Boris Johnson delivered one of his most important speeches as a PM of the United Kingdom this Sunday, presenting the government's 'first sketch of a roadmap to reopening society', but his overall message and underlying tone seem to have been misconstrued by many. Most of the backlash he received came in the form of misplaced mockery of his recommendations for the public.
Some people seem to think of the 'work from home if you can but go to work, if you have to' portion of the statement as being a contradiction, thereby completely missing the point. Throughout the nearly 15 minutes long speech, Johnson sounded resilient and on point, stressing on several separate occasions on the conditionality of the plan. He also emphasised on the fact that all actions implemented by the government are, and will continue to be, justified by 'strict' and 'scientific' data.
Johnson's rhetoric was neither purposefully convoluted, nor was he unintentionally inconsistent. Instead, the PM managed to hit all the right notes by using short and precise statements in addition to expressive body language. What seems to have confused a lot of people, however, were parts of the speech such as the concession allowing people to go to parks while continuing to adhere to social distancing policies. The two are not self-excluding.
In politics, prominent figures need to sound confident. Oftentimes their rhetoric is going to be judged by the public based on their preconceived beliefs and opinions. The fact that many people did not understand Johnson's message is not demonstrative of his 'vagueness' as much as it is illustrative of those people's misapprehension of the nature of the epidemic.
Just compare Johnson's resolute demeanour and emphasis on the need for conducting all manners of policymaking based on existing scientific data, against Trump's typical rhetoric on Twitter, for example. The latter seldom uses words such as 'conditional' in his addresses to the public. Rather, what has become a sort of a mainstay in Trump's rhetoric are phrases such as 'tremendous', 'incredible', and of course 'great'.
Just because the US president is not accustomed to underlining the potential need for adjusting his agenda as the situation changes, it does not mean that he is somehow more precise compared to Johnson. The British PM has at least demonstrated the foresight to warn people against the uncertainty that Britons currently face.
One cannot expect any government to conduct direct and at the same time effective policymaking under the uncertainty stemming from the pandemic. So why is it then that so many people expect the politicians to be equally as blunt in their statements?