This is crappy journalism. "Health officials & political scientists believe the only thing keeping Ala from becoming like Florida – where restrictions are essentially removed, despite soaring increases in Covid-19 cases – is Ivey’s order requiring people to wear a face covering." https://twitter.com/aldotcom/status/1321834743722291200

How do you get "soaring increases" from this data set? This is exactly 4 weeks after Florida removed restrictions. Increases in cases are moving with increases in testing.

Wouldn't a reasonable journalist ask "hey, I wonder what happened in Florida after they removed their mask ordinance and restrictions?" It is easy to find this data.
Hospitalizations, by age range, are decreasing.

(Hospitalized patients by month and age group, March-Oct.)

Wouldn't a reasonable journalist ask "I wonder what C19 related deaths have done in Florida after this change? Four weeks is enough time to see the impact."

(C19 deaths in FL by date of death, not date of report.)

Wouldn't a reasonable journalist ask "Well, if deaths aren't going up, I wonder if more people are hospitalized because of C19 after these changes?"

(Hospital beds occupied, Covid (blue) and non-Covid (red) July - 10/28.)

Wouldn't a reasonable journalist ask "I wonder if they are having more positive cases as a percentage of tested cases four weeks after these changes?"

Wouldn't a reasonable journalist ask "well, maybe people aren't in the hospital yet or haven't died yet from these changes. But, are they going to the hospital with symptoms?"

(CLI: % of emergency visits for COVID-like illness (purple dots) between 2-3% since the end of Aug.)

I live in BHM, but work in Tampa. I've spent at least a week a month since mid-June in Florida. Things are mostly back to normal there (w/ reasonable precautions), but there simply are no "soaring" cases as the article suggests and the data paints a clear picture.

If the author of the article wants to write an opinion piece that is pro-mask, then go right ahead. But, to compare Alabama's situation to Florida's, without a thoughtful consideration of what the situation actually is in Florida is simply incompetent.

The author decided to write an article, with a headline about Florida, and the only "analysis" in the article of the situation in Florida is to say cases are "soaring" with no supporting data. How can the headline be "follow Florida's lead" with no exploration of that scenario?

Contrary to the specious assertions of the article, it would appear, based on the data, that Florida's lead is worth following. A journalist with credibility would have done the legwork to see what he was comparing Alabama to before offering up non-informed speculation.