By Dr Niall McCrae:
A censorial atmosphere has descended on journalism. The minority of sceptics in the media have been pilloried by their peers, whose pro-establishment activity would be better suited to Pravda in the USSR than a country with a proud history of a free press. Among the most strident inquisitors in this modern witch hunt are at the Guardian and Observer.
In November 2018, Observer columnists Nich Cohen and Carole Cadwalladr, David Aaronovitch of the Times and James Ball of Buzzfeed spoke at a two-day conference titled ‘Tackling Tools of Malign Influence – Supporting 21st Century Journalism’. This was organised by Integrity Initiative, a programme to tackle Russian disinformation launched in 2015 by the government-funded Institute of Statecraft, based in Fife.
Integrity Initiative propagated media messages against public figures with perceived sympathies for Vladimir Putin. The normally Labour-supporting Guardian was critical of Corbyn, particularly after a Russian dissident was poisoned in Salisbury, and his likening of the haste to blame Russia to the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ dossier that led to Britain waging war on Iraq. Natalie Nougayrede was retweeted by Integrity Initiative on posting a scathing editorial with the comment ‘shameful Corbyn & Co reaction to Russia behaviour & chemical weapon use’. Cadwalladr was retweeted on claiming that ‘Labour has a Russia problem’ and that Corbyn’s director of communications Seamus Milne’s ‘support for Putin has made him a Russian propaganda tool’, as was Cohen’s assertion that ‘Labour is led by Putin fans’.
After its political activities were leaked by Anonymous, Integrity Initiative was investigated by the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator, whose damning report in 2019 revealed an uncharitable smear campaign. According to the Daily Record, Integrity Initiative had ‘clusters of media people, some who admit to being involved, others who don’t’. The Guardian and Times were allegedly riddled with Integrity Initiative, although the name never appeared in articles.
Another target was Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, whose partnership with the Guardian ended in 2011 after unredacted material was released. The newspaper shifted from actively supporting Assange to accusing him of working for Putin against Western democracy. Integrity Initiative retweeted several messages by associated journalists on this theme, such as Cadwalladr describing Assange as a ‘special friend’ of Russian intelligence, and he and Milne as ‘Russian propaganda tools’. In 2016 Cadwalladr asserted that WikiLeaks ‘sought assistance from Russian intelligence officers to disrupt the US presidential election’. Cohen referred to Assange as a Russian agent, and tweeted that WikiLeaks ‘will think whatever Putin tells it to think’.
Journalists aligned with Integrity Initiative saw Russian mischief in any political upheaval. Cadwalladr was awarded the prestigious Orwell Prize for Journalism for a conspiracy theory of Russian interference in the EU referendum. In 2020 Cadwalladr finally admitted that she had absolutely no evidence that Arron Banks’ Leave.EU campaign was surreptitiously aided by the Kremlin. Cohen had backed his colleague throughout, describing her work as the epitome of investigative journalism.
Back in 2007, Cohen’s incisive book What’s Left exposed the antisemitism and nihilistic nonsense on the fringe of the Labour Party. Disturbed by the advents of Trump and Brexit, Cohen regarded populism as the biggest threat to the world since the Second World War. Indeed, he likened Brexit campaigners to the fascists of the 1930s. Writing on ‘fake news’ in the Spectator, Cohen deplored the growth of news websites telling inconvenient truths.
The Covid pandemic has given the holier-than-thou Guardian and Observer commentators a new target. George Monbiot, the shrill climate change alarmist, argued last week that misleading statements about the pandemic should be banned, because they are not only wrong but also dangerous: ‘people are being trampled to death by these lies’. Feminist Naomi Wolf tweeted that she was ‘shocked and disappointed by a writer who she had always respected showing a lust for authoritarianism.
Aaronivitch, in an article verging on Covid porn, wrote in the Times that ‘despite 100k deaths, we’ve been lucky this time’. Meanwhile Cohen bluntly blamed lockdown sceptics such as Toby Young and Julia Hartley Brewer for the death toll, accusing them of spreading dangerous disinformation, and for causing the death of a Shropshire man who apparently died of Covid after following the sceptic movement. Tweeting his latest Observer column, Cohen opined: –
‘Anti-vaxx propaganda will disproportionately kill the poor, the poorly educated and ethnic minorities. Why isn’t it illegal?’
There is so much wrong with this tweet. With the ‘anti-vaxx’ slur (why the double ‘x’, by the way?), Cohen seems blissfully ignorant that the entire mainstream media is now acting as vaccine propagandists for government and Big Pharma. By ‘poorly educated’ he means thick people who don’t do as they’re told. As for criminalising legitimate concerns, this is a slippery slope that would allow scandals such as thalidomide, Harold Shipman and the severe neurological syndromes caused by the failed swine flu jab to recur. Lockdown, as the World Health Organisation admits, makes the poor poorer. Isn’t this worthy of critique?
When Cohen described journalist Neil Clark as ‘RT’s go-to Covid denier’, the latter responded: –
‘I’ve only met Nick Cohen once. He was blindingly drunk – so much so he was struggling to stand up. But Nick Cohen drunk is still preferable to Nick Cohen sober.’
Clark noted that the cheerleaders of the Iraq War are the same writers who are suppressing debate on lockdown, faulty testing and vaccines. Journalism in the time of Covid shows a vocation that has lost its way, and (for legacy columnists) much of its pay. Perhaps there is more reward in toeing the establishment line. These Covid zealots should go back to basics: objective enquiry, listening to opposing sides and (although it’s now a bad word) – scepticism.
Opinions from the Unity News Network (UNN) editorial team & various contributors. | UNN always clearly distinguishes between news and opinion pieces and as an open minded outlet we publish views from a variety of people and organisation that do not necessarily reflect the views of UNN or its writers. Articles published under UNN Opinions are always opinion pieces and if published on behalf of a contributor will contain that authors name at the start of the piece.
