> 1. "Dropping at a historic rate" is such a weird thing to brag when it's just falling back to the pre-Covid level.

You've mixed up the current level with the rate of decline. The article is pretty clear about it.

I'll say it again: "Dropping at a historic rate" is such a weird thing to brag when it's just falling back to the pre-Covid level.

I didn't mix up anything. Covid is a very abnormal event, and seeing the numbers go back to pre-Covid quickly after Covid is more or less expected. It's a good thing (if it's true), but not that newsworthy.

> but not that newsworthy.

It may be expected, but I disagree that it's not newsworthy. If a sharp-rise is newsworthy, then it's also important to inform people of the sharp-drop. Even if it makes sense to expect a sharp-drop after an anomalous sharp-rise, if you only report the sharp-rise then you leave people misinformed about the current situation.

I think it's fine to complain about the framing of the article, but I think the fact itself is newsworthy.

Technically right, but using "historic" instead of "pre-COVID" is a form of propaganda targeted to people who don't pay attention, and is rightly flagged.

> I think it's fine to complain about the framing of the article

It's easy to have a historic rate of decline if you just had a historic rate of increase.

I'm a really capable and well-read English speaker and I missed that subtle detail. No wonder people distrust the legacy media.

> The centrepiece of this article is basically "people's feelings are wrong, the government's numbers are right".

True, but such patronizing statements are pretty much what mainstream media has consisted of since at least 2016. There is a vast movement across most media outlets to push the narrative that 'the people' cannot be trusted and need oversight and control. It's probably the most significant anti-democratic wave in several generations, and ironically the perpetrators are mostly those who constantly accuse others of anti-democratic tendencies.

The crap north americans put up with is amazing. In all of Central / South America the only country comes close to the level of day to day restrictions is Nicaragua.

Not even El Salvador which is apparently a right-wing dictatorship where no one has rights has anything close to resembling North American rules.

People have been railing against the news for years (decades?) about overreporting negative news and making things seem worse than they actually are. Then an article comes out saying things are actually OK and we get comments like these. I suspect there's really no winning here.

so people should not complain about fabricated news? also: whataboutism

The thing that bothers me for instance, living in SF, is that SF has always been kinda nuts. However. In the last 8 years SF traffic tickets issued have fallen by 97%. [1] Now I know that in the last 8 years people didn't suddenly become 97% better at driving. That kind of thing really skews my perception of the statistics.

When I hear mass shootings happen in Bernal and near 24th, and my street gets looted several times -- but crime is actually down and I'm safer than ever according to the stats -- something just doesn't add up to me.

I don't think there were more murders in SF, that kind of thing gets picked up and reported - but I don't think that the number of traffic incidents per murder has dropped 97%. Therefore, I also don't think the number of property crimes per murder has dropped, or car jackings, etc. I have no basis to work from, nothing to anchor my personal perceptions of safety.

I mean ffs SF boarded up downtown for the elections in 2020. That's some failed state shit. I've got my plywood all set for 2024.

The number of killings has never been high in my recollection. Dropping by some percent, large or small, doesn't impact my personal perception of safety. But all sorts of other things do.

[1] https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/traffic-citations-san...

Ehh, for an anecdotal counterpoint, I've lived in SF for 10 years. When I first moved here, I'd hear gunshots - actual gunshots - outside of my apartment in the Mission every couple of months, and people were getting shot regularly. Nowadays, alright, the Mission isn't amazing, but it certainly isn't that bad.

I do agree that traffic citations going down is an indicator of less citations rather than better traffic... but while you can avoid reporting on minor crime like speeding to some degree, it's quite a bit more difficult to stop tracking murder, which is what the original article is about.

I mentally roll my eyes every time the press love to use the word "historic" to describe an event. I suppose it makes the narrative more dramatic, but it's such an empty buzzword and a cliche. Technically, everything is historic, because anything and everything that happens is future history.

> "people's feelings are wrong, the government's numbers are right"

They could both be wrong.

The Los Angeles Times specializes in propaganda. Watch for a great many 'things are great!' articles between now and election time.