CONNECT WITH LYNNE:
VIEW ACCOUNT

What is fake news?

On May 12th, 2017

Broadcast journalism has landed many low blows before when it comes to alternative views about medicine. I was eight months pregnant with our first child when we launched WDDTY, and a few moments before I was due to have a live debate with a media doctor, he leaned over and murmured, sotto voce: ‘Did you know that your obstetrician was up on charges for malpractice?’

It wasn’t true – my doctor is well-known natural birth specialist – but who does this to a pregnant woman?  Answer:  somebody with an agenda.

And that’s exactly the point about Dispatches show on Channel 4 last Tuesday, one of the trashiest pieces of broadcast journalism I’ve ever seen, an object lesson in what exactly is fake news in the media and why.

Yet more on Wakefield

Dispatches had decided to take on Andrew Wakefield, the MMR vaccine and Donald Trump, and in its official news release about the show Dispatches trumpeted the fact that for three months it has been investigating Andrew Wakefield’s ‘great American comeback.’

Wakefield, you will remember, was the gastroenterologist who carried out a small study of 12 of his pediatric patients who seemed to develop both serious gastrointestinal issues and autism right after receiving the MMR vaccine.  For simply raising questions about the MMR, Wakefield was demonized by the UK press until, in a kangaroo court of the General Medical Council, his license to practice medicine was revoked.

After being struck off for his ’misleading claims about vaccinations and the MMR scare,’ said Dispatches’ PR release, ‘Andrew Wakefield has reinvented himself and claims to have the ear of the President of the United States.’

It’s hard to know where to start, in terms of how much this offends my sense of good journalistic practice.  Here are Dispatches’ major allegations, with my comments:

‘Wakefield’s increasing prominence in the United States coincides with weakening confidence in vaccinations from the American public and a subsequent rise in cases of preventable and lethal diseases,’ said Channel 4. Minnesota is currently facing the largest outbreak in Measles in almost 30 years.  Ergo, this must be Wakefield’s fault for spreading lies about the vaccine.

As American Dr. Toni Bark, an integrative specialist and regular witness in vaccine damage trials patiently explained to the Channel 4 journo grappling with the story, there are random outbreaks of measles every year. They occur amongst the unvaccinated and the vaccinated alike; for instance, one outbreak occurred among a school population, 99 per cent of whom had had the live measles vaccine.  The vaccine has a consistent failure rate.

Oops – here’s the story

Dispatches then went on to attempt to discredit Wakefield for his ‘wacky’ theories about the MMR and autism, which appeared in his movie VAXXED.

In the movie, you have whistleblowing researcher Dr. William Thompson from the Centers for Disease Control, who worked on the major study designed to end speculation about MMR and autism once and for all, prepared to be filmed on camera providing evidence that the CDC manipulated data in their study to make the giant increase in autism among African American boys disappear.

In other words, the very government agency charged with determining vaccine policy in the US is guilty of gross scientific malpractice, of lying to the American people, saying something was safe when they knew it was not, and of potentially being responsible for damaging an untold number of children. 

Believe it or not, Channel 4 didn’t even refer to any of that.  As the reporter said to Wakefield: The whistleblower has concerns about - he has concerns about one case. What about the 17 studies that debunked your original 1998 study?’

Call me old fashioned, Channel 4, but the whistleblower and the CDC: THAT’S THE STORY.  In fact, it’s a story of Watergate proportions.  If the CDC is prepared to massage their data, what else have they massaged?  Evidence about all vaccines?  And therefore how legitimate are any of the other studies?  Even the British Medical Journal has admitted that three-quarters of all medical studies are in some way manipulated.

Follow the (little) money

Undeterred, our intrepid Dispatches reporter then moved on to Dr. Wakefield’s ‘lucrative’ finances, the $300,000 he’s taken over six years ($50,000 per year average – less than the median annual income of most minorities in America) from Strategic Autism Initiative, a charity he set up to promote research in autism and neurological disorders.  To prove how he’s milking this charity, they even did an aerial shot of his house in Texas.

The show largely relied on the testimony of Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia to debunk Wakefield and the CDC whistleblower.  Dr. Offit, one of the US’s chief apologists for vaccines, has earned millions of dollars as part of a $182-million sale by the hospital of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine.

Offit’s personal stake in the royalty interest is estimated to be somewhere between $30-$46 million. That’s 100 times what Wakefield got from his charity.

Here’s where it gets interesting. Offit was formerly on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and voted yes to putting the rotavirus on the schedule of vaccines considered mandatory for children. By managing to get the vaccine on a schedule of shots given to nearly every baby born in America, ACIP turned Offit into a millionaire overnight.

If you’re going to do investigative reporting particularly on vaccines, you have to be prepared to dig deep into the swamp, and the swamp is very murky indeed – murkier than you can possibly imagine.  You have to be prepared to have your investigation take you to a place you weren’t prepared to go to.  And most of all your job emphatically is not to be an apologist for the pharmaceutical industry.

Real reporting, and not fake news, usually all comes down to one simple truism:  follow the money and reveal it, don’t defend it. And the big money, believe me, isn’t chasing Andrew Wakefield.

 

Comments

comments

14 responses to “What is fake news?”

  1. Eugenie Verney says:

    Thanks so much for this, Lynne. It was an appalling piece of journalism — if you can even call it that. Lazy, poorly researched, with an ill-concealed agenda, it made for deeply depressing, exasperating, and groundhog day viewing. It was a joint production with The Times (according to The Times), so it's pretty clear where the agenda was set. Shame on Channel 4 for playing this game, and particularly for running this as a Dispatches investigation.

  2. Jeannie Catherine says:

    Bless you! BLESS YOU.

    Unconscionable profit-driven motives of the pharmaceutical companies are behind this push for vaccines. It's all about the $$$, not our health, I strongly suspect.

    I recently read that in America "From the day of birth through age 18, children are given six dozen doses of vaccines that contain genetically engineered viruses and bacteria, plus toxic heavy metals, antibiotics and human, animal and insect DNA and RNA." WHAT??! And the medical-pharmaceutical complex undoubtedly would like, in the future, to expand _mandatory_ vaccines to adults.

    I am 71 years young, recently was named Yogi of the Month at my power yoga studio :), have for decades REFUSED to even get a flu shot. Guess what? No flu, no colds; and a very attentive concern about the health of my immune system via diet and exercise and meditation -- and following Lynn McTaggert's wisdom ever since I first heard her in the 2004 film "What the Bleep Do We Know?"

    Thank you, bless you, for your deep and long-lasting impact on my health and well-being! I personally owe you big time Joy!

  3. Gotami says:

    Hope you have sent a copy to the Dispatches Programme and asked about the old-fashioned idea that the BBC gives equal airtime to both sides of a debate. It was outrageously slanted and the reporter totally blinkered and biased - almost like a robot. I almost threw things at the TV! Why, for instance, did they not talk to some of the families devastated by vaccine results, or to some of the distressed GP's who, like with the morning sickness pills that led to Thalidomide babies, advised the vaccine and saw the results?
    And what murky elements and influences led to them making such a programme, anyway?

  4. JamesH says:

    If this programme is the best the best they can do ,to defend the pro vaccination lies, big pharma and their puppets are bound to be exposed soon.The pressure by patients on their doctors, who are defending the indefensible, will result in many doctors becoming unable and unwilling to continue.If they decide not to resign and go quietly, it will be an explosive situation-imagine if there were hundreds of doctors in Andrew Wakefield,s position.

  5. Irene says:

    Thank you Lynne for another amazing blog..... the word is spreading ever wider. Also thank you to Karma Singh - just read your newsletter which is brilliant. I didn't see Dispatches and to be honest like another of your commentors I try to keep my blood pressure on an even keel by not always watching propaganda programmes that make my blood boil. Breathe ?........

  6. Laura Read says:

    I would recommend the recently available 'The truth about vaccination' series to anyone interested in finding out about the bigger picture.

  7. Tony Gilmore says:

    Dispatches has a vested interest in pursuing Andrew Wakefield since, if Wakefield is right and subsequent research seems to be pointing that way, then the stitch-up job done by Brian Deer and Dispatches some years ago must be wrong. That's afar more interesting story; who stood to gain by demonising Wakefield and how did they enlist Deer and Dispatches services in that hue & cry? As you so rightly say a deep and murky swamp indeed with some very scary slithery invertebrates lurking therein.

  8. Lynne says:

    I watched the Dispatches programme. I am livid with myself for being so niaive as to think that British Journalism is free, unbiased and does not have an agenda LOL. I have never seen such biased, uninformed journalism. I have always watched the Ch 4 News programme believing that it gave the best reporting of issues. Sorry Ch 4 News but since Kathy Newmans exploitative attempt to sway public opinion without showing data, without facts and naming references for backing presumptive biased statements and pedalling out non factual emotional blackmail by filming a sweet toddler, I have done with Ch 4 news unless she is sacked for incompetence. Interesting edited out interview https://lynnemctaggart.com/what-is-fake-news/

  9. Maria Wilton says:

    I am 77years old. I have been waiting all my life to see the day when big pharma is beeing brought down. I nearly gave up. You have restored my faith that I may live to see it yet. Thank you soo much Lynne, you are doing wonderful work.
    Maria

  10. ZoeViva says:

    If anything shows why we need a team like WDDTY, this is it .

  11. paul cross says:

    At the bottom of my beliefs relative to this is the perspective that the human body is an amazing machine capable of defending itself naturally and more so with careful maintanence for peak performance. People the world over are the unnatural rationalizers. Our brains are so capable of deceiving ourselves of the very realities that we experience if we allow the motivation to do so be corrupt based and not simply with intention for the best for all. The need for medicines is also a part of reality but the creation of medicines is indeed corrupted.

  12. I couldn’t resist commenting. Very well written!

  13. I am no longer certain where you are getting your information, but good topic.
    I needs to spend a while learning more or figuring out more.
    Thank you for great info I was looking for this
    information for my mission.

  14. Hi, after reading this amazing post i am also cheerful to share my know-how here with friends.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

BUY NOW AT AMAZON!
  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Unit 9, Woodman Works, 204 Durnsford Rd
    London SW19 8DR.

    You can connect with Lynne via Laura Ortiz: laura@wddty.co.uk

    You can speak to Customer Services at:
    +44 (0)208 944 9555

    Privacy Policy
    shopping-carttwitter-squarefacebook-squareinstagram

    Lynne McTaggart