Iain Davis
Declined artwork for the BBC podcast. The BBC’s” Marianna in Conspiracyland”podcast series exists by Marianna Spring, the BBC’s specialist disinformation and social networks reporter. Over the course of 10 podcast episodes, blending reality with fiction and making use of applied psychology, “Conspiracyland” is a disinformation and propaganda campaign created to deceive the BBC audience into accepting dictatorship.
It belongs to a much bigger global operation which looks for to set up a international governance program. For any readers brand-new to my work, this may sound like a quite goofy “conspiracy theory.” Sadly, it isn’t and over the next couple of posts we will check out the proof that shows the existence of precisely this international “conspiracy.” All I’ll say for now is that this “conspiracy” is not a “trick.”
Over the next couple of posts, by deconstructing the BBC’s Conspiracyland and Verify disinformation, we will reveal the BBC’s motivations for spreading falsehoods and engaging in “conspiracy theory” propaganda. We will likewise analyze the broader context within which it occurs.
The next post, Part 1 of the series, is presently exclusively available to my paid Substack subscribers. However, there is no need to become a paid subscriber to read it. Preceding posts will be made easily readily available to all as and when each subsequent post in the series is released.
I am trying to earn money as a reporter and writer. This is not something that Marianna Spring authorizes of. In her politically inspired attackon scientist, movie maker, author and reporter Richard D. Hall, Marianna said:
Mr Hall is just earning a living from his theories, instead of making big earnings– why keep going?
Marianna makes somewhere in the area of ₤ 70K– ₤ 84K per annum as a BBC correspondent. The journalists, writers and content developers she attacks aren’t salaried and ‘earn a living’ purely from the kind support of people who have an interest in and value their work.
They don’t earn anything like Marianna’s wage. Marianna is at a loss to understand why they keep going and is figured out to assist government efforts to make certain they do not.
The BBC invites the reality that its journalism is directly moneyed by the federal government, especially the work of its foreign reporters and its abroad media operations in nations like Ukraine. British individuals, who wish to spend for their propaganda, presently fork-out ₤ 159 annually for BBC disinformation.
For many, this isn’t viewed as an option because they can’t enjoy broadcast tv without it. With steep fines payable for failure to pay your TV license, the federal government utilizes threats and threats to coerce the public to money the BBC.
A rapidly increasing number of people have understood that they do not need to pay anything. Contrary to federal government propaganda, it is a choice.
Confronted with the prospect of no one troubling to spend for their propagandists, so wedded is the federal government to ensuring that its BBC “shows” continues that it has frozen the present license charge for two years, in the hope of luring people to stay, while it desperately attempts to find out how it is going to money its State media operation.
Presently the proposed federal government option looks likely to be a direct tax:
Our evidence was clear that some form of public funding for the BBC remains required. […] A universal home levy linked to council tax expenses is one option which might take higher account of individuals’s ability to pay. A ring-fenced earnings tax is another.
As the effectiveness of its risks and threats wanes, it is clearly necessary, from the government’s viewpoint, that all choice be eliminated. Tax at source has the included advantage of taking money from individuals who can’t abide the BBC and wouldn’t select to support it if you paid them.
For the 2020/21 financial yearthe BBC declares that it got ₤ 3.8 billion in license charges and more than ₤ 1.5 billion in other income– direct federal government funding, and so on– giving it an annual budget plan of more than ₤ 5.3 billion. It also operates its own “charity,” called BBC Media Action, which spreads out BBC propaganda and disinformation globally.
BBC Media Action was supported in 2022with “charitable– tax deductible– donations” from, among others, USAID (theCIA), The Costs and Melinda Gates Foundation, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth workplace– without a doubt its most significant donor– the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN).
Unsurprisingly, the BBC license fee is presently set by the UK government. Nearly 30% of the BBC’s functional costs are directly funded by the UK federal government and its “charitable” operations are solely moneyed by a global public-private collaborationin between the UK government, other governments, global humanitarian foundations, intelligence agencies and supranational intergovernmental organisations.
Ofcom, the organisation that regulates the BBC, which itself is “straight responsible” to the UK government, describes the BBC as a Civil Service Broadcater(PSB) and rejects that the BBC is a state broadcaster. According to Ofcom, a PSB provides “unbiased and trusted news.”
The usually accepted definition of state broadcastersis:
… media outlets that are under financial and/or editorial control of the state or government.
On 23rd March 2020, less than two weeks after the WHO stated their international pandemic, Ofcom released their main Coranovirus Guidance, to regulated broadcaster, such as the BBC:
We strongly recommend you to take specific care when broadcasting […] statements that seek to question or undermine the guidance of public health bodies on the Coronavirus, or otherwise undermine people’s rely on the recommendations of mainstream sources of information about the illness […] Such views must always be placed into context and not exist in such a way regarding risk undermining viewers’ rely on main health suggestions […] Ofcom will consider any breach emerging from hazardous Coronavirus-related shows to be potentially severe and will consider taking suitable regulative action, which could consist of the imposition of a statutory sanction.
BBC’s reporting on the pseudopandemicwas completely controlled by the government via the government’s so-called “independent” regulator. The BBC just reported “main” federal government approved information. However the BBC went much further than the majority of traditional media (MSM) outlets.
In December 2020 Marianna Spring reported on BBC “Newsround,” the BBC’s existing affairs program for more youthful viewers. Spring told the BBC’s kid audience:
Big communities of anti-vaxxers, those who are against vaccines, have actually invested years spreading out incorrect conspiracies. […] There is a huge difference between genuine stress over vaccines […] and these conspiracies which recommend that vaccines are a method of intentionally hurting or triggering damage to individuals. […] Social network websites and the government have actually dedicated to do more to take on lies about the coronavirus vaccine online. […] some state they have refrained from doing enough to label or remove subjects on this topic.
Marianna did not believe it required to inform British children that she was compelled only to report federal government authorized messaging. She informed the children to trust info from the government and its pharmaceutical corporation “partners” and to reject all opinions expressed from any other source.
She deliberately conflated concerns about jab safety and effectiveness with suspicions about a possible wicked program, misleading children into thinking that the people she identified anti-vaxxers, who had actually continually highlighted jab security threats and suspicious effectiveness, were spreading out “conspiracies” that were “lies.” Marianna, like the majority of her BBC associates, was causing children to take experimental jabs that they did not need.
Maybe most concerning was Marianna’s desire to normalise state censorship for children. Contrary to every democratic concept known to their parents, she recommended to the youngest generation that the government must “remove” details it doesn’t “authorize.” Therefore, Marianna was advocating dictatorship, as a favored model of federal government, to British kids.
There is no doubt that the centralised control of details is favoured by autocracies and other kinds of dictatorships. It goes without saying that dictatorships are, by definition, anti-democratic.
When German political scientists checked out How Dictators Control the Web, they discovered:
A growing body of research study has studied how autocratic regimes interfere with web interaction to include obstacles to their rule. […] In many autocratic programs, governmental interference in digital facilities and interaction is prevalent. […] This impact happens for political intentions– to prohibit opposition activists from mobilizing their fans online, to consist of the spread of details that is crucial of the program, or to spy on the population to recognize possible dissenters. […] [A] utocrats make organized usage of digital tools and hinder online interaction to contain obstacles to their rule.
This is specifically the information control system that Marianna was promoting among children. Marianna Spring completely endorses dictatorships and is vocally opposed to democratic perfects.
The BBC is moneyed completely at the discretion of the UK federal government, it gets a considerable proportion of its income directly from the government, it is controlled by an organisation that is bound by law to report to the federal government and which functions, by means of legislation, at the wish of the government.
Yet, despite all of this, in its mission statement, the BBC states of itself:
Trust is the structure of the BBC. We’re independent, neutral and truthful.
This is a misleading statement intended to deceive. The BBC is not remotely “independent” from federal government. It is not neutral, but is rather directed by the government to report just “main” narratives. By any affordable definition, it is quite undoubtedly a state broadcaster.
For that reason, the BBC’s own objective statement is disinformation. In no chance can it be considered “truthful” and just the most naive would “trust” it.
The Oxford English Dictionarymeaning of “trust”is:
Firm belief in the reliability, fact, or capability of someone or something. […] Approval of the truth of a declaration without evidence or examination.
Any news media organisation that firmly insists that you trust it does not want you to engage in vital believing. It needs that you believe whatever it tells you “without evidence or examination.”
The need for “trust” has no location in a pluralistic, free media in a democracy. Our capability to question power, and not to trust it, is one of the most basic of democratic perfects.
Over the next few posts, we are going to examine each episode of “Marianna in Conspiracyland” and, having downloaded and listened to all of it– using this useful online service— we’ll highlight the ridiculous propaganda and disinformation scattered throughout. However before we do, I just wanted to make a number of points.
Marianna Spring has every right to her viewpoint, both as a reporter and as a human. Naturally she features greatly in my criticisms, but this is just due to the fact that she is the picked face of the Conspiracyland series and the BBC’s Verify project. I hold no personal bitterness towards her.
Unlike Marianna and the BBC, I do not think that anyone must be censored or personally assaulted for revealing their honestly held viewpoint, consisting of Spring herself. If she has been attacked or abused online, that is not something I support.
Her opinions are the antithesis of my own. I believe she is spreading harmful disinformation that seeks to censor liberty of speech and expression and, consequently, end human flexibility and promote enslavement of the population. I find Marianna Spring’s authoritarian, anti-democratic opinion, advocating dictatorship as she does, offensive.
That being said, I have no right not to be offended and both Spring, and the BBC, have every right to upset. Causing offence is one of the expenses of totally free speech: a democratic perfect most people consider essential.
I am likewise not clear regarding the degree of Spring’s personal complicity. To what degree she has considered the dreadful ramifications of what she promoting is unidentified to me. I can only conclude that she is either a ready propagandist, who welcomes political dictatorship, or is unsuspectingly or wittingly spreading out BBC propaganda and disinformation, merely to further her own profession, without caring about the repercussions.
I’m not exactly sure which is worse.
You can read more of Iain’s work at his blog site IainDavis.com (Previously InThisTogether) or on UK Column or follow him on Twitter or sign up for his SubStack. His new book Pseudopandemic, is now readily available, in both in kindle and paperback, from Amazon and other sellers. Or you can claim a free copy by signing up for his newsletter.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
For direct-transfer bank information click here.