Legacy media outlets have, over decades, become hollowed out by the erosion of their business models and they now show every sign of being compromised and failing to present balanced accounts of key aspects of the COVID policy response.
The response to Angelo Ryan’s opinion piece in the Mail & Guardian on “vaccine hesitancy” is more interesting for what it tells you about the state of our captured media, than what it tells you about vaccination. Daily Maverick, Groundup, Bhekisisa and others have once again told us that they are promoting a specific narrative and censoring and demanding that others censor contrary views. Can you trust organisations that tell you that this is how they are conducting the business of journalism to give you accurate information in future? We think not.
An op-ed that appeared recently again highlights the need to fact check those who call themselves fact-checkers and the key messaging around COVID-19. What we wish to point out is the extent to which you are being manipulated.
The Fauci emails have revealed the tip of the censorship iceberg and should wake people up to the extent to which we are being kept in the dark. The Press, Academia and public institutions are hiding important information about this crisis from us based on a patriarchal idea that they know what is best for us. Because so many of them have deep-seated conflicts of interest, it is going to be very difficult to win back what we have lost.
Nick has been in the news after an attack on him personally and PANDA as an organisation, published by the Daily Maverick website – which he says refused him a right of reply. In this hard hitting response, Hudson offers his side of the story.
At stake is a crucial aspect of free speech. Though the Daily Maverick may consider PANDA’s speech inconvenient, it certainly does not constitute hate speech or defamation – two accepted limitations on free speech. The clear intention of the Daily Maverick article is to silence PANDA’s voice. Publishing personal information about selected members and their employers knowing that it was irrelevant to the topic of the article can have had no other purpose.
A journalist from the Daily Maverick submitted a series of questions to PANDA for comment. This is our full response.