After the line of 4, the line of 10 and that of the weekly changing 15, we have returned to a fixed social bubble of 5 since yesterday. But why does the number 10 still circulate somewhere, in combination with “social distance”? And why was it interpreted differently several times? Again, the new corona rules seem to be cut off by incoherent communication. “Politicians need to make sure they understand the rules first.”
“I thought last night I got it after seeing Marc Van Ranst in” The News “. But when I heard Philippe De Backer on Radio 1 just now, I was confused again.” Speaking here: Professor of Communication Sciences An-Sofie Claeys (UGent) about the new rules around social bubbles.
Claeys says she went looking for additional information herself, on news sites and at the crisis center, yesterday. But if even the country’s communication professors have to study to understand the rules, something goes wrong.
5 or 10 people?
The tricky point is not so much the new “fixed bubble” that you can now form as a family or single with a maximum of 5 other people (excluding children under the age of 12). That seems clear. No, the confusion is mainly about this phrase: “Unaccompanied gatherings such as family or friends gatherings are limited to a maximum of 10 people”.