🧵GUTTER JOURNALISM STRIKES AGAIN🦠💥
There was once a time, in the now dark & distant past, when journalists would craft their stories with balance and panache. Using credible sources to add “weight” to an article.
I’m about to tell you what today’s crop of “journalists” do👇🏻
There was once a time, in the now dark & distant past, when journalists would craft their stories with balance and panache. Using credible sources to add “weight” to an article.
I’m about to tell you what today’s crop of “journalists” do👇🏻
But first, a bit of background. Yesterday @beverleyturner debated @DrNighatArif on @thismorning over the proposed rollout of Covid-19 vaccines to 12-year-old children.
Safe to say, it was a lively affair. But it’s important to note it was a more balanced interview than usual.
Safe to say, it was a lively affair. But it’s important to note it was a more balanced interview than usual.
Both guests had opportunity to speak, and the presenters remained largely impartial throughout.
Dr Arif was representing an organisation called @projecthalo which is part of the United Nations “Verified” initiative. It is regularly promoted by big tech companies like YouTube.
Dr Arif was representing an organisation called @projecthalo which is part of the United Nations “Verified” initiative. It is regularly promoted by big tech companies like YouTube.
And it is “supported” (funded) by organisations like philanthropist body Luminate which also funds organisations like Full Fact and Greenpeace UK.
Beverley was representing herself as a broadcaster, journalist, & mum-of-three.
Dr Arif started off by stating vaccination raised…
Beverley was representing herself as a broadcaster, journalist, & mum-of-three.
Dr Arif started off by stating vaccination raised…
…3 big questions:
• is it necessary?
• is it safe?
• is it effective?
She then, curiously, went on to talk about other school immunisation programmes such as rotavirus. I say curious because whilst that may be true, other vaccines have little to do with the Covid-19 vaccine.
• is it necessary?
• is it safe?
• is it effective?
She then, curiously, went on to talk about other school immunisation programmes such as rotavirus. I say curious because whilst that may be true, other vaccines have little to do with the Covid-19 vaccine.
She then listed another three aims:
• is it safe & effective for the child? • is it going to be effective for other people around you to bring down the infection rate?
• and is it going to be a public health safety measure that we need to add in?
“When all of those three…
• is it safe & effective for the child? • is it going to be effective for other people around you to bring down the infection rate?
• and is it going to be a public health safety measure that we need to add in?
“When all of those three…
“…criteria are included in the middle of a pandemic — we do it with lots of vaccines already — vaccinating children makes sense,” she said.
She went on to make the argument about safeguarding children from “severe complications” & rising cases leading to further lockdowns.
👇🏻
She went on to make the argument about safeguarding children from “severe complications” & rising cases leading to further lockdowns.
👇🏻
What was again curious was the lack of scientific evidence to answer the questions she herself laid out.
1. Is it safe & effective? Well we simply don’t know, is the honest answer, as the vaccines remain in clinical trials until May 2023 (Pfizer below)👇🏻
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04…
1. Is it safe & effective? Well we simply don’t know, is the honest answer, as the vaccines remain in clinical trials until May 2023 (Pfizer below)👇🏻
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04…
2. Is it effective for others? Well, we know that the vaccines don’t stop transmission.
“There's no evidence that any of the current Covid-19 vaccines can completely stop people from being infected,” say the BBC. Lowers the chance, yes, but not stops.
bbc.com/future/article…
“There's no evidence that any of the current Covid-19 vaccines can completely stop people from being infected,” say the BBC. Lowers the chance, yes, but not stops.
bbc.com/future/article…
3. is it going to be a public health safety measure that we need to add in? It’s unclear what Dr Arif means by this as we have never before locked healthy people in isolation or denied young people education for fear of spreading a respiratory virus. Cases also don’t equal sick…
…people which, disappointingly, the doctor doesn’t clarify to the watching audience.
What was also fascinating were the myriad of mistakes Dr Arif made during the 15-minute segment. Here she is misspeaking & stating that the risks from the vaccine “far outweigh” the benefits.
What was also fascinating were the myriad of mistakes Dr Arif made during the 15-minute segment. Here she is misspeaking & stating that the risks from the vaccine “far outweigh” the benefits.
https://twitter.com/james_townsend9/status/1432679257642348547
She later corrected herself.
And here she appeared not to know how many children she has, stating 3 and then shortly afterwards 6.
Of course, it could just be nerves. But the quote from Mark Twain did feel pertinent: “If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.”
And here she appeared not to know how many children she has, stating 3 and then shortly afterwards 6.
Of course, it could just be nerves. But the quote from Mark Twain did feel pertinent: “If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.”
Beverley made most of the points I have addressed above and delivered a compelling argument, leaving host Rochelle Humes clearly conflicted at the end of the debate over whether to vaccinate her own children.
She wasn’t the only one Beverley left conflicted as you can see here👇🏻
She wasn’t the only one Beverley left conflicted as you can see here👇🏻
Flicking through the #ThisMorning hashtag & it was clear most people thought Beverley had come out on top. Yet if you Googled her name in the hours afterwards, it told a very different story.
“Uproar”, “irresponsible row”, “divides viewers” & “faces backlash” screamed headlines.
“Uproar”, “irresponsible row”, “divides viewers” & “faces backlash” screamed headlines.
And now we reach my central point. Journalists used to have pride in their work and find credible sources to give a balanced view.
Now many simply search Twitter for a comment(s) that fits a pre-determined narrative. Let me be clear: you can find any opinion you want on Twitter.
Now many simply search Twitter for a comment(s) that fits a pre-determined narrative. Let me be clear: you can find any opinion you want on Twitter.
I can find literally any view imaginable just by taking a few minutes to use the search function.
Here we have @rosemhill’s attempt in the Mirror. The whole basis of her “backlash” article is around one comment with 4 retweets and 126 ‘likes’ and another with 24 ‘likes’.
Here we have @rosemhill’s attempt in the Mirror. The whole basis of her “backlash” article is around one comment with 4 retweets and 126 ‘likes’ and another with 24 ‘likes’.
Should we be surprised at the negative slant towards Beverley Turner?
Well no, these political activists tell us exactly what side of the fence they are sitting on as they type up their copy. “Journalists,” don’t make me laugh.
Well no, these political activists tell us exactly what side of the fence they are sitting on as they type up their copy. “Journalists,” don’t make me laugh.
“Sparking uproar” says @CharlyMcIntyre, who repeatedly spells Beverley’s name wrong throughout the copy.
The central basis of her article is from a bot with 5 followers and 1 ‘like’ on its tweet. Another comment used had the significant total of 0 RTs and 5 ‘likes’.
The central basis of her article is from a bot with 5 followers and 1 ‘like’ on its tweet. Another comment used had the significant total of 0 RTs and 5 ‘likes’.
Birmingham Live’s @jamesdrodger declared ITV had “come under fire” & was “in hot water” over Beverley. Of course, no justification is ever given to support this meaningless newspaper phrase.
One comment he quotes has not a single interaction. Was it his second account? Who knows
One comment he quotes has not a single interaction. Was it his second account? Who knows
And here is @rebeccalderwood of Entertainment Daily. Her article uses comments with a single ‘like’, 8 ‘likes’, and 10 ‘likes’ and not a single RT between them.
I’ve deliberately not linked to any of these articles, instead using screenshots, as that is exactly what they want.
I’ve deliberately not linked to any of these articles, instead using screenshots, as that is exactly what they want.
Your average citizen who comes across these stories (with sensationalised headlines) on Google will get a wholly distorted picture of the debate as it happened. As long as you click the link, boosting their web traffic and therefore ad revenue in the process, they don’t care.
It’s unadulterated gutter journalism. And it’s lazy at best, wholly sinister at worst. They deliberately cherry-pick the comments to suit the narrative they or their editor wants, & completely ignore the reality & the hundreds/thousands of people supporting Beverley, shown below.
This is one of the reasons so many of the public have no idea of the “other” side of these issues and debates. They are conditioned through cynically drafted propaganda which, as I’ve just demonstrated, falls apart at the first sign of scrutiny.
This distortion must stop!
ENDS
This distortion must stop!
ENDS
RT to raise awareness! Thank you!🙏🏻 #ThisMorning #ThisIsNotJournalism #TheMediaIsTheVirus #propaganda #COVID19 #Covid_19 #covid #CoronavirusUpdates #censorship #coronavirus #EnoughIsEnough #goodmorningbritain #ImDone #lorraine #gmb #JeremyVine #MSM #fakenews #NoVaccinePassports
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
