The Trusted News Initiative

In Google, Facebook, and Twitter we trust? I don't think so!

The ‘Trusted’ News Initiative

Good news! If you trust any one of the Big Tech or Big Media companies below, you can now trust them all. That’s because they have told us so. Actually, this happened in 2019, and just in time. As it happens, the credibility of the media and also Big Tech has been at an all time low in recent years. So, they spontaneously got together and created this Trusted News Initiative (TNI) to set us straight. Naturally, they must have done this all on their own, because if there had been any government involvement, that would have been, um, a bit strange. Credit where credit is due, they have “fixed” everything with this:

It will not surprise friends that when a media organization feels it needs to go out of its way to tell me I should trust them, I am less inclined to do so - not more. When many supposedly independent outlets suddenly come together seemingly out of the blue to tell me I should trust them because they are all coordinating their efforts, then I know the fix is in. Now, having disclosed where I stand, let me try to examine both sides of this:

The Critics’ Views -

Let’s start here. It will be shorter, because I have a nice little video to help me:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/2eqVMWaDsvsC/

Based on my readings on Big Tech, Big Pharma, Corporate Oligarchy, Big Government, the MSM, and the science and history of propaganda as part of my research into the Power Versus People Paradigm and the Covid era, the above video nails it. It was produced by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, one of many independent sources of information I have often drawn on and learned a lot from the past 2.5 years. I believe in them and what they do.

The Horse’s Mouth -

Now let’s examine this piece in The Press Gazette from Jessica Cecil, the BBC’s project director for the Trusted News Initiative. Ms. Cecil’s article made such an impression, I’m going to unpack it thoroughly and use it to cover other related ground.

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers-need-to-work-together-to-fight-harmful-disinformation/

Cecil begins acknowledging that, “There is widespread mistrust of institutions – that is what leaders from Davos to democratic capitals all over the world are pondering.” Now, whatever you do, be sure not to notice the completely inconspicuous nod to our masters at the World Economic Forum in Davos from the outset. Moving on. Despite acknowledging the lost trust, Cecil conveniently never acknowledges, let alone attempts to examine its root causes. As such, there is no allowance for the possibility that the BBC or any of its TNI partners may share in the responsibility for any of it, or that any reviews or remedial actions in these organizations might be warranted.

Cecil says trust has been particularly damaged during the pandemic, but again shows no signs of reflection or introspection; and not a hint of questioning how governments have handled things. Instead: “Governments, companies and institutions are worrying about their own trust scores – and of course what they can do to make it better.” It seems governments, corporations, and institutions, presumably including media, are unified. I further infer an “us-and-them” mentality in this, with the “us” from Cecil’s perspective being establishment power and “them” being We-the-People who need their direction. As Ben Shapiro likes to say, “I am old enough to remember when” it was widely believed that the media’s job was to hold governments and large corporations to account, rather than represent their interests or partner with them. I am old enough to remember when collusion in the US was frowned upon and governments would take an interest in investigating the appearance of the same, because there are laws against it.

Cecil continues: “You can easily join the dots between online conspiracy theories and elected representatives cowering in the US Capitol. You can join the dots between false Covid-19 ‘cures’ and hundreds – probably thousands – of deaths worldwide.” The level of manipulation, misinformation, and transparent reliance on speculation here (“probably thousands”), while simultaneously projecting certainty is extraordinary. Alas, even though Cecil has done nothing to explain her arguments, she and TNI have now told me how and what to think. For that, at least, I am grateful because I was lost without them.

However, I have some questions! When Cecil refers to false Covid-19 ‘cures’, is she referring to any and all alternative Covid treatments or just some? If the latter, which ones? If the former, that’s extraordinary. Either way, where’s the science which makes these assertions unequivocal? If Ms. Cecil’s favored science, which she did not present, is not unequivocal, that means it’s speculative. If it’s speculative, then on what basis do the powerful forces behind Cecil and the TNI presume to decide how doctors treat their patients, which scientists’ efforts constitute science, and even who is and who isn’t permitted to speculate?

Notice the straw-man use of the word “cures”. This is being used to condition readers to reject anyone advocating alternative treatments, regardless of their credentials, on a false premise that all such people are invariably promising “cures”. What about treating symptoms? By the way, do the ‘vaccines’ treat symptoms? What about protection or even prevention? What about potentially shortening the infection period? What about medical independence? Move along. Nothing to see here.

Ms. Cecil’s article is nearly a year and a half old, which means we can know much more now than either we or she could have known then. For instance, we now know that the Covid ‘vaccines’ are not “cures”, not even in the way they were meant to be, or the way we were told they would be. If you missed this video before on Covid ‘vaccine’ efficacy, it’s well done and the source information is all from the mainstream media, so it must be accurate:

Anthony Fauci: The Vaccines are “virtually a 100% efficacious”

https://odysee.com/@thelongformguy:9/vaccine_propaganda:e

However, it’s okay because the same governments, health authorities and media that led us down the garden path on efficacy regarding prevention of infection, transmission, hospitalization and death are now reassuring us that the Covid injections at least reduce the severity of symptoms. Do you believe them? They do not even appear to be too sure themselves, as it seems we will have to have 3 or 4 or 5 or however many of whatever gene-based experimental injections they say we must have at any particular point in time to keep the conjuring game going. However, Covid is a self-limiting disease that circa 99.85% of people were surviving regardless even before Omicron, which is less lethal. Separate out those with comorbidity and the most elderly and the already very low risk drops precipitously. In any event, alleviating symptoms is something that many cheap (off patent) alternative treatments do and those drugs have decades of safety data supporting them and have benefited billions. See: Nobel Prize for medicine for drugs that have benefited billions.

If you would like to see the Deep State, Big Pharma and TNI at work, try to research Ivermectin before and after early 2020. You may have to use the Internet Wayback Machine because censorship is now so pervasive even pre-Covid publications that clash with Covid narratives are also being gradually wiped from existence. You will also, want to stay clear of search engines from TNI members Google and Microsoft. Try Brave, StartPage or DuckDuckGo instead. With those caveats acknowledged, you can still find plenty on Ivermectin and also on Hydroxychloroquine and associated cocktails. Watch in amazement as the ‘Fact Checkers’ work their magic on these once loved drugs starting in mid-2020. It is a sight to behold and also an excellent way to see clearly what so-called Fact Checkers are really all about. Investigating who funds them and also the competencies and controversies surrounding the people who run them is also enlightening.

Another fascinating line of inquiry is Rendesivir from the notorious Gillead Sciences corporation. For a long time, Rendesivir was the only in-hospital drug treatment even allowed for Covid-19 patients in the US. You will want to investigate the appalling risk profile of this drug, including the history of its Ebola trial, and also how so many other countries around the world rejected it on safety grounds. (Investigating Gillead Sciences more generally will also lead to starting findings.) When you do, you will likely struggle to fathom how such a drug could be mandated for Covid this way in the US. That is, until you follow the money trail and see all the familiar powerful fingerprints on Rendesivir (and Gillead).

Strong evidence supporting Ivermectin for Covid related use was emerging as early as August of 2020 in Australia. By December 2020, when Dr. Pierre Kory testified at a United States Senate Congressional hearing such data was beyond compelling. Dr. Kory cited no less than 27 peer reviewed studies on that day. The Democrats boycotted his testimony en-masse, leaving only a few of their tribe behind for the purpose of besmirching Dr. Kory and then walking out on him before the man could even speak. Sadly, one of those feckless Senators was Gary Peters who represents my home state of Michigan and has substantial financial ties with Big Pharma.

The mainstream media largely suppressed this event but could not do so completely. So, they slandered Kory and called it ‘news’, while Big Tech and its fact checkers also promptly got to work labelling Dr. Kory an anti-vaxxer and set out to systematically destroy his career. This was the very same bunch that got together to create the Trusted News Initiative. By the time of his testimony, Dr. Kory had already saved hundreds of Covid patients’ lives and may well have saved thousands by now. Fortunately, Dr. Kory is alive and well and still fighting hard. Nevertheless, as intended, the TNI synchronization in all of this worked a charm against alternative treatments.

Returning to Ms. Cecil: perhaps, I have been a bit unfair. Cecil did cite the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH) which “estimated the number of deaths as a result of coronavirus-related misinformation at 800 in just the first three months of 2020.” (Emphasis added.) Therefore, I stand partially corrected. Cecil wasn’t merely speculating. She was actually taking the ASTMH’s speculation and adding her own speculation on top, which, of course, changes everything. Although Cecil did not provide the source information supporting the ASTMH claim for 800 deaths as a result of misinformation, I tracked it down here. While I certainly found it interesting and entertaining, I didn’t see any science in it. The only part of the study I found convincing was this sentence here: “This study has several limitations.” In fact, multiple counter-veiling doctors and scientists with seriously impressive careers and accolades attribute close to 500,000 unnecessary deaths in the US to the suppression of information and denial of access to alternative treatments for Covid-19. Dr. Ryan Cole is but one of many. Now, remind me again, Ms. Cecil, who is peddling misinformation that is costing lives?

The ASTMH and its Journal are both cryptic about the make-up of their funding, but they do have Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation fingerprints all over them. As part of my research, I also came across a notice on the ASTMH’s website about the tragic passing of its member, Partners In Health founder, Dr. Paul Farmer, due to a mysterious cardiac arrest. (There seem to be a lot of those lately.) Dr. Farmer was 62, appears healthy in his photo, and was working actively in the field in Rwanda at the time of his unexpected death. No further information was offered. I also found this ASTMH President’s Address from Dr. Julie Jacobson in November of 2021 to be rather spooky. No, it was downright creepy. The title of the presentation is… “Brave New World”. One couldn’t make this stuff up, if one tried.

Returning to Ms. Cecil: “Since 2019, I have led the Trusted News Initiative (TNI), where we have been considering how global tech platforms and global media organisations can play a part in working together to protect what is in our mutual interest: trust in news.” Got that? Big Tech and global media organizations are working together to protect their mutual interests. Got it????

This next paragraph is a gem: “First, it’s about scoping out what counts as demonstrably harmful disinformation that poses an immediate threat to life or the integrity of the democratic electoral process. There isn’t an adequate free-speech defence to justify attacking masts, committing arson and disrupting the vital communications of the emergency services, even though beliefs linking Covid-19 and 5G may be sincerely held.” Please allow me to translate: 1) “We decide what constitutes allowable information in your life and in democratic electoral processes.” Regarding the latter, if you doubt it, read Mollie Hemmingway’s book. It’s excellent and should blow your mind, but then again, we’re not supposed to talk about the election, so I better just leave it there; 2) “Free-speech is quaint”; 3) “There are hooligans who disagree with us. Therefore, everyone who disagrees with us is a hooligan”; 4) “We pity those conspiracy theorists who disagree with us and whatever you do, don’t investigate concerns related to 5G technology, unless you too want to be considered a conspiracy theorist.”

“TNI members share urgent alerts of disinformation that has the potential to go viral and which represents either an immediate threat to life or to the integrity of the electoral process.” More gaslighting? Electoral process mentioned twice for emphasis? Projecting the 2022 mid-terms in the United States, perhaps? “Decisions about this sit at arm’s length from editorial decision making – no journalism is ever muzzled as a result.” Do you believe it? If so, call me urgently. I’ve got a fabulous swamp in Florida I’d like to sell you at an amazing price. Actually, it is possible Cecil is correct, just not in the way she means or in the way we are intended to understand her point. In other words, there is probably very little need to actually ‘muzzle’ journalism within TNI organizations, because those few independent thinkers who have lasted in them thus far can easily infer what is permitted and what is not, and they have conditioned themselves to self-censor to survive. Most like them were culled from these organizations a long time ago. The vast majority that remain have been curated to fit the correct group-think. They therefore already think the way they are meant to think, such that it would not occur to them to produce or promote counter-veiling content. Either way, however we got where we are, diversity of thought is gone.

“In a world of abundant information, there’s a shared responsibility to signal clearly information that is not based on facts and cannot be trusted.” Translation: “We decide. We have the power.” Next: “In this new environment, we know far less than we would like: how do audiences react to signals that online information is questionable? Which types of signals work? Does this vary from country to country? Are particular groups more susceptible than others? The evidence is still sketchy.” Translation: “We don’t just have the power, we have the power to do this globally, but we will need to surveil you more, to perfect this.”

“Oxford University’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, a TNI member, is conducting research, funded by the BBC World Service, on how citizens in the UK, Brazil and India react to indicators that content is false. That will build on our emerging understanding, but there is a long way to go.” Translation: “Our heightened surveillance is well underway and you will have no say in this.” Then: “We will make that information available to everyone, with the first results shared at our virtual TNI conference in late March.” Translation: “We will do what we are doing in plain sight, with impunity and you won’t even realize what’s happening.”

“Looking ahead, climate change is forecast to increasingly dominate the attention of global citizens and be reflected in the news they consume, as well as the continuing devastating effects of Covid-19. Both are shared problems where the actions of individuals affect us all.” Translation: 1) “Citizens are global - nation-state be damned. They consume for us.” 2) “We make no distinction between Covid-19, the pretext through which we assumed these powers, versus climate change or anything else we choose to prioritize for that matter.” 3) “Now that we have these tools and powers, we will use them as we see fit.”

“We need to think through collectively the problems plaguing the information environment, recognising that we have a shared interest in cleansing what is currently a polluted well. The stakes are high.” This is coded globalist speak for UN Agenda 21, The 2030 Agenda, and The New Urban Agenda. Dear Reader, when you discover the true significance and implications of those agendas - assuming you don’t already know, everything about the Covid era and the power behind it will suddenly make a lot more sense, but that is the subject of a future post, which is coming soon.

A few final words on Ms Cecil:

In my opinion, Cecil is in no way the brains or the braun of much of anything in this. She is not even a lieutenant. I am sure Cecil also believes completely in what she is doing and in what she is part of, but she is so heavily indoctrinated she cannot see the potential harms. Either that or like so many she is so certain and so committed to her “greater good”, that she believes it supersedes any other concerns. Like so many, Cecil is in Matthias Desmet’s Mass Psychosis Formation. Yes, she is both helping to foment the psychosis and a victim of it at the same time. I doubt very much that Cecil even wrote the above article. It was probably written by a unimpressive PR staff member, who had certain “talking points” they are mandated to include in such pieces as a general rule. If Cecil did write it, she’s a very poor writer for someone in such a consequential position in media. Either way, the article is globalist New World Order propaganda through and through.

Trusted News Initiative (TNI) to combat spread of harmful vaccine disinformation and announces major research project

Just a few quick questions regarding the article below: It was published in December, 2020. How were they so certain about the ‘vaccines’? Isn’t it their job to be cautiously sceptical, or at least a bit more balanced?

https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2020/trusted-news-initiative-vaccine-disinformation

Origin of the Trusted News Initiative (TNI) Logo Seems to be a State Secret

Oops: It seems the particulars of who designed the TNI logo are a state secret, which even the Freedom of Information Act is no match for. Could it be that it came from the Zuckerberg marketing department? I read the full case of the FOIA request, which is shown in the screen shot below. Concerned citizen Cathy Fox, doggedly tried. The government obfuscated back and forth a fair bit hoping she would go away, and when she didn’t they eventually they just said ‘No’ with an obvious pretext.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/trusted_news_initiative

Mark Sharman, formerly of ITV speaking about the TNI

In case you missed this previously, here is Mark Sharman, British broadcasting veteran formally of ITV speaking about the TNI at the Better Way Conference in Bath. It’s 5 minutes long. Let me know if you don’ think every word comes across as heartfelt, sincere, and reasonable:

https://odysee.com/@thelongformguy:9/marksharman:c

---

Special bonus: For the curious…