Post by Struth on Jul 9, 2021 8:31:37 GMT 8
The Editor
The Townsville Bulletin (and others)
The Townsville Bulletin and its staff have sadly let down the people of Townsville, Queensland and Australia by refusing to connect the dots on “the Townsville experiment.”
“The Townsville experiment” took place between June 24 and July 8 after Queensland Health’s very own Delta variant super-spreader came north and had 900 close contacts.
None of the 900 died. None went to hospital. None got sick. Heck, none even tested positive. That’s the proof anyone needed the government is wrong about covid. So why not report that?
Some have argued that the contact tracing was faulty. So why bother with compulsory check-ins everywhere?
Some have argued that the QH staffer’s test was a false positive. But didn’t she infect her brother, too? And why not admit that the tests are often wrong?
What the heck have newspapers and their staff got to gain by helping the government exaggerate a health threat to their paying customers, to the detriment of their wealth and freedom?
The people that are all-in on the covid scares are of the political left. They also believe in catastrophic climate change, men can be women, and racial division via “critical race theory.”
That political divide, and the ongoing suppression of the advice of tens of thousands of medical experts around the world about effective therapeutics (particularly in India) says covid is mostly agitprop.
Journalists think they are justified in ignoring the first standard of their Code of Ethics, which says, “1. Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts. Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis. Do your utmost to give a fair opportunity for reply.”
That justification comes from the Code of Ethics’ “guidance clause,” which states, “ Only substantial advancement of the public interest or risk of substantial harm to people allows any standard to be overridden.”
However, in assuming that governments around the world (all beholden to the UN’s WHO) are right and that the public is at “risk of substantial harm” when that is clearly not the case (as demonstrated by “the Townsville experiment”) the media have breached their contract with their paying customers.
Come on, Townsville Bulletin and staff – you can do better and we expect better. Report “the Townsville experiment” properly in accordance with your first ethical standard or explain how doing so offers “risk of substantial harm.”
(395 words)
Peter Campion
Tolga
The Townsville Bulletin (and others)
The Townsville Bulletin and its staff have sadly let down the people of Townsville, Queensland and Australia by refusing to connect the dots on “the Townsville experiment.”
“The Townsville experiment” took place between June 24 and July 8 after Queensland Health’s very own Delta variant super-spreader came north and had 900 close contacts.
None of the 900 died. None went to hospital. None got sick. Heck, none even tested positive. That’s the proof anyone needed the government is wrong about covid. So why not report that?
Some have argued that the contact tracing was faulty. So why bother with compulsory check-ins everywhere?
Some have argued that the QH staffer’s test was a false positive. But didn’t she infect her brother, too? And why not admit that the tests are often wrong?
What the heck have newspapers and their staff got to gain by helping the government exaggerate a health threat to their paying customers, to the detriment of their wealth and freedom?
The people that are all-in on the covid scares are of the political left. They also believe in catastrophic climate change, men can be women, and racial division via “critical race theory.”
That political divide, and the ongoing suppression of the advice of tens of thousands of medical experts around the world about effective therapeutics (particularly in India) says covid is mostly agitprop.
Journalists think they are justified in ignoring the first standard of their Code of Ethics, which says, “1. Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts. Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis. Do your utmost to give a fair opportunity for reply.”
That justification comes from the Code of Ethics’ “guidance clause,” which states, “ Only substantial advancement of the public interest or risk of substantial harm to people allows any standard to be overridden.”
However, in assuming that governments around the world (all beholden to the UN’s WHO) are right and that the public is at “risk of substantial harm” when that is clearly not the case (as demonstrated by “the Townsville experiment”) the media have breached their contract with their paying customers.
Come on, Townsville Bulletin and staff – you can do better and we expect better. Report “the Townsville experiment” properly in accordance with your first ethical standard or explain how doing so offers “risk of substantial harm.”
(395 words)
Peter Campion
Tolga