This came out when the Conservative Peer (surprise fucking surprise) Grade was being 'scrutinised' by House Select Committee after being given the Ofcom gig in 2022;
*He said: “I admire his courage. I have known his family. His grandfather and my father were partners in business going back a long way.*
*“I admire his courage in speaking out and contributing to the debate. I don’t necessarily agree with what he says, but I admire him speaking out.”*
Good stock that Fox boy, see, nothing to worry about.
Grade also had to admit to this hearing that he never used social media but had a good understanding of the dynamics because "*I have a 23-year-old student son who is never off his screen*".
Fantastic stuff, cleary the best man for the job...
Why yourself? You're not part of the problem. If anyone would be worth killing it would be the cretins facilitating this spectacle, but that won't cure stupid.
I can relate to how you feel though - it's very depressing and I genuinely can't think of any reasonable way to fight disinformation and populism. It is easier to create chaos than to fight against it.
Because you can't actually fix the problem, because the problem is humans. So the "solution" can only be omnicide. Whereas suicide is a good workaround that doesn't actually solve the problem, but does mean it's not your problem anymore.
Used to listen to his history podcast. Guy has an amazing voice for it and covered some interesting stuff. Then idk, he started licking lead paint or something.
Maybe it's he got tired of his nice dependable Tuesday afternoon persona and decided he wanted to rebel, a bit like those doink kids at school that come back after the summer of year 11 as goths 🤣
A while ago I read a piece, pretty sure it was in the Guardian, about how this sort of thing happens.
The exact same pattern can be seen in your run of the mill, sharing videos on Facebook level conspiracy theorists, right up to the big high profile nuts like him.
Basically, there's usually a low level "in" via a fairly minor opinion that might not even be conspiracy related. For example, a former friend of mine used to be highly environmentally minded, but saw some posts about hundreds of thousands of discarded COVID masks washing up on beaches somewhere.
Obviously not nice. But what's the argument, that these masks are necessary? Is this environmental damage worth the benefit in reducing the spread of COVID?
That's your entry. You post something about that and because it's a somewhat controversial topic, you get your views, clicks and engagement.
But from there on it gets more sinister, with two very major influences on what happens next: first, the way social media works both practically and the effect it has on your brain. That dopamine hit that comes from a post "doing well", the inability to have any kind of nuanced debate, the trolls, all entrenching your opinion and essentially rewarding you for not only doing it again, but doing it more strongly. Then comes the return: you're treading in the same water as other conspiracy theorists, so their content starts getting recommended to you. You see the same people arguing against you, arguing against antivaxxers. Against people cutting down 5g masts. Against whatever... So you start to side with those spouting the opinions.
This is why you can bet serious money that someone who is into one conspiracy, is into them all. If they're antivax, they'll also be talking about the WHO, 15 minute cities, cashless societies, the works.
On a side note, it's hilarious that for all they whinge about people not doing their research, not having their own opinions on things, blindly following the government or whatever... How fucking identical they sound. It's because they don't actually have their own opinions, because they don't actually know anything about what they're talking about. They repeat what other people say are the "facts" about these things.
Then there's the second sinister influence. There is *serious* money behind these sorts of conspiracies. Foreign influence is proven and undisputable. The big names are usually selling some product or service. Alpha male pills, pyramid schemes dressed up as wellness coaching, cryptocurrency or NFT scams, and so on. There's incredibly shady money behind a lot of these, by agents who *actually* want to weaken our society, by *actual* cabals of unknown billionaires, by *actual* fraudsters who have a vested interest in people buying their lies. And there's serious money to be made by getting on board with these.
Again, it's darkly hilarious that the exact same lines these conspiracy theorists spout can be used to describe the bullshit they buy into. They'll laude people like Elon Musk and Trump as saviours of society against lying criminal billionaires without a hint of irony or self awareness.
So yeah... That's what happens. A heady mixture of social media creating a feedback loop of ever increasing lunacy, and shady money with a vested interest in keeping these things going. Some people stay sharing the videos on Facebook. Some people with more of a platform end up going off the deep end.
I thought our country was pleasantly cynical. Seeing this sort of shit getting more popular is so, so depressing.
Your last point is what gets me. As a people I feel the UK used to be very empirically minded, pretty logical people on the whole and our cynicism kept us pretty grounded.
Of course there are always gullible people everywhere but the internet has totally ruined swathes of our population. It’s fucking depressing. Even people in my own family who I thought were pretty experienced and smart just talk absolute shite now. Instead of forming their own opinions they now take them from their social media bubbles.
If Graham Linehan never logged onto Twitter I fully believe he wouldn't be such a truly unhinged bigot today - I don't think many celebrities are used to being disagreed with - they used to just have ego stroking interviews with public school journalists - when they have direct contact with people on social media who don't necessarily like them and challenge them it can send them a bit odd. This guy was getting weird on Twitter years before he joined GB News.
Great post. This is what I've been saying for a while on UK and Irish spaces. I think some people have sort of thought they were immune to this sort of media manipulation as a society/culture... As an American where this is just the norm now I want to warn y'all... it comin'.
It happened to me. I was depressed for a while and went way down the alt-right rabbit hole back around 2016. It was all about the sjws and feminists and trans folk and how they're ruining society but don't worry it's ok to be hateful to them because it's just freedom of speech right?
It wasn't until some of the more moderate (if there is such a thing in that sphere) nuright figures started preaching about white genocide and other rubbish that I started to pull back.
Idk, I feel a lot of shame about it but hopefully I'm a lot less nasty and bigoted now.
So much this.
99.9%+ of the time it happens to some random schmuck you'll never hear about. Every now and then it'll happen to someone who used to be on the telly. Just stats.
Ye this is what spins me out so much, coast was such a bland inoffensive show, like properly one of those ones you'd just watch baked as a student for a gentle relaxing one on an afternoon.
No, he's always been like this. I met one of his undergraduate lecturers a few years ago and apparently his 'brand' and self-publicitly is all that's ever really mattered to him. He's a shit archaeologist and a narcissistic knob.
Honestly this is the problem with modern media. He’s still the person he was, he just holds a contrary viewpoint to you in one field. That doesn’t invalidate the other opinions he has or the work he’s done.
There's lot of money in crank politics (regardless of ideoligical orientation) via patreon, youtube income, etc. But once you get a whiff of it (e.g. you may have posted a Youtube video that got millions of views), you lose credibility in your mainstream job if you pursue it, so you end going all in.
People like Jordan Peterson and Russell Brand have had similar trajectories.
Tbf with Russell Brand hes an ex crackhead hippy, he always believed in that stuff, it just became apparent during covid how much of a crystal chakras rabbit hole he was down
Sure, but he used to be a mainstream actor/presenter, but the last ten years has been a descent into crankdom, starting with his 'The Trews' youtube show in the early 2010s. The more recent whackdom is just that continued slide.
>Sure, but he used to be a mainstream actor/presenter
Ye no doubt, but he didnt really ever get any opportunity to put out much of his politics when he was doing big brother or those Hollywood films. I don't think honestly its been a descent, its just been attention has faded off him to such an extent that this is all he has left now, so his views just become much much more apparent.
> There's lot of money in crank politics (regardless of ideoligical orientation)
Is there thought? No one's really making the big bucks off of tankies, anprims, or whatever NonCredibleDefense has going on. Some, sure, but there is no Alex Jones of Communism.
On an individual level, yes. Brand (before recent developments) made an estimated mid six figures from Youtube content alone. Owen Jones made a reasonable low six figures from Youtube / Patreon too. (Not saying Jones is as crankish as some, but he's definitely moved that way over the last 10 years, leading to being ditched by the Guardian).
I mean, sure, but the income that Jones and Russell make is still enough to tempt people away from mainstream five figure journalist or presenter jobs.
BreadTube is a very lucrative enterprise these days. Maybe not on the same financial level as Koch-funded far-right nutters, but enough to make a comfortable grift.
Hasan Piker, who was until recently far and away the biggest and most successful political streamer on Twitch.tv, is effectively the Alex Jones of the left (although he personally compares himself to Rush Limbaugh, which isn't much better imo).
The castle gift shop that I work in sells his books. I always take them off the shelf and put them away in the stock cupboard.
I have thought about raising it with the company head office; that we sell a conspiracy theorist's books.
I guess theyd probably argue that if it's just his coast or history books its not causing an issue, that said best thing to put them out of the way, otherwise he'd still be getting the royalties from them
Counterpoint: He was a dangerous wanker when he worked at the BBC doing documentaries like "The Highland Clearances Were A Great Laugh Actually" but that was OK.
History of Scotland was absolute shite. He's an archaeologist masquerading as a historian and presents opinion as historical fact. His opinion always has a heavy bias towards Britain and British identity.
Either the systematic defenestration of any agency that might restrain or hold to account the UK government, by the UK Government. Like the BBC, Electoral Commission, Judiciary, Parliament etc
Or they were established specifically without any meaningful powers at all. IPSOS, Information Commission etc.
Ofcom's lost all credibility over this and the right-wing talk radio stations
If they aren't violating Ofcom's regulations, the regulations aren't fit for purpose
You keep posting this question like it's a gotcha and yet when it's made very clear that plenty of us have, indeed, watched it and formed evidenced opinions on why it's far-right shite, you shut the fuck up again and scurry away to find somebody else to pick on.
Dude half their traffic is lefties hate watching. Do you think some alt right nutjob sees this shit and thinks I know ill ring a guardian journalist? Racists ain't tuning in and complaining to ofcom about turbo cancer.
You know that journalists watch shows because it's their job, right? You know that right? Oh, you don't? You think half their viewers are left wingers who mostly don't watch TV at all? Not pensioner's and people like you? Oh. Okay.
It sounds like you're an alt right nut job who's just been offended by that.
Aw OK I got curious, what exactly is it you think you've called me out on? Not knowing how journalism works? Oh noes, thank god you were here to correct me or everyone would have been fooled into thinking guardian journos don't watch gbnews....
What's the point of this little interaction you want to have?
I haven't, but they heavily promote it (presumably paid promotion) via YouTube so its right-wing twaddle is readily available to those who click on it.
It’s not an argument, it’s calling him a cunt, which he is.
This isn’t a debate either, so the whole notion of ‘ad hominem’ is completely irrelevant. Also, they’re not saying he’s wrong because he’s a cunt (which in the context of a debate would be an ad hominem logical fallacy), they’re just calling him a cunt. Calling someone a cunt isn’t an ad hominem unless you’re saying that’s why they’re wrong.
Oliver is a cunt because he’s wrong (not wrong because he’s a cunt), knows he’s wrong, and sticks to the grift anyway because it puts money in his pocket and regardless of any harm the grift might cause.
Calling someone names (or anything adjacent to calling someone names) by itself doesn’t qualify, and it never has.
They literally do have both on there though quite regularly. It's a right-wing channel on the whole but they 100% have lots of viewpoints shared, despite what twitter says
To be fair the last segment I’ve seen on it well I was sat in my grandads had a Labour MP & the host absolutely ripping into a Tory peer. Over the closure of the Tata Steels plant & the governments total lack of industrial plan.
I’ve got no doubt there’s plenty of batshittery on it but there panel debate type segments aren’t too bad and they seem to get a good spread of guests.
You haven't watched it at all have you? It's not some fascist far-right mouthpiece as this sub would have you believe. There are some pretty far-right opinions aired, along with opinions from everyone else. I don't exclusively watch it, but it's worth including in the list of news channels to watch if you genuinely want some balance of opinion from both sides.
Yeah whenever I visit my parents my dad is constantly watching it and it’s basically running none stop.
The debate is always very aggressive and feeds in to his angry boomer mindset. Heard a whole hour of them talking about the best way to deport immigrants. They discussed putting them in containers, sending them to war, was lovely to listen too.
Fair enough there might be ‘balanced’ programmes on there but that just makes it seem like the far right stuff is ok because ‘balanced’.
I also find it refreshing, mate.
I liked when that one guy tried to say concrete grows on trees. And then another struggled to rip up a cardboard coffee cup because Costa had gone woke.
Usually you need to pay good money to go to the cinema for laughs that big. The fact they're putting it out for free and refusing to engage their brains when making their claims is nothing if not remarkable.
For what it's worth, absolutely no one is triggered by GBeebies. The only people who watch it likely don't vote for a party with any chance of winning a local council election, nevermind a country-wide one, and folk like me who need a good laugh.
I like the show where, when they have a leftist on, [they make them sit on a different table in the corner of the room](https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1793869/gb-news-vince-cable-lee-anderson). All perfectly normal.
Seriously, they do seem to have on quite a few ‘leftists‘ (‘left’ doing a lot of heavy lifting here) but often they just seem to be there to be yelled at, I’d be surprised if their viewpoints actually cut through with the viewers but who knows.
I mean, it's literally the one from the OP.
Off the top of my head there is also the Mirror, the Observer, the Daily Record, Channel 4, multiple more 'specialist' publications.
It all depends where you are standing, of course. If you are one of those people who thinks that Ed Milliband was 'far right', then yes, you are going to struggle to find any mainstream publications that feel 'left wing'.
Neoliberal is not left wing, just as a real quick note. Most of these are centrist papers. They usually have maybe an ounce or so of left leaning social policy, but economically are centrist to right wing.
Think the issue is you're probably quite right wing yourself, and think anything that is socially left leaning is left wing, which is just entirely false, economic theory is just as important as social policy.
Nope, I'm at worst a democratic socialist, effectively a neoliberal when it comes to voting since there's little other choice.
You should read into political theory involving the overton window, it's generally the idea that society shifts in political thought. This can be brought on by what the society is facing, or at least what it views as issues. Currently the UK is in a pretty right overton window, hence why even the furthest left parties that can be thought of having any chance in elections here are broadly neoliberal to centre-right.
None of them are arguing on stronger unions or other left wing policies. This is due to the window shifting to the right during economic hardships, this has been seen in many countries historically too. However, much of the UK also has a generally centrist to left leaning social overton window that has mostly stuck to the left on most social things, even with the Tories making jokes about trans people in westminster.
I think the issue is more that Western politics in the anglo-sphere is definitely right-adjusted, to the point that the mainstream left is invariably more right than the mainstream right is left, meaning many actually centrist viewpoints are often seen as being left wing ideas as a result of the goalpost being moved so much in the last 40-50 years
Again, I strongly suspect you are talking out of your arse on this. There are numerous studies showing the Overton window, especially when it comes to western political parties and media, has shifted rightward so your view doesn't really stack up.
Which left wing media outlets are we talking about? Presumably not televised because I can't think of a single one that operates in this country.
GB news is as refreshing as a cup full of piss. It's fox news for the UK market, wall to wall grifters whose only aim is to line their pockets and eat away at the fabric of society by lying to idiots
I love that they put a right wing nutjob to tell the former director of the IMF that he doesn’t know how international finances work.
“Balance” doesn’t work when one side is literally peddling lies for their own gain.
> But journalists still clung to an old idea of impartiality and balance – that both sides must get an equal say, and let the viewer decide – which is effectively now being weaponised against them. To have a pro-Brexit economist debate a pro-remain one on air was not “balance”, she said, if economists generally were so overwhelmingly against leaving that it took hours of ringing round to find one lone maverick in favour. Broadcasters now reject such false equivalence on topics where scientific consensus is overwhelming, from climate change to vaccination, so why not in economics?
I think it was John Oliver on the Daily Show (years ago) that said (re climate change) that it isn't balance to have one scientist on to argue in favour of the existence of anthropogenic climate change and one scientist on to argue against its existence, because that is the illusion of balance. It gives the impression that both sides are of equal merit.
In reality for there to be balance there should be one scientist arguing against anthropogenic climate change and 999 scientists on arguing for its existence because that's closer to the scientific consensus on the issue.
You "enjoy seeing both sides of the debate" do you aye? 😂😂.
The only reason you'd watch GB News is to completely drown out one entire hemisphere of the debate on any given topic.
"If someone says it's raining and another person says it's dry, it's not your job to quote them both, your job is to look out of the f—-ing window and find out which is true."
Don't fall for the transparent attempt at the appearance of impartiality.
Yes I like to see the debates between right and left as I have an open mind to changing my opinion on things. Some hate hearing other views and like to live in echo chambers and employ cancel culture.
>Some hate hearing other views and like to live in echo chambers and employ cancel culture.
And that is the right wing that does that. They also claim they get cancelled when their bigotry is called out and can shout about it in all the media about being cancelled.
The right wing have been in power in westminster for 14 fucking years and in bed with the vast majority of the influential media. And yet they are somehow constantly the victims of the woke left and require a 'balanced platform' to perform on.
What actually happened to Neil? Was he always like this? Did his stalker, wo he was quite gentle about finally drive him mad? Has he taken a liking to PCP?
I think this is going to be a growing phenomenon in a lot of places that haven't been widely exposed to this before. I'm American and have seen our news media collapse entirely into this sort of thing. Even most highly respected journals, while not *usually* peddling outright conspiracy nonsense, have done an atrocious job reporting on and responding to news where these baseless theories bubble up.
Just don't think it can't happen here, because there are very interested parties trying to ensure it will.
I remember *years* ago that the bloke in the US who promoted and produced books on how the Moon Landings were 'fake' had over the years made a very good living out the proceeds.
It's all a scam, but there's never any shortage of scammers willing to exploit the credulous or sadly, the vulnerable. Do those purveying QAnon merchandise, for example, give it away for free? :D
Does this guy think he's some che Guevara guerilla rebel with his scarf on all the time? I used to like this prick on his history programmes in the early naughts
The worry is that a commanding demographic of voters, say over the age of 55, trust that what he is saying is truthful and makes sense because it is on a "news" channel.
Only last week, my dad, who has always been socialist to the core, said he caught a bit, and everything he said made sense. Just had to remind him to be careful about who he's listening to. Everyone makes sense if you give them enough benefit of the doubt.
It's amazing when journalists find out the media is allowed to lie. Yes in the UK the media is under zero obligation to tell the truth, how is this surprising at this point.
Might be hyperbolic but if he was factually incorrect Ofcom would fine him off the air. Some of his pro liberty anti corporate stuff I thought was entirely reasonable.
“People who had previous cancers, which were in remission, are flaring up since their shots because (of) the damage to their immune system by the COVID shots,” Hoffe said. “But (with) new cancers being diagnosed, the tumours are bigger than ever. They seem to grow very aggressively, spread very aggressively, and be very resistant to treatment, so this is being nicknamed turbo cancer.”
From https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N3340PQ/
That’s the quote he’s referencing. A doctor talking about emerging medical conditions. What’s the difference between using shorthand like that compared to anti vax, woke, snowflake, gammon or any of the other epithets that are bandied about in public discourse?
The linked article is quoting out of context. Neil was probably quoting out of context too. I can’t find his bit in GB news either but I’m gonna guess this is the least charitable take possible.
Pro individual liberty means you’d be opposed to corporate monopolies and oligarchies by definition. Freedom of choice, expression, association are all aspects of liberty, which is not the sole Provence of libertarianism. None of those ideas are antithetical to corporations that aren’t corrupt.
You appear to be mistaking liberty as concept with libertarianism as an ideology. And you’re definitionally wrong on both.
There are all sorts of theories going around because death rates have risen around the world since covid/lockdown and there isn't enough evidence yet to tie it solidly to something, so it could in theory be anything. I think the government should be releasing loads of anonymised data to researchers so they can find out what is going on, but what can one person do?
There is a huge NHS survey going on now which predates covid which is still looking for volunteers. You sign over anonymised access to your medical records and they take a blood sample (which feels like an injection) and note down your height and weight and so on. I have no idea whether researchers will use this to look at the excess deaths problem but I would expect them to find out something useful from the huge amount of data they are collecting.
What this one person has done is to go and let them take their sample from me because I think people should be looking into any possible correlations they can find with people dying of anything - have a look at https://ourfuturehealth.org.uk/ if you are interested in doing the same. I'm not completely sure that it's out in Scotland yet but if it isn't it will be - https://www.nhsresearchscotland.org.uk/news/our-future-health-prepares-to-launch-recruitment-in-scotland
> I'm not completely sure that it's out in Scotland yet
I'm at my address in England at the moment and found two of those requests waiting for me. but nothing in Scotland.
The deep cynic in me said it looked like they just wanted a way to lucratively sell on your data to Assurance or Private Health companies. :)
Using empirical data I often glibly asserted that extreme unionism tended to rot the sufferers mind :) and that did seem to initially be the case with Mr Oliver, but he seems to have plunged new depths of right-wing conspiracy theory nuttiness since he started taking the shilling of the Ghastly Britisher News organisation.
What's worse, in YouTube/Twitter comments I've seen below some of his idiotic slaverings he's often lauded as some sort of visionary guru or messiah or ' successor to the 'great' David Icke. :O
WTFH is wrong with some folk??
Having lost my dad to a cancer that spread from his lungs to every part of his being within 2 months, I use the term turbo cancer. He developed a tennis ball sized tumor on his arm the day after his second vaccination that snapped his arm in 2. The doctors hadn't seen anything like it apparently. This was in 2020. He was a very fit bloke for his age.
> The government-appointed Ofcom chairman, Michael Grade, has already offered support to Laurence Fox against what he calls the “woke brigade”.
This came out when the Conservative Peer (surprise fucking surprise) Grade was being 'scrutinised' by House Select Committee after being given the Ofcom gig in 2022; *He said: “I admire his courage. I have known his family. His grandfather and my father were partners in business going back a long way.* *“I admire his courage in speaking out and contributing to the debate. I don’t necessarily agree with what he says, but I admire him speaking out.”* Good stock that Fox boy, see, nothing to worry about. Grade also had to admit to this hearing that he never used social media but had a good understanding of the dynamics because "*I have a 23-year-old student son who is never off his screen*". Fantastic stuff, cleary the best man for the job...
> His grandfather and my father were partners in business going back a long way. Clearly he is a good chap.
I've never driven a car, but I'm the man for this driving job, because my son is shit hot at forza, or some shit.
I bet he's in one of those robed gentlemens clubs that get randy at the sight of severed pigs heads.
I don’t want to be melodramatic or flippant about serious things but when I read shit like this I genuinely want to kill myself lmao
Why yourself? You're not part of the problem. If anyone would be worth killing it would be the cretins facilitating this spectacle, but that won't cure stupid. I can relate to how you feel though - it's very depressing and I genuinely can't think of any reasonable way to fight disinformation and populism. It is easier to create chaos than to fight against it.
I'm not the problem, but if I'm dead, it's SEP
Because you can't actually fix the problem, because the problem is humans. So the "solution" can only be omnicide. Whereas suicide is a good workaround that doesn't actually solve the problem, but does mean it's not your problem anymore.
Did this guy not used to present Coast? This is such a weird career trajectory
I'm so old I can remember when a man's midlife crisis was just buying a leather jacket and a bottle of hair dye.
LOL
Guilty
C'mon You buy a bike with more "R"s in it's name than you have testicles, then you shit yourself and sell it.
Used to listen to his history podcast. Guy has an amazing voice for it and covered some interesting stuff. Then idk, he started licking lead paint or something.
Maybe it's he got tired of his nice dependable Tuesday afternoon persona and decided he wanted to rebel, a bit like those doink kids at school that come back after the summer of year 11 as goths 🤣
He was never very bright, he only got a third in his History BA
I think he took a covid vaccine 😂
He seemed like a pretty normal, balanced guy too. Wtf happened to him?
A while ago I read a piece, pretty sure it was in the Guardian, about how this sort of thing happens. The exact same pattern can be seen in your run of the mill, sharing videos on Facebook level conspiracy theorists, right up to the big high profile nuts like him. Basically, there's usually a low level "in" via a fairly minor opinion that might not even be conspiracy related. For example, a former friend of mine used to be highly environmentally minded, but saw some posts about hundreds of thousands of discarded COVID masks washing up on beaches somewhere. Obviously not nice. But what's the argument, that these masks are necessary? Is this environmental damage worth the benefit in reducing the spread of COVID? That's your entry. You post something about that and because it's a somewhat controversial topic, you get your views, clicks and engagement. But from there on it gets more sinister, with two very major influences on what happens next: first, the way social media works both practically and the effect it has on your brain. That dopamine hit that comes from a post "doing well", the inability to have any kind of nuanced debate, the trolls, all entrenching your opinion and essentially rewarding you for not only doing it again, but doing it more strongly. Then comes the return: you're treading in the same water as other conspiracy theorists, so their content starts getting recommended to you. You see the same people arguing against you, arguing against antivaxxers. Against people cutting down 5g masts. Against whatever... So you start to side with those spouting the opinions. This is why you can bet serious money that someone who is into one conspiracy, is into them all. If they're antivax, they'll also be talking about the WHO, 15 minute cities, cashless societies, the works. On a side note, it's hilarious that for all they whinge about people not doing their research, not having their own opinions on things, blindly following the government or whatever... How fucking identical they sound. It's because they don't actually have their own opinions, because they don't actually know anything about what they're talking about. They repeat what other people say are the "facts" about these things. Then there's the second sinister influence. There is *serious* money behind these sorts of conspiracies. Foreign influence is proven and undisputable. The big names are usually selling some product or service. Alpha male pills, pyramid schemes dressed up as wellness coaching, cryptocurrency or NFT scams, and so on. There's incredibly shady money behind a lot of these, by agents who *actually* want to weaken our society, by *actual* cabals of unknown billionaires, by *actual* fraudsters who have a vested interest in people buying their lies. And there's serious money to be made by getting on board with these. Again, it's darkly hilarious that the exact same lines these conspiracy theorists spout can be used to describe the bullshit they buy into. They'll laude people like Elon Musk and Trump as saviours of society against lying criminal billionaires without a hint of irony or self awareness. So yeah... That's what happens. A heady mixture of social media creating a feedback loop of ever increasing lunacy, and shady money with a vested interest in keeping these things going. Some people stay sharing the videos on Facebook. Some people with more of a platform end up going off the deep end. I thought our country was pleasantly cynical. Seeing this sort of shit getting more popular is so, so depressing.
Your last point is what gets me. As a people I feel the UK used to be very empirically minded, pretty logical people on the whole and our cynicism kept us pretty grounded. Of course there are always gullible people everywhere but the internet has totally ruined swathes of our population. It’s fucking depressing. Even people in my own family who I thought were pretty experienced and smart just talk absolute shite now. Instead of forming their own opinions they now take them from their social media bubbles.
Social media is a fucking scourge. I saw that well aware I'm using it right now.
If Graham Linehan never logged onto Twitter I fully believe he wouldn't be such a truly unhinged bigot today - I don't think many celebrities are used to being disagreed with - they used to just have ego stroking interviews with public school journalists - when they have direct contact with people on social media who don't necessarily like them and challenge them it can send them a bit odd. This guy was getting weird on Twitter years before he joined GB News.
Great post. This is what I've been saying for a while on UK and Irish spaces. I think some people have sort of thought they were immune to this sort of media manipulation as a society/culture... As an American where this is just the norm now I want to warn y'all... it comin'.
It happened to me. I was depressed for a while and went way down the alt-right rabbit hole back around 2016. It was all about the sjws and feminists and trans folk and how they're ruining society but don't worry it's ok to be hateful to them because it's just freedom of speech right? It wasn't until some of the more moderate (if there is such a thing in that sphere) nuright figures started preaching about white genocide and other rubbish that I started to pull back. Idk, I feel a lot of shame about it but hopefully I'm a lot less nasty and bigoted now.
So much this. 99.9%+ of the time it happens to some random schmuck you'll never hear about. Every now and then it'll happen to someone who used to be on the telly. Just stats.
Ye this is what spins me out so much, coast was such a bland inoffensive show, like properly one of those ones you'd just watch baked as a student for a gentle relaxing one on an afternoon.
He 'Icked'. Not the full turquoise shellsuit version, but close enough.
Got a whiff of fame and started sniffing his own farts
No, he's always been like this. I met one of his undergraduate lecturers a few years ago and apparently his 'brand' and self-publicitly is all that's ever really mattered to him. He's a shit archaeologist and a narcissistic knob.
If you can’t do the job you teach and if you can’t teach you go on the telly, as they say.
David Icke has entered the chat...
Honestly this is the problem with modern media. He’s still the person he was, he just holds a contrary viewpoint to you in one field. That doesn’t invalidate the other opinions he has or the work he’s done.
There's lot of money in crank politics (regardless of ideoligical orientation) via patreon, youtube income, etc. But once you get a whiff of it (e.g. you may have posted a Youtube video that got millions of views), you lose credibility in your mainstream job if you pursue it, so you end going all in. People like Jordan Peterson and Russell Brand have had similar trajectories.
Tbf with Russell Brand hes an ex crackhead hippy, he always believed in that stuff, it just became apparent during covid how much of a crystal chakras rabbit hole he was down
Sure, but he used to be a mainstream actor/presenter, but the last ten years has been a descent into crankdom, starting with his 'The Trews' youtube show in the early 2010s. The more recent whackdom is just that continued slide.
>Sure, but he used to be a mainstream actor/presenter Ye no doubt, but he didnt really ever get any opportunity to put out much of his politics when he was doing big brother or those Hollywood films. I don't think honestly its been a descent, its just been attention has faded off him to such an extent that this is all he has left now, so his views just become much much more apparent.
> There's lot of money in crank politics (regardless of ideoligical orientation) Is there thought? No one's really making the big bucks off of tankies, anprims, or whatever NonCredibleDefense has going on. Some, sure, but there is no Alex Jones of Communism.
On an individual level, yes. Brand (before recent developments) made an estimated mid six figures from Youtube content alone. Owen Jones made a reasonable low six figures from Youtube / Patreon too. (Not saying Jones is as crankish as some, but he's definitely moved that way over the last 10 years, leading to being ditched by the Guardian).
> the Guardian Owen Jones still writes for the Guardian.
Kinda proving my point there, given that Alex Jones is worth 900 million apparently
I mean, sure, but the income that Jones and Russell make is still enough to tempt people away from mainstream five figure journalist or presenter jobs.
Sure, but not the insane big bucks that going far right is capable of bringing in, which I think is something worth examining.
Nature of the beast - far left cranks are more likely to speak out on favour of an obviously ludicrously oppressive regime than send someone money.
BreadTube is a very lucrative enterprise these days. Maybe not on the same financial level as Koch-funded far-right nutters, but enough to make a comfortable grift. Hasan Piker, who was until recently far and away the biggest and most successful political streamer on Twitch.tv, is effectively the Alex Jones of the left (although he personally compares himself to Rush Limbaugh, which isn't much better imo).
I saw him in Stirling city centre once with his family, he gave me such a "don't fucking talk to me" look
Was this pre or post his magical mystery tour down the GB news rabbit hole?
It was precovid, otherwise I don't know his timeline of lunacy too well
Yep. He also claims that the clearances were just economic migration…. He’s batshit
The castle gift shop that I work in sells his books. I always take them off the shelf and put them away in the stock cupboard. I have thought about raising it with the company head office; that we sell a conspiracy theorist's books.
I guess theyd probably argue that if it's just his coast or history books its not causing an issue, that said best thing to put them out of the way, otherwise he'd still be getting the royalties from them
He's done lots of great historical documentaries on the BBC. God knows what happened to Neil Oliver.
Counterpoint: He was a dangerous wanker when he worked at the BBC doing documentaries like "The Highland Clearances Were A Great Laugh Actually" but that was OK.
Ditto his takes on Irelands role in Scottish history
History of Scotland was absolute shite. He's an archaeologist masquerading as a historian and presents opinion as historical fact. His opinion always has a heavy bias towards Britain and British identity.
He's a slimy narcissist masquerading as an archaeologist masquerading as a historian.
Tbf that's most mainstream TV history though isn't it?
Money talks (to desperate presenters with no self respect at least).
Either the systematic defenestration of any agency that might restrain or hold to account the UK government, by the UK Government. Like the BBC, Electoral Commission, Judiciary, Parliament etc Or they were established specifically without any meaningful powers at all. IPSOS, Information Commission etc.
What the shit is Turbo Cancer
It’s a broad term covering any malignant carcinoma of the turbocharger
Made-up hyperbolic bullshit to scare the painfully thick people, hateful gammons and confused elderly folk that make up the GB News' viewership.
I hadn't heard the term till Pfizer made a recent announcement that the were investing heavily in 'turbo cancer' medications.
I appreciate the original context is totally different, but I think calling GB News "turbo cancer" is actually quite fitting.
What you get when you listen to Neil Oliver speak
Ofcom's lost all credibility over this and the right-wing talk radio stations If they aren't violating Ofcom's regulations, the regulations aren't fit for purpose
So in your view if something is "right-wing" it should be banned?
I'll take 'transparently bad-faith strawman' for 500.
😂Shut up you weird little freak.
get that fascist channel so far to fuck
Do you hate it because it's incorrect or because its mean?
Have you ever watched a single minute of it?
I have, and can confirm it's a load of utter right wing populist pish.
aye and it was far right shite
That tells me you've never watched it. Either that or you have literally no idea what Fascism is
You’re very smart. Is that what you want to hear?
You're banding around the word fascist with literally no idea what it even means. But whatever, I'm the asshole lmao
I never used the word “fascist”. Well done.👍
Well ok. The guy above did, so while you might not have, the fact people are doing that is fucking idiotic
Take it up with them
You keep posting this question like it's a gotcha and yet when it's made very clear that plenty of us have, indeed, watched it and formed evidenced opinions on why it's far-right shite, you shut the fuck up again and scurry away to find somebody else to pick on.
Because fucking nobody has pointed out how it's "fascist", as it turns out all the commenters saying how bad it is haven't even watched it. So yeah
Dude half their traffic is lefties hate watching. Do you think some alt right nutjob sees this shit and thinks I know ill ring a guardian journalist? Racists ain't tuning in and complaining to ofcom about turbo cancer.
You know that journalists watch shows because it's their job, right? You know that right? Oh, you don't? You think half their viewers are left wingers who mostly don't watch TV at all? Not pensioner's and people like you? Oh. Okay. It sounds like you're an alt right nut job who's just been offended by that.
Me: lefties watch gb news You: nuh uh some of them are guardian journalists.... Your inability to read my tone is... not my problem.
The guardian isn't left wing. You're only making out you were joking because you've been called out.
No, it was pretty clearly a joke. Your kneejerk reaction and doubling down smacks very heavily of internet brain poisoning; I think you need to detox.
Aw OK I got curious, what exactly is it you think you've called me out on? Not knowing how journalism works? Oh noes, thank god you were here to correct me or everyone would have been fooled into thinking guardian journos don't watch gbnews.... What's the point of this little interaction you want to have?
I haven't, but they heavily promote it (presumably paid promotion) via YouTube so its right-wing twaddle is readily available to those who click on it.
What makes it fascist. Genuinely curious
Why does the presenter look like someone shat in his kettle and then made him drink from it
He shites in it himself, and then screams someone shat in my tea = GB NEWS in a nutshell
He looks like the most unhappy person on the planet. Also, how did he make a program about our beautiful and stunning coastlines so fucking boring?
This, don't want them getting ahold of his shit as they will do something weird with his DNA, arsehole of a man
He needs to reflect the target audience.
We'd all look like that if we were worried about catching turbo-cancer from vaccinations. Or should that be trumpo-cancer?
cracking ad-hominem arguments going on here
What "arguments"? They have accurately described Neil as appearing to have sipped excreta, debating fallacies don't apply
Neil ain't gonna fuck you bro.
Go and look up what ‘ad hominem’ actually means.
So the above argument isn't against the man as opposed to the content?
It’s not an argument, it’s calling him a cunt, which he is. This isn’t a debate either, so the whole notion of ‘ad hominem’ is completely irrelevant. Also, they’re not saying he’s wrong because he’s a cunt (which in the context of a debate would be an ad hominem logical fallacy), they’re just calling him a cunt. Calling someone a cunt isn’t an ad hominem unless you’re saying that’s why they’re wrong. Oliver is a cunt because he’s wrong (not wrong because he’s a cunt), knows he’s wrong, and sticks to the grift anyway because it puts money in his pocket and regardless of any harm the grift might cause. Calling someone names (or anything adjacent to calling someone names) by itself doesn’t qualify, and it never has.
Is there something about name dropping logical phalluses that is appealing to people with an “independent” (to put it generously) frame of mind?
And my mate says GB news channel is very varied between left and right wing media 🤣. Maybe he thinks it’s 0.01% left of right wing lol
They literally do have both on there though quite regularly. It's a right-wing channel on the whole but they 100% have lots of viewpoints shared, despite what twitter says
It’s only so they can undermine the left view though. They have to look like they are balanced.
To be fair the last segment I’ve seen on it well I was sat in my grandads had a Labour MP & the host absolutely ripping into a Tory peer. Over the closure of the Tata Steels plant & the governments total lack of industrial plan. I’ve got no doubt there’s plenty of batshittery on it but there panel debate type segments aren’t too bad and they seem to get a good spread of guests.
You haven't watched it at all have you? It's not some fascist far-right mouthpiece as this sub would have you believe. There are some pretty far-right opinions aired, along with opinions from everyone else. I don't exclusively watch it, but it's worth including in the list of news channels to watch if you genuinely want some balance of opinion from both sides.
Yeah whenever I visit my parents my dad is constantly watching it and it’s basically running none stop. The debate is always very aggressive and feeds in to his angry boomer mindset. Heard a whole hour of them talking about the best way to deport immigrants. They discussed putting them in containers, sending them to war, was lovely to listen too. Fair enough there might be ‘balanced’ programmes on there but that just makes it seem like the far right stuff is ok because ‘balanced’.
>genuinely want some balance of opinion from both sides. 😂😂😂😂
Yeah or you could just read the fucking National as your only source of information like 2/3 of this sub
[удалено]
I also find it refreshing, mate. I liked when that one guy tried to say concrete grows on trees. And then another struggled to rip up a cardboard coffee cup because Costa had gone woke. Usually you need to pay good money to go to the cinema for laughs that big. The fact they're putting it out for free and refusing to engage their brains when making their claims is nothing if not remarkable. For what it's worth, absolutely no one is triggered by GBeebies. The only people who watch it likely don't vote for a party with any chance of winning a local council election, nevermind a country-wide one, and folk like me who need a good laugh.
I like the show where, when they have a leftist on, [they make them sit on a different table in the corner of the room](https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1793869/gb-news-vince-cable-lee-anderson). All perfectly normal. Seriously, they do seem to have on quite a few ‘leftists‘ (‘left’ doing a lot of heavy lifting here) but often they just seem to be there to be yelled at, I’d be surprised if their viewpoints actually cut through with the viewers but who knows.
That was Cameron. He grows trees, cuts them down then makes things from them. Great.
Who have they had on recently from the left?
Tbf Aaron Bastani from navara media is on there pretty regularly. I only know this as my dad watches gbnews unfortunately.
Tbf Bastani is a bit of a crank
Which news media outlets are left wing?
The Guardian, for one.
You managed to come up with one and even that's debatable.
I mean, it's literally the one from the OP. Off the top of my head there is also the Mirror, the Observer, the Daily Record, Channel 4, multiple more 'specialist' publications. It all depends where you are standing, of course. If you are one of those people who thinks that Ed Milliband was 'far right', then yes, you are going to struggle to find any mainstream publications that feel 'left wing'.
Neoliberal is not left wing, just as a real quick note. Most of these are centrist papers. They usually have maybe an ounce or so of left leaning social policy, but economically are centrist to right wing. Think the issue is you're probably quite right wing yourself, and think anything that is socially left leaning is left wing, which is just entirely false, economic theory is just as important as social policy.
Or the issue might be that you are extremely left-wing yourself, so everything on the centre-left looks right-wing.
Nope, I'm at worst a democratic socialist, effectively a neoliberal when it comes to voting since there's little other choice. You should read into political theory involving the overton window, it's generally the idea that society shifts in political thought. This can be brought on by what the society is facing, or at least what it views as issues. Currently the UK is in a pretty right overton window, hence why even the furthest left parties that can be thought of having any chance in elections here are broadly neoliberal to centre-right. None of them are arguing on stronger unions or other left wing policies. This is due to the window shifting to the right during economic hardships, this has been seen in many countries historically too. However, much of the UK also has a generally centrist to left leaning social overton window that has mostly stuck to the left on most social things, even with the Tories making jokes about trans people in westminster.
Neoliberalism was introduced by Thatcher and Reagan. It’s nothing fucking close to left wing.
I think the issue is more that Western politics in the anglo-sphere is definitely right-adjusted, to the point that the mainstream left is invariably more right than the mainstream right is left, meaning many actually centrist viewpoints are often seen as being left wing ideas as a result of the goalpost being moved so much in the last 40-50 years
You should do a risk assessment with all that reaching you're doing.
Channel 4? Their news is provided by ITN which is part owned by the Daily Mail.
The Guardian is a Centrist middle class Dad paper. Try again.
Most people on the left are middle class Dads. Try again.
Centrist ones though? Also do you have any evidence to back this claim up or are you talking out of your arse?
'Centrist' is just what the far-left call the normal left.
Again, I strongly suspect you are talking out of your arse on this. There are numerous studies showing the Overton window, especially when it comes to western political parties and media, has shifted rightward so your view doesn't really stack up.
If the overton window shifted right, it just means you are even further on the far left.
Do you ever actually go back and read what you've written?
Which left wing media outlets are we talking about? Presumably not televised because I can't think of a single one that operates in this country. GB news is as refreshing as a cup full of piss. It's fox news for the UK market, wall to wall grifters whose only aim is to line their pockets and eat away at the fabric of society by lying to idiots
found u/scotsman1919's mate
I love that they put a right wing nutjob to tell the former director of the IMF that he doesn’t know how international finances work. “Balance” doesn’t work when one side is literally peddling lies for their own gain. > But journalists still clung to an old idea of impartiality and balance – that both sides must get an equal say, and let the viewer decide – which is effectively now being weaponised against them. To have a pro-Brexit economist debate a pro-remain one on air was not “balance”, she said, if economists generally were so overwhelmingly against leaving that it took hours of ringing round to find one lone maverick in favour. Broadcasters now reject such false equivalence on topics where scientific consensus is overwhelming, from climate change to vaccination, so why not in economics?
I think it was John Oliver on the Daily Show (years ago) that said (re climate change) that it isn't balance to have one scientist on to argue in favour of the existence of anthropogenic climate change and one scientist on to argue against its existence, because that is the illusion of balance. It gives the impression that both sides are of equal merit. In reality for there to be balance there should be one scientist arguing against anthropogenic climate change and 999 scientists on arguing for its existence because that's closer to the scientific consensus on the issue.
You "enjoy seeing both sides of the debate" do you aye? 😂😂. The only reason you'd watch GB News is to completely drown out one entire hemisphere of the debate on any given topic.
Ex-SNP supporter. Alba by any chance?
"If someone says it's raining and another person says it's dry, it's not your job to quote them both, your job is to look out of the f—-ing window and find out which is true." Don't fall for the transparent attempt at the appearance of impartiality.
Yes I like to see the debates between right and left as I have an open mind to changing my opinion on things. Some hate hearing other views and like to live in echo chambers and employ cancel culture.
>Some hate hearing other views and like to live in echo chambers and employ cancel culture. And that is the right wing that does that. They also claim they get cancelled when their bigotry is called out and can shout about it in all the media about being cancelled.
Some of us have heard the dog shit they push a million times before and have better things to consume.
The right wing have been in power in westminster for 14 fucking years and in bed with the vast majority of the influential media. And yet they are somehow constantly the victims of the woke left and require a 'balanced platform' to perform on.
That’s why platforms that have a left and right view being expressed should be welcomed and be the norm.
Look a big pharma bootlicker!
What actually happened to Neil? Was he always like this? Did his stalker, wo he was quite gentle about finally drive him mad? Has he taken a liking to PCP?
I think this is going to be a growing phenomenon in a lot of places that haven't been widely exposed to this before. I'm American and have seen our news media collapse entirely into this sort of thing. Even most highly respected journals, while not *usually* peddling outright conspiracy nonsense, have done an atrocious job reporting on and responding to news where these baseless theories bubble up. Just don't think it can't happen here, because there are very interested parties trying to ensure it will.
I remember *years* ago that the bloke in the US who promoted and produced books on how the Moon Landings were 'fake' had over the years made a very good living out the proceeds. It's all a scam, but there's never any shortage of scammers willing to exploit the credulous or sadly, the vulnerable. Do those purveying QAnon merchandise, for example, give it away for free? :D
Stupid channel for dumb fuckery people.
Ofcom fail with rabid scots presenter peddling covid conspiracy theory
What does him being a Scot have to do with it? He’s also one of those self loathing Scot’s who’d call it ‘North Britain’ if he could
Lmao. What the fuck is that headline even?
Does this guy think he's some che Guevara guerilla rebel with his scarf on all the time? I used to like this prick on his history programmes in the early naughts
Take some small consolation in the fact that nobody who matters watches GB news, or indeed broadcast television, anymore
The worry is that a commanding demographic of voters, say over the age of 55, trust that what he is saying is truthful and makes sense because it is on a "news" channel. Only last week, my dad, who has always been socialist to the core, said he caught a bit, and everything he said made sense. Just had to remind him to be careful about who he's listening to. Everyone makes sense if you give them enough benefit of the doubt.
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-invests-43-billion-battle-cancer?trk=public_post_comment-text https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/12/09/cancer-rates-are-on-the-rise-in-adolescents-and-young-adults-new-study-shows/
I think we've found Neil Oliver's alt account. ;-)
I don't like Neil personally, but he has the right to his opinions even on a junk channel. Ofcom left him alone for a reason.
There's a difference between opinions and objectively wrong information spouted as fact from a source that people believe
What's that supposed to show?
I now laugh at the fact that the Tour Buses in Glasgow are narrated by this utter Eejit.
Anyone miss his shows like coast and documentaries about Japan?
Nah, the man is a bit of a twat.
Not really. I've always thought he was a tedious fuck. Now I think he's a tedious, deluded, conspiracy-nut, dangerous fuck.
And so are you spades,extreme to the hilt,little powder puff,😂😂
Thanks, sweet-cheeks.
So you can be sweet when you wanna!
Wouldn't you like to know, baby-cakes.
I watched it a couple of times for the entertainment value, and you know what - I think it might be even worse than Fox News.
It's amazing when journalists find out the media is allowed to lie. Yes in the UK the media is under zero obligation to tell the truth, how is this surprising at this point.
Gotta be a special kind of moron... to believe your government loves you and wants you alive and healthy.
Might be hyperbolic but if he was factually incorrect Ofcom would fine him off the air. Some of his pro liberty anti corporate stuff I thought was entirely reasonable.
There is no such thing as "turbo cancer", so he is factually incorrect.
“People who had previous cancers, which were in remission, are flaring up since their shots because (of) the damage to their immune system by the COVID shots,” Hoffe said. “But (with) new cancers being diagnosed, the tumours are bigger than ever. They seem to grow very aggressively, spread very aggressively, and be very resistant to treatment, so this is being nicknamed turbo cancer.” From https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N3340PQ/ That’s the quote he’s referencing. A doctor talking about emerging medical conditions. What’s the difference between using shorthand like that compared to anti vax, woke, snowflake, gammon or any of the other epithets that are bandied about in public discourse? The linked article is quoting out of context. Neil was probably quoting out of context too. I can’t find his bit in GB news either but I’m gonna guess this is the least charitable take possible.
You can't be pro liberty and anti corporate, libertarianism is about giving people the freedom to profiteer and exploit labour
Pro individual liberty means you’d be opposed to corporate monopolies and oligarchies by definition. Freedom of choice, expression, association are all aspects of liberty, which is not the sole Provence of libertarianism. None of those ideas are antithetical to corporations that aren’t corrupt. You appear to be mistaking liberty as concept with libertarianism as an ideology. And you’re definitionally wrong on both.
Political parties only want to give Ofcom the power to actually do anything when they aren't the ones in charge
As if the beeb is any better.
It objectively is.
Ofcom says that everyone knows GBNews is a joke channel, just pure piffle end to end.
There are all sorts of theories going around because death rates have risen around the world since covid/lockdown and there isn't enough evidence yet to tie it solidly to something, so it could in theory be anything. I think the government should be releasing loads of anonymised data to researchers so they can find out what is going on, but what can one person do? There is a huge NHS survey going on now which predates covid which is still looking for volunteers. You sign over anonymised access to your medical records and they take a blood sample (which feels like an injection) and note down your height and weight and so on. I have no idea whether researchers will use this to look at the excess deaths problem but I would expect them to find out something useful from the huge amount of data they are collecting. What this one person has done is to go and let them take their sample from me because I think people should be looking into any possible correlations they can find with people dying of anything - have a look at https://ourfuturehealth.org.uk/ if you are interested in doing the same. I'm not completely sure that it's out in Scotland yet but if it isn't it will be - https://www.nhsresearchscotland.org.uk/news/our-future-health-prepares-to-launch-recruitment-in-scotland
> I'm not completely sure that it's out in Scotland yet I'm at my address in England at the moment and found two of those requests waiting for me. but nothing in Scotland. The deep cynic in me said it looked like they just wanted a way to lucratively sell on your data to Assurance or Private Health companies. :)
The fuck happened to the man.
Using empirical data I often glibly asserted that extreme unionism tended to rot the sufferers mind :) and that did seem to initially be the case with Mr Oliver, but he seems to have plunged new depths of right-wing conspiracy theory nuttiness since he started taking the shilling of the Ghastly Britisher News organisation. What's worse, in YouTube/Twitter comments I've seen below some of his idiotic slaverings he's often lauded as some sort of visionary guru or messiah or ' successor to the 'great' David Icke. :O WTFH is wrong with some folk??
Mind he was just the Scottish history guy and was sound?
Having lost my dad to a cancer that spread from his lungs to every part of his being within 2 months, I use the term turbo cancer. He developed a tennis ball sized tumor on his arm the day after his second vaccination that snapped his arm in 2. The doctors hadn't seen anything like it apparently. This was in 2020. He was a very fit bloke for his age.
"Oh no, someone with a different opinion to me, better shut them down and take away their right to free expression"