The BBC has now run a day-long anti vaccination campaign. Possibly the most-viewed coordinated anti vaccination campaign in the world so far.
It centred around Novak Djokovic.
Here is a short thread on how it worked.
They got an 'exclusive interview' with Novak Djokovic, the #1 ranked men's tennis player, and the only man in the top 100 who has not taken a covid vaccine.
Everyone who pays attention to tennis knows his stance, but he quickly falls out of the news outside of major tournaments.
Then they filled their flagship morning news program - which they believe sets the news agenda for the day - with ads for their interview, running snippets from it continuously.
Other outlets copied the story, and it has trended all day on Twitter as a result.
Simultaneously, they ran the story as the main article on the biggest news website in the world.
They didn't simply run it as a regular article, they also added several secondary articles, and a 'timeline' of updates on a non-breaking news story.
And they ran this as a 'World News' story, not a sport story, displacing stories like the Ukraine/Russia update.
It is interesting to note that - despite the extremely heavy coverage - the story very quickly dropped to 3rd most read article on the BBC news. In other words: this was not a naturally 'massive' story - it was prompted to be read.
Alongside this, staff put out notes on social media running still more promo for the interview.
Some of these featured Amol Rajan, who fronts the interview, and is being pushed as a sort of next Piers Morgan - an editor/celeb interviewer who ideally becomes a celeb themselves.
Almost all of these articles ended with this 'call to action', urging people to watch the show at a specific time on BBC One, and linking through to the exact location where it can be watched.
If you've ever done much campaign marketing, you will know that trying to establish an idea requires a few things:
1. A message. 2. Proof points to make that message convincing. 3. Distribution, to create awareness. 4. Reinforcement.
This coordinated campaign contains all 4.
First - the message:
The story focuses on his unvaccinated status, and heavily amplifies his assertion that he is not 'anti vax', he simply isn't vaccinated. This message redefines the idea of 'anti vax', and prompts the idea it is simply pro choice, and a sign of determination.
Second the proof points:
Djokovic is a living 'proof point' himself - that you can be extremely healthy without the vaccine. He is an extreme outlier, the only top 100 mens player to be unvaccinated.
He does not represent the masses, he is way beyond the norm, but he is the perfect person to point to and say 'well he isn't vaccinated'. The main negative consequence he has suffered cannot apply to anyone else, and the BBC paints his stance as 'determination'.
Thirdly, distribution.
You cannot buy the top spot on the BBC news. It would be worth millionso, due to the huge number of people who see it, particularly first thing in the morning.
Radio 4 Today is similar.
The dozen+ articles and hundreds mentions of Novak today the same.
On top of that there are the secondaries it creates: copycat articles across all major news sites, trending on Twitter, extra mentions across gossip radio shows.
All of this leads to those central articles on the BBC, which in turn have a call to action to watch the interview.
And finally reinforcement through all that - repeated mentions, followed by a primetime BBC One show that goes into detail on his story: not he is the world's #1 tennis player, and he will remain unvaccinated, and that actually that is not 'anti vax', just pro choice.
And so that's how the BBC ran the world's largest coordinated anti vaccination campaign.
I'm not saying that the BBC intended it to be an anti vax campaign (I very much doubt that), or that it will be successful. I am simply saying that is what - in effect - it is.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here is one of those topics that seems small, & gets zero wide media coverage, but affects everyone reading this tweet in a small way every day, and in theory happens 5,443,200,000 times every day.
You can see it here, as spotted by @lagringaeterna. Can you spot it?
(cont...)
It's unnoticeable to most, outside those interested in search engines, but in that example:
Google have taken what the page is about ('Flu'), and rewritten it to what they *think* it should be ('Flu Vaccinations').
That seems small (other than perhaps re pro/anti-vax) but...
Those blue links (or purple, after you've visited) are the main way we all 'engage' with Google, some of us hundreds of times each day.
In the past, Google showed them exactly as the website owner chose (albeit sometimes shortened), as defined by any webpage's <title> tag.
Here's the current status with the Extinction Rebellion protest on Long Acre & St Martin's Lane.
A handful of protesters stood on a giant pink table in the middle of the road.
Oddly, it was just the police, the protesters, and me. Everyone else has been kicked out of the area.
There are tons of police in the area. I'd guess a few hundred. And it's all fenced off with temporary barriers.
The area is only a couple of hundred yards from one of the largest police stations in Central London, so fairly easy for police to come & go.
The police aren't letting anyone in, but oddly they have closed it using a 'Section 14'. They have cleared the whole area using that, and are telling everyone they cannot go in, but legally that is not true: They should let you in if you are not part of it.
The Independent uncovered the 'UK Government' had set up a website 'On the Move', posing as a non-government site, to dissuade migrants from coming to the UK (independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…)
Here is a short investigation to figure out what may be going on behind the scenes:
(The Independent article is by @LizzieDearden. She talks about it here:
The website address - 'migrantsonthemove.org' - was registered on the 16th April last year (remember 'April'), a few weeks after lockdown began.
It was actually spotted months ago by @josephinegoube, in December last year, as being run by the 'UK Home Office', but there were no replies to her tweet highlighting it.
I went to the Marble Arch Mound today. It cost £2 million to build, and today was launch day, but it was still quite quiet.
Here is a short thread with info.
First, the original plan drawings and the marketing description do not quite match reality.
These plans never match reality, but it feels like they could probably clean the area up a bit.
It also seems the team who planned it perhaps designed it in Winter and forgot about the trees already in the area, which change the impression of it vs the plans.
I'd joked before that it cost 6p per step to climb it, as the 'fast track' price was £8.
That seems to have dropped to £6.50, meaning it is a more affordable 5p per step to climb the 130ish steps. (the marketing info describes this as an experience of the 'great outdoors')
@DavidVidecette Hi, David, I think your impression of the geography of the office is incorrect.
Here is the CCTV in the office. Note the planter on the balcony outside, the brackets on the wall, the shelf beneath the brackets, the red fire 'break glass' point between the windows...
@DavidVidecette Compare those vs the same elements in this shot of Matt in an office.
Note the coat stand here, with hi vis hanging on it. Note the door there.
That would place the CCTV in the red circle here.
@DavidVidecette Here is another shot of Matt in the same spot (left). You get a better view of the coat stand with the hi vis, and the door, and the TVs on the wall.
The CCTV would therefore point at that door area.
You see the same TV, coat stand, and hi vis in the Sun's video (right).