If they must run these, then online would surely make sense. Perhaps they are scared of a video being leaked? But this would be a risk of the normal courses anyway.
Possible strategy for attending enduring GASCO Zoom webinar:
but will the CAA offer to pay to develop a social distancing course!
Doubtless they will. 
This latest missive from the CAA and their interpretation of an ATZ infringement is causing widespread controversy and anger.
Well they are obviously not going back on the mayhem they have caused, because they would have to undo the actions they took against a lot of pilots. They would have had to refund god knows how many Gasco fees, travel, etc.
I would say I’m surprised by this, but it is the CAA, so it almost could have been expected. I’d be very interested to see this tested legally, but the fact that they can suspend your license and potentially serioulsy damage your aircraft is a massive barrier.
I don’t think I’ve ever done the position, height, speed, colour of socks, breakfast, report at any ATZ. So I guess I’ve now poor airmanship from the CAA’s point of view.
What exactly do you see as the problem? Is it the bit about airports with A/G service? In that case I do feel that two way radio communication or prior coordination is excessive. Otherwise what the CAA says on that webpage that you should do is what I’d consider good airmanship and I would do it regardless of the airfield having an ATZ or not. So not following it would be poor airmanship.
I think it is a combination of several things:
Basically some people in the system have decided to get aggressive and the CAA, under its new “bust them all” policy, has jumped at the opportunity to bust some people for it.
I recall a case where an instructor or examiner left the circuit with a student and upon returning shortly afterwards didn’t make the required calls and got busted for it. I have been told that the Barton MOR chasing actions have resulted in a number of instructors or examiners losing their livelihood (presumably temporarily).
There is no demonstrated safety angle I am aware of. This is not some dramatic misnavigation and flying straight through some ATZ below the 2000ft AAL altitude.
Although I’ve not come across it myself, I imagine there’s quite a few A/G airfields with an ATZ where the A/G operator wanders off for some time. If you’re trying to cross (or land at that airfield), having to circle until the A/G operator comes back isn’t really satisfactory. Hopefully with this clarification, the CAA will oblige any airfield with an ATZ to have it continuously manned during notified hours.
However, if not manned, who will notice the “below CAA specification” radio call ? 
This stuff is in the same category as yellow jackets.
