A TOTAL FILLETING OF THE TELEGRAPH...MORE COWARDS TRY TO BLOCK SCREENING OF FILM

IN this week’s edition of News Uncut:

1: Why has it taken The Telegraph so long to say what we all knew already?

2: Cowards disrupt another academic showing at Cambridge University

---

By Mark Sharman

“THE BBC has a reputation as a truth teller – but in COVID it did what the Government wanted.”

So trumpeted the Daily Telegraph, in a series of ‘exclusives’ detailing the BBC’s links with a ‘secret’ Government disinformation unit and Big Tech social media partners in a highly co-ordinated campaign of censorship.

No shit Sherlock. The bulk of the story has been around independent media for many months. And as The Telegraph finally catches on, it is hard to know which is worse, the paper’s rank hypocrisy or the BBC’s sanctimonious denials.

For the record, the Government’s Disinformation and Misinformation Unit is not secret. It was openly discussed in the House of Commons, where Nadine Dorries, then Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, spoke of daily contact with online companies, particularly over Covid.

Further, the influence of the Behavioural Insights Team, the Government ‘nudge unit’ on Covid policy and its communication has been well documented, both in Laura Dodsworth’s book ‘A State of Fear’ and in the OracleFilms/News Uncut film ‘Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion’.

Meanwhile, the BBC’s involvement with the Trusted News Initiative (TNI) is the subject of legal proceedings in the United States, an anti-trust suit alleging that the TNI acted as a collusion between broadcasters, Big Tech companies and US State agencies in protecting the Covid narrative, blocking alternative views and silencing alternative independent media outlets.

This information and much more was available to The Telegraph and every other mainstream organisation. So why has it taken more than three years to start looking behind the mirror, while freedom of speech was being systematically eroded?

The Telegraph articles did produce one nugget: that both the BBC and the broadcast regulator Ofcom attended meetings of the Government’s Counter Disinformation Policy Forum. The BBC claims its role was as an observer; Ofcom meanwhile is re-imagining and back-tracking both the intention and effect of its misinformation advice to all broadcasters.

Former Minister David Davis had it right in The Telegraph when he said of the Counter Disinformation Unit “the most paranoid wing of Government is interfering with the democratic process”. He called for a Parliamentary inquiry with “the biggest combination of power, access and speed”.

The BBC denies that its coverage of Covid was subjective. It says it featured “a range of voices during the pandemic … in line with our duty of impartiality”.

That claim that would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious. It certainly wouldn’t stand up to scrutiny with three years of video tape and website articles available as evidence, backing Government propaganda and spreading fear, while ignoring dissenting experts and important newsworthy events such as the huge Freedom Marches in London.

Indeed, Radio 5 Live is on record as saying it was BBC editorial policy not to debate with “anti-vaxxers,” a label pinned to anyone who dared to speak out, whatever their qualifications.

The BBC even has its own Disinformation Correspondent in Marianna Spring, whose very title suggests prosecutor, judge and jury; her reports are consistently in concert with the State narrative and she summarily dismisses opposing views with well-worn phrases such as ‘anti-vaxxer’ and ‘conspiracy theorist’. Her work is the antithesis of impartiality and time will show her on the wrong side of history.

Interestingly, The Telegraph reports that some BBC journalists raised concerns on objectivity and balanced reporting over Covid, but were ignored by senior editors.

That is a situation all too familiar at News Uncut. We know from personal experience that broadcasters and newspapers were consistent in blocking anything that could be seen as questioning the Government line over Covid statistics, lockdowns, mask wearing, school closures, the efficacy of jabs and, in particular, any suggestions that those jabs may be causing harm.

Dissenting articles were few and far between, buried under an avalanche of scare stories, warnings and lockdown panic, followed by gushing enthusiasm for the miracle “vaccine”.

There was unbridled vilification of the unvaccinated and shameful abandonment of the vaccine-injured; self-help groups have confirmed that being ignored and/or ridiculed by the press greatly worsened mental health.

We have witnessed a gross and unprecedented dereliction of journalistic principles, no questions asked. Those who did not willingly toe the Covid line were often threatened with losing their jobs and some did – notably Maajid Nawaz from LBC, Mark Steyn from GB News and The Telegraph’s own cartoonist, Bob Moran.

Which raises the question, how did senior Telegraph editors feel when they read through their investigative work on the Government and the BBC? Did they recognise their own shortcomings over the past three years? Did they, like the BBC, ignore concerned members of their own team? Will they look at themselves in hindsight and wonder if they could have done more to seek out the truth? Did the merest flicker of guilt cross their minds?

Sorry The Telegraph, you get only half a mark for spelling your own name correctly and another half mark for accepting, finally, that there is a can of worms to be opened. Now please do your job properly and start looking beyond the mantra ‘Safe and Effective’.

Recognise “vaccine” harm. Investigate the huge increase in excess deaths, heart disease and cancer cases since the jabs were rolled out.

We don’t believe in coincidences of this magnitude and nor should you.

There are important questions to be asked for the sake of humanity. So ask them.

---

PROTESTORS? YOU ARE SIMPLY COWARDS

STUDENT protestors have again disrupted the running of an academic film at Cambridge University, this time using a coward’s strategy.

Two weeks ago school teacher Eleanor Dobson told News Uncut how she attended a clandestine, unofficial screening of the documentary Birthgap after the University had effectively blocked the original event.

However, organiser Charlie Bentley-Astor was not giving up easily; she secured the Pitt Building in Cambridge and even persuaded the film’s producer to make a second trip from Tokyo.

Accordingly Stephen J Shaw, a data analyst and president of birthgap.org, appeared in person to discuss his film, on how the world’s population is in dangerous decline, a view diametrically opposed to the popular narrative. He argues that there will not be enough young people to sustain economies and social welfare across the majority of countries.

The event was a 100-seat sell-out, or so it seemed. But in reality only 20 places were filled. Student protestors had booked the rest to leave rows of empty seats and deny opportunity to many supporters who were on a waiting list.

Eleanor writes:

I guess this is the current way of preventing events you don't like from proceeding. All you need is a computer and an internet connection; no need to leave the comfort of your bedroom to make your point.

On my two visits to see this documentary I never met a single protestor in person, not one. So who knows how many, or how few, are behind this?

The screening went ahead anyway. It is well worth watching because it raises very important issues that will affect everyone and it really needs to be openly discussed if we are to avoid a catastrophe.

It is ironic that the students who were so desperate to avoid seeing the film are of the very generation that needs to know.

Why is the documentary considered controversial enough that some people want to shut it down? Apparently it is a threat to the narrative that women only have children because they are forced into doing so by “the Patriarchy” and by culture.

The protestors who attempted to prevent this documentary from being shown have rendered themselves wilfully blind. They have also chosen to impose this blindness on others of their generation, which is not a right they have. But whether they like it or not, this will hit them.

*News Uncut is free. We welcome any donations, however, to help our journalism grow.