Choice of words from virus officials so crucial

The UK's deputy chief medical officer Jenny Harries was standing at the press conference lectern to dish out the latest predictions on the coronavirus pandemic. She declared that we could not expect to return to normal life in the next three to six months and that some restrictions would have to remain for that period. Six months! SIX MONTHS!! Why on earth did she have to come up with that timescale so casually? Does she actually know what she is talking about or just being over cautious and talking of worst case? And, most important of all, did she have any idea how the media would react to that statement? Did anyone warn her about choosing her words carefully and not to be led into making any sort of time prediction? It seems not. Either that or she ignored the advice from the Cabinet Office PRs. Her statement was yesterday. Today the headlines on the front pages of the newspapers all shouted that we faced another six months of lockdown! No life for a further six months!!! That's into October. The reaction for every newspaper reader must have been the same. Oh God how can we put up with this for another six months. Not one single newspaper so far as I could see had a headline saying it was going to be three months, but possibly six months. Everyone went for SIX MONTHS. This is how newspapers work. They always ALWAYS take the top-end figure. If an official says three to six, newspapers will say six. If an official says we could have between 10,000 deaths and 20,000, every headline will say 20,000. Or, if you're lucky, up to 20,000. I am not knocking newspapers, it's my profession. I'm just stating the reality, that's the way it works. So, Dr Harries, you and your colleagues in the prediction business working for the government or the NHS have to be honest but not brutally so. Amid the gloom we all need a little optimism. So perhaps this is what Dr Harries should have said: "The government will make a decision in two weeks, as it said it would, about whether we need to extend the three-week social distancing instructions. The two metre rule. I don't want to preempt the government's decision but obviously, as I'm sure you are all aware, we have to take steps to stop this virus from spreading and overwhelming our NHS. For that reason it is unlikely that we can just return to normal pre-virus life in the near future. I cannot and will not predict how long this may all last. Hopefully the peak of the virus will be reached soon and then the pressure on the NHS can be reduced. But one step at a time." First reporter asks: "How long can we expect the lockdown to last?" Her answer should have been: "As I said, I'm not in the business of predicting but for the foreseeable future we may have to put up with some form of restrictions. But that is a matter for the government to decide and to announce in due course. Thank you, I'm afraid I now have to leave." Headlines the next day? Perhaps: Medical official warns of lockdown for foreseeable future. It's still not accurate because she didn't say "lockdown" but it's a helluva lot better than SIX MONTHS!!!