga :) I'd love to chat further if you have time/later

Completely -- and this is an effect of social media, people consuming information and news in an echo chamber

i.e. people get served (in their feeds) more of what they 'like'

Polarisation is concerning because there is no rational debate. The best way to learn is to listen to someone who disagrees with you and keep an open mind -- and even, be willing to change your mind. No point having a mind if you can't change it!

I love data for its ability to tell stories

That's fascinating Phil

we are at end of our time I think?

Thank you all so much!

Thank you so much!

Thank you - that was fantastic

Thanks all, that was great!!

Thank you! That was great

Thanks everyone! Really interesting stuff

Thanks!