Ofcom Suppress Debate on Coronavirus to Stop You Hearing The Truth
Many people are beginning to question why UK Broadcasters have completely failed to report any alternative scientific viewpoints on the Coronavirus 'Pandemic', except in the context of calling any dissenters "conspiracy theorists" of course. Many others assume that there is no alternative viewpoint because it is never aired by the mainstream media.
The public is lead to believe that 'the science' is settled, and that all scientists agree on the theories of Ferguson, Whitty and Vallance. In reality, there are hundreds of top scientists whose research and analysis fundamentally disagree with their hypothesis, so why are these respected scientists not heard by the public?
We can reveal that these voices have not been aired by the Broadcast media on Ofcom's say-so. A ruling by the organisation published on the 23rd of March (the day of lockdown) informed all broadcast media outlets that there was to be no alternative viewpoints. The watchdog's coronavirus ruling tells it's member not to broadcast “statements that seek to question or undermine the advice of public health bodies on the Coronavirus, or otherwise undermine people’s trust in the advice of mainstream sources of information about the disease.”
As a result this “guidance” the truth about Covid-19 has been completely suppressed. no dissenting views about it are heard on the mainstream media, particularly the BBC regardless of who holds that view.
When, on April 20th, Eamonn Holmes, an ITV presenter, argued in favour of always maintaining an open mind with respect to different theories about the coronavirus Ofcom issued a 'discipline' and Holmes was treated like he was a flat-earther.
Ofcom's decision has effectively destroyed any debate on traditional broadcast media. Meaning that the majority of the public are unaware that they are being fed a particular narrative of half truths, exaggerations, and lies. For example few know the Neil Ferguson's model didn't work (discovered by Edinburgh University); or that he has a 20 year track record of wild predictions that didn't come true (a matter of public record); or that the death figures have been falsified (discovered by Oxford University); or that the much-championed testing process is producing huge amounts of false-positives, because these facts, which can all be independently corroborated, never make it to air.
If anyone does question the official narrative, Ofcom swoop in with a two-pronged response, firstly issuing disciplinary proceedings against the broadcaster, in the form of forcing them to make a public retraction and the levying of massive fines, as well as orchestrating public 'humiliation' of those that dared deviate from the party-line. It's the sort of thing you could expect from Chinese state broadcasters.
It is important to understand that there are just as many eminent scientists, doctors and specialists who not only disagree with SAGE but have already disproved the theories it promotes as their are those who still believe their analysis. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that blows their theories about lockdown and social distancing straight out of the water.
None of this will ever be aired on British television whilst Ofcom's censorious Coronavirus ruling is in place. Toby Young and the Free Speech Union wrote to Ofcom requesting a judicial review but were 'dismissed' without any real debate. As Young and his colleagues rightly pointed out, free speech is a protected characteristic under the Human Rights Act and, have now implemented legal proceedings against Ofcom to challenge their decision. An organisation that see's itself as 'the law' being challenged by an actual law, and real lawyers, is going to be irksome to the bureaucrats in Ofcom at the very least, but a huge amount is riding on this case. Only by abolishing the Ofcom ruling can honest debate about Covid-19 be had.