At the End of the Day

The President is just fine and close to death as a result of testing positive for the deadly killer but otherwise benign Corona virus Covid 19

‘Some of Donald Trump’s vital signs over the past 24 hours were “very concerning”‘

‘The President is in good shape and responding well to treatment’

‘The President is reported to be suffering from “mild symptoms” of COVID-19’

‘We’re well aware that Trump has a disease that is particularly deadly for older, overweight men, but we have no reason to trust anything the White House says about the state of his health’

Yer pays yer money, and yer takes yer pick.

President Donald Trump could live to be 200 years old, or die tomorrow – it’s that clear.

This presentation of Presidential capacity shines a less than flattering light on the inability of our mainstream media to report what is, as opposed to how they would like it to be.

‘Covid-19 immunisation programme could be quicker than experts predict, say government scientists’ today’s Times told us, suggesting that a vaccine could be ready by next Easter. The same newspaper told us yesterday that Birmingham scientists would have a vaccine ready to go by Chistmas. Both these stories are rubbish: no vaccine could be tested properly by either date, but more to the point there is no fucking vaccine on Earth that can be effective against a mutating virus like influenza or the common cold.

I’m sorry to underline that observation with an obscenity, but then the lies we’re all being offered are infinitely more disgusting. In their determination to show that the science is “settled”, spinners on all sides illustrate nothing more than their ability to censor that part of the evidence they don’t like.

Isn’t the first duty of a news medium to inform?

I think it is. But most of today’s mass media are there purely to disguise views as news.

The tabloid press media for example could bore hypocritically for England on the inviolability of their right to freedom. But over and over again, this is shown to be the right to accuse on the basis of distorted evidence – or simply no evidence at all.

Should any honest independent reporter online dare to point out the bullying State reducing Julian Assange to a gibbering shadow of his former self, however, and just watch as the tabloids at best ignore it, or at worst write lascivious nonsense about ‘Weirdo leaker whose 3-in-bed romps left his cult dismayed’.

As with Trump, I do not hold a candle for Assange: he often strikes me as a bloke in search of martydom. But do the media portray either him or the State accurately? They do not.

I really do wish there was a daily online bulletin – called, I don’t know, Bigotwatch for the sake of argument – that issued the full range of reportage with health warnings about each one. Such things have been tried, but failed to engage because of the lack of objective critique offered.

It could never, given the time frame involved, get anywhere near Absolute Truth.

But it would, if nothing else, make more people think about what they read.