Professional writers and speakers must "sweat the small stuff"

It's striking that clear advice on who should get the latest "targeted" booster shot is not readily available everywhere... and that it's not at all easy to schedule getting the shot (and a flu shot) once we determine if this is the right time.

Here is a section of a Washington Post article that helps me, at least.

Should I wait and time the booster for when Covid cases get bad again?

Most experts agree you shouldn’t wait. You’re eligible to get the updated booster shot if you’re 12 or older and it has been at least two months since your initial vaccine or your last booster. Older Americans, those with chronic illnesses and people who are immunocompromised or pregnant should get the updated booster shot as soon as possible.

Of course, today's brouhaha is over President Biden saying on 60 Minutes that "the pandemic is over," and then immediately saying we still have work to do to contain the virus. Huh? I would guess that almost anyone not looking for controversy might interpret his initial comment as closer to "The emergency part of the pandemic is over," since hospitalizations and deaths are quite low compared to the past, but we don't live in a time when people care to give anyone the benefit of the doubt.

I watched that interview and was struck by the strategy that Scott Pelley (the interviewer) used to try to catch the president saying something that would make news (in short, looking for a mistake that would boost ratings and provide more support for the TV show). Several times Pelley began questions with "Many people are saying..." -- followed by negatives like "you are too old" or "you have a low approval rating."

Pelley stated the president's approval rating as 40 percent, but just a couple days previously the rating was 49 percent. Different surveys? Failure to update known data? A preference for a lower number and therefore a more dramatic situation? 

Probably all the above.

BTW, the Post quote above uses what journalists call AP Style, with no comma before the final "and" in the series. Most other style guides prefer what is known as the Oxford Comma, and here we see some potential for confusion when that comma is not included. (I hope you saw my use of the Oxford comma here.)

The last two items in the series are "those with chronic illnesses and people who are immunocompromised or pregnant should..." A reader could be forgiven for wondering if people would need to fit TWO conditions -- having a chronic illness AND being either immunocompromised or pregnant -- to get the booster shot. As opposed to one of THREE situations, which is the intent.

I only mention this because the basic problem we have in so many areas of the world is simple clarity and truth. Just as Mr. Biden might have expressed himself a bit more clearly in that interview, so the Post reporter/editor might have added that little comma to make certain that readers clearly saw the A, B, and C pattern of the series in my example paragraph. 

Official communication needs to pay special attention to the "little things," even down to those commas.