Towards the end of last year, Laura Dodsworth and I complained to Ofcom about a collaboration between Sky U.K. and the Behavioural Insights Team – then part-owned by the Cabinet Office – to use “behavioural science principles”, including subliminal messaging, to encourage viewers to endorse and comply with the Government’s ‘Net Zero’ agenda. That is, Sky bragged about joining forces with a unit that was part-owned by the U.K. Government to use covert psychological techniques to try to persuade viewers to endorse one of the U.K. Government’s most politically contentious policies – and encouraged other broadcasters to do the same! Alarmingly, the joint report by Sky and the BIT also recommended broadcasters utilise these same covert techniques to change the behaviour of children “because of the important influence they have on the attitude and behaviours of their parents”.
In our complaint, Laura and I argued this was a breach of Ofcom’s Broadcasting code – in particular, paragraph 11 of section two, entitled ‘Harm and Offence’:
Broadcasters must not use techniques which exploit the possibility of conveying a message to viewers or listeners, or of otherwise influencing their minds without their being aware, or fully aware, of what has occurred.
Now, two months later, Ofcom has replied, effectively dismissing the complaint. You can read the full reply beneath our original complaint here, but this is the gist of it:
In the Guidance we outline that, among other things, whether an issue has “been broadly settled […] and whether the issue has already been scientifically established” should inform a broadcaster’s consideration of whether the special impartiality requirements in the Code apply to a particular issue. In our Guidance, we identify the scientific principles behind the theory of anthropogenic global warming as an example of an issue which we considered to be broadly settled. On this basis, we do not consider these principles in themselves to be matters of political or industrial controversy for the purposes of Section Five of our Code.
In other words, using covert psychological methods to persuade viewers to endorse climate change dogma and adapt their behaviour accordingly, e.g. switch to electric cars, is not a breach of the Broadcasting Code because the science of anthropogenic global warming is “broadly settled” and “scientifically established”.
What about the fact that many of the behavioural changes Sky is trying to persuade viewers to make also happen to be changes the current Government is promoting under the banner of ‘Net Zero’? On that point, Ofcom is slightly more ambivalent, leaving the door open to another complaint:
The U.K. Government’s position on net zero covers a wide range of policy areas around which there may be a degree of controversy. Policies on how governments deal with crises or controversies in general can be a “matter or major matter of political controversy or relating to current public policy”, even if the U.K. Government has a settled policy position on it. It is possible, depending on the specific content and context, that a broadcast programme containing discussion of specific net zero policy decisions by the UK Government may engage Section Five of the Code, and require consideration under the special impartiality rules.
Ofcom goes on to say that it has raised our complaint with Sky, but has been assured by Sky’s response, and for that reason, among others, won’t be taking our complaint any further:
Turning to your complaint, you did not identify any specific programmes broadcast by Sky which you considered to be in breach of the Code. As I have explained, Ofcom is a post-transmission broadcast regulator and as such, does not usually consider general complaints about a broadcaster’s policies. On this occasion, we drew Sky’s attention to your complaint. Sky has assured us that they retain full control of all editorial broadcast content on their channels, and they are aware of their obligations under the Code.
It is also important to note that, broadcasters have the editorial freedom to analyse, discuss and challenge issues across the board, including topics related to net zero policies. As set out above, a broadcaster’s right to freedom of expression can only be subject to restrictions which are in pursuit of legitimate aims, in accordance with the law, necessary, and proportionate. We must exercise our regulatory functions in a way which is compatible with those rights, and in line with our regulatory principles.
For these reasons, in light of the assurances given by Sky, and in the absence of a complaint about specific broadcast content, there are no grounds for opening an investigation into Sky’s editorial policies and general organisational strategy related to net zero carbon emissions under the Code.
Accordingly, we will not be taking any further action in relation to the general matters which you raised with us about Sky. However, if you do wish to make a complaint about a specific programme that you consider raises issues under the Code, then you can do this by submitting a complaint on Ofcom’s website.
Disappointingly, at no point does Ofcom address our concern about Sky’s use of covert psychological techniques to prosecute its green agenda or its intention to use these methods to bend the minds of children.
Needless to say, Laura and I have no intention of letting the matter drop. If you see a programme on Sky that you think uses covert psychological methods to brainwash you (or your children) into accepting ‘Net Zero’ gobbledegook please bring it to our attention by emailing us here.
You can subscribe to Laura’s Substack newsletter here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
A simply terrific article, covering all the bases as far as I can see.
Agree totally JBW. I feel I am getting the most valuable education from Toby’s chosen posters. Thank you to all, and to Toby!
I fully concur, including the castigation of the faux left “woke” brigade which to my mind are simply, paraphrasing George Carlin on politically correctness, fascists pretending to have good manners.
A superbly written piece. And so correct. It deserves a wider audience.
Trying to do some of that.
An EXCELLENT article, best one on the subject of left support for the lockdown, which is exceeding the right’s in its zealotry.
Wonderfully put. A question for other leftwing people… if you are left wing for thw reasons I am – to improve equality and tolerance between classes and races, has the left, left us behind?
It went in a different direction.As in 1914, when the “left,” contrary to numerous pledges to never support a war between the major powers, did so, each national faction supporting its nation’s war effort. That’s when activists left the left behind.
It’s so true that modern discourse fails to realize that “the left” really hasn’t existed in the west for a heck of a long time. As a label, the term is totally obsolete, and I reckon we’re currently right down to some human basics here: The bright vs. the dull-witted, or, if you prefer, the decent vs. the downright evil. I hope it is obvious that my definitions cross all party and class lines.
I always thought of myself as “leftist”, but Blairism seems to have grabbed the left’s megaphone, and it won’t hand it back. Hard to feel at home with leftist principles when their representatives have no idea what “left” is any more.
Unfortunately the answer has to be yes.
But, we are the real left, they aren’t!
Wow. I will definitely have to read this again when I have more time and give this article the reflection it deserves!
This article may be the most embarrassing exposure of the faulty logic of lockdown supporters I have seen in this pandemic. And the fact that it is written by an unashamed leftist makes it even more humiliating and powerful.
I have to praise Phil for his honesty and for his willingness to join forces with the political right to criticize the common enemy–lockdowns. The lockdowns may go down in history as one of the worst of the scientific, political, and media failures of the 21st century. We need as many people as possible to point out this failure, regardless of where they identify on the political spectrum.
I appreciate how broad the scope of this article is—from the disastrously inaccurate Imperial College paper; to the ridiculous, simplistic propaganda of media darlings Joe Biden and Andrew Cuomo; to an honest examination of how destructive the lockdowns have been globally on public health; to the numerous hypocrisies of the media and political left; and so many other issues.
I have to give Phil an A+ for this one!
Someone on the left completely onside with you on this brother. Time to resist being politically pigeon holed just for speaking common sense.
Excellent piece, thank you Phil. Don’t agree with the socialism, but this critique is accurate as far as I can see.
Please see my anarcho-analysis of the radical left (with coronavirus postscript on page 3 — in which I have linked to this article) for some context on why it has responded in this way.
I agree this is a truly excellent piece, moreover one whose greatest strength has nothing to do with references to socialism – or to any other political ideology for that matter.
A seminal pjece. Bravo! Brings home that the true Left is currently homeless. We had a last chance with Corbyn but it proved to be a last hurrah. We need to regroup with libertarian allies anywhere.
There is NO way anyone left can ally with propertarians (“libertarian” is a mere euphemism). They are the Left’s very worst enemies, and must be resisted and crushed.
‘Quarantining the healthy is economically catastrophic, with Depression-era levels of unemployment, business closures, and mind-numbing long-term government debts and deficits. A demographically-targeted, strategic approach of protecting the vulnerable would have had far better financial (as well as health) outcomes both for the vulnerable and for the whole population.’
Similarly: I live in a small town in Maine. Only a few months ago did they ban plastic bags. So: for several decades, instead of every one of its 5000 citizens bringing their own reusable bag to the store, each week thousands of bag went out from store — many ending up in water, on streets, etc.
Ditto for me in Mass. After a loooong campaign to ban plastic bags that was finally successful I think two years ago—adopted in all towns in the area—now we are back to square one. Clouds of bags leaving stores. At least they are paper bags, but still now onetime use.
A number of aspects of this are ridiculous.
If you can’t bring a supposedly contaminated reusable bag from home, then how come you are allowed to walk into a store with your contaminated clothes on??? Probably more contaminated because the bags have probably been lying in a box in your car forever, whereas your clothes have been exposed to your infectious family and activities on an ongoing basis!! Maybe we should all shop butt-naked to prevent viruses that cling to our clothes from colonizing the store and other people . . .
Furthermore, if shops were serious about trying to continue to observe the earlier bag bans, it would be very easy to engineer a system whereby clean and folded used bags can be stored in boxes for a few days and then brought out to be used again at checkout.
One can only hope that if/when this madness tapers off, consumers will appreciate the accomplishment of banning one-use plastic bags and return to their canvas shopping bags with relief.
From a fellow Australian who worked in the UK for 23 years (before that in the Netherlands) now back in Australia. No left-right axe to grind as I don’t vote and never will vote…..however…..a very good article. Honest and analytical. The left are destroying themselves and have completely ignored their base, ignored the evidence and ignored the great danger facing everyone. Some actually think that a kind of “socialist paradise” will emerge. Meanwhile people have been literaly murdered and there is worse to come. Not only that but the 1% are concentrating power and getting richer. And the left are helping them. They refuse to behave honestly or engage reasonably.
I said to my son (who was unemployed) on the 18th Sept last year….don’t worry soon millions will be unemployed. How did I know? Because the Federal Reserve started REPO. I warned my family to buy extra food (toilet paper etc)….I knew what was coming. How come no one else did? The virus was incidental. BlackRock had advance knowledge. This is deliberate. Yet the left sees this as an opportunity. More fool them. There is no socialist paradise coming. A technocratic oligarchy ruled by the 1%…..certainly the serfs will be thrown a few crumbs but we face full spectrum dominance. If you thought crony capitalism was bad wait to see this…on steroids and then some. P.s. Watch out for those Hegelian rainbows.
Thanks for a good article
Yes. Check out Whitney Webb´s articles at The Last American Vagabond. Things are about to get very nasty.
As a newly woke lefty in addition to a pinko commie anarchist at heart, ‘we’ – my preferred pronoun in situations such as this – like this piece except its divisive language.
Watch out for the the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset. They’ve got a whole strategy to change ‘corporate capitalism’ into ‘stakeholder responsibility.’ As a stakeholder, we tried to get into the game. But we weren’t invited.
It feels like taxation without representation to us.
Oppressive policy oppresses all of us, except maybe Prince Charles.
Right on, re The Great Reset. Glad you mentioned.
This must be brought into the conversation very quickly, and fought down.
The founder of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, wrote 50 years ago that this is what the WEF aims for. He stated this very clearly recently on the occasion of the WEF 50th anniversary.
Now, with the “covid-9 crisis,” the Davos set have the “opportunity.” How convenient.
They will start trying to get this Reset going in January 2021.
What they call “stakeholder capitalism” can’t be good for most of us.
Sad that saving lives is seen as an attack on freedom. Sad that saving lives (which the ruling class hates) is seen as a betrayal of those that we seek to save from death.
Perfect example of the kind of double-think described in the article.
Troll?
Simply brilliant. Thank you.
Jane
I simply cannot understand the crass stupidity of every global government who chose to lockdown as a first option for s virtual non-existent pandemic… This is a measure that should have been imposed as a very, very last resort only. Meanwhile economies melt down and the cost in social terms is truly astronomical… They say lift the lockdown now but my mind just cannot cope with the fact that it was ever imposed at all!
In fact only one country (New Zealand) rapidly imposed a harsh nationwide lockdown at a point when it was still more-or-less unscathed by the pandemic. Although even there it was largely because they realized they didn’t have an effective test-and-trace strategy in place.
Perhaps a Corbyn government would have locked down sooner for this reason, especially as they’d be more likely to acknowledge the decrepit state of the country’s public health tracking systems (as this was the result of Tory austerity).
But would he have been able to get people to comply with an earlier lockdown in the face of a hostile press?
Last resoert?? Stupit, very stupid.
The UK lost an estimated 10000-20000 lives from a 10-day delay.
A couple of points :
1.The ‘left/right’ single dimension isn’t sufficient as a description of political space. Covid-19 has brought this issue to the fore, even tho’ it has been recognized for some consderable time. THis panicdemic has brought to authoritarian/libertarian distinction to the fore.
2.” …the working class, those who have to sell their labour to an employer, are the vast bulk of the population. “
Exactly – but the article at other times experesses hints of the left-infantilism that hints of a romantic attachment to 19th Century concepts of ‘the working class’. Such is embedded in the notion of Trumpism and Brexit being symptoms of ‘revolt’. It really isn’t quite like that in the 21st century, and it is notable, for instance that Trade Unions have been co-opted to the cause of ‘Lockdown’. A wider, more accurate analysis is needed to nail the current dire situation.
But the article does indeed highlight hard truths about the essential impotent incompetence of the ‘left’.
It’s strange that the Leave/Remain divide is sometimes portrayed as an authoritarian/libertarian one (although more accurately it is an insular/cosmopolitan one) when it seems like Remainers are now more likely to support the lockdown than Leavers.
On trade unions, perhaps the fact that trade unions are almost exclusively public sector these days has a lot to do with it, because in the private sector most of the big old monolithic (and thus easily-unionized) workplaces of the past were broken up by outsourcing, enabled by the new computer technology.
Thanks for the article. I’m an Australian & it’s pretty impossible here to get any dissenting opinion from the Left or from most people for that matter on lockdown. Because we had such a low death toll here, the unquestioned assumption is that LD works. No research made into our success being for a variety of other reasons perhaps (Professor Michael Levitt & others have talked about this).
Now with the new cases in Victoria, we’re repeating the same policy without examining all that’s been learned about the virus. (From what I’ve read from non mainstream analysis, the virus is on its way out but who’s taking any notice of this informed view?) It’s possible that Australia’s lockdown delayed our ability to get some herd immunity so we have new cases. Also we’re in Winter, when seasonally, viruses spike.
There may be a number of reasons why the Left has been AWOL about opposing or questioning the lockdown. In the early stages (China, Italy) the media presented a picture of a rapidly spreading deadly virus that would kill millions (even though The Imperial College prediction that turned out to be wrong). Fear really shuts down the cerebral cortex stopping regulation of emotional responses ergo: panic. Humans of any political stripe are susceptible.
Also since the Spanish Flu in 1918 – when the world was a very different place – the Left hasn’t confronted anything as unique as a global medical crisis. The Left is used to addressing, inequality, the failure of capitalism, systemic racism, misinformation about dodgy wars, contemporary Imperialism etc.
The Left aren’t predominantly made of epidemiologists, immunologists, data analysts etc. On the whole the Left is not experienced in critically examining the quite complex analysis of viruses. Sure the Left (& parts of the Right) are critical of ‘Big Pharma’ but this is different to freaking about a ‘pandemic’. The Left like the rest of us (including myself, until I read some alternative material) has been susceptible to the 24/7 repetition in the media about COVID and one sided scientific opinon what needs to be done. They haven’t exercised their usual critical investigation of what’s served up in MSM. They accept the ‘science’ but only the scientific consensus opinion. So like many, the Left believes alternative views on the virus & how to deal with it are just a bunch of conspiracy theorists.
Also I noticed a shallow take from parts of the Left who viewed opposition to lockdown because of the ‘economy’ as right wing callousness & an obsession with money & profit – rather than seeing it as concern for the majority of people ending up unemployed etc..
In fact, the IC forecast was right. It just had a very wide range, and everyone (incl. the IC people) spoke about the top bar (95% confidence) of the range.
Jen: I am experienced in data analysis and so are several friends and colleagues who I’ve corresponded with extensively. We are all for lock down, having considered everything else. The initial rise in infections and deaths was really exponential and extremely frightening (all of us are well over 60). It was clear from the numbers that every available tool, including lockdown, had to be deployed against this pandemic.
The are also some benefits: leisure, much improved air quality (already degrading since end of lockdown), far less car use, greatly increased telecommuting, acceptance of telemedicine, people getting used to measures which will have to be imposed to mitigate global warming …
Your use of the term “extremely frightening” betrays the level and quality of your analysis of this situation. You panicked or supported the panic and now want to justify your irrational damaging response, it is really hard to admit being wrong but it is crucial to show this fortitude at this time. Don’t fall for the sunk costs fallacy. In medicine, one should first aim to do no harm, this principle was thrown out of the window for this virus. Vastly more lives and years of life have been lost by lockdown than anything lockdown could ever have saved, any rational analysis of the data will reveal this (see this for example – https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/499394-the-covid-19-shutdown-will-cost-americans-millions-of-years-of-life), and it was always going to be a temporary delay measure at best, even if you think lockdowns worked, as it was never a sustainable policy. Your supposed ‘benefits’ are gobsmackingly disconnected from the suffering of millions of people in developing countries who are being sacrificed for your increased ‘leisure’ and ‘telecommuting’. They don’t have any government subsidies to fall back on, they just starve or fall into grinding poverty. Lockdowns are a luxury of western wealthy people, at the expense of the people of developing countries. I hope you come to terms with this reality eventually, before it’s too late.
As a Labour supporter it really does dishearten me to see the opposition party support everything this government is doing. While I am no economist its quite obvious that when you shutdown your economy for any length of time it will affect those least likely to help themselves.The Tories will tell everyone how their saved everyone from certain death and how their now helping to save workers jobs. The electorate will agree with this or just think why didn’t Labour give us an alternative and once again the Tories will be re-elected and Labour will be dazed wondering why? Today I hear more jobs being lost and businesses going under but I hear nothing from Labour pointing out the disaster which lockdown as caused and I wonder why. As Labour given up on the working class because we haven’t given up you if you lead us and expose the disaster of lockdown. So I say lead us and flatten the Tories at the next election.
Well said. I agree with your analysis, as a member of the Labour Party. It is somewhat depressing that the ‘Westminster bubble’ is not operating as a proper opposition on this issue. Remember the timing of it all – not long after the GE last December, leadership change etc, and the absence of local elections this year. Doesn’t look good at present. I suspect that quite a lot of us don’t know what to do just now, and it’s entirely possible that a few membership ‘direct debits’ will be stopped next time round.
Excellent article, but personally I do not believe this was a mistake. It is a carefully planned global coup. And, for some reason not clear to me, the intellectual left is complicit. Yes, I agree that it probably did all start with Reaganism–Thatcherism.
I, too, was a Trotskyist in the 1970’s and this article chimes with me. Once you lose your class perspective, you are no longer the left.
This is a truly superb article. The left’s support for lockdown seems so utterly bizarre but it is very well explained here.
Hallelujah! At last the discussions (and fairly regular rants) that my partner and I have been having for months have been brilliantly summerised. Thank you Phil. I’m going to share this with some of our friends (most of whom think we are bonkers of course) just to show them that somewhere in the world intelligent life still exists!
From NYC, consider myself a radical green leftist and I loathe the hideous technocratic tyranny and want to resist by any means necessary. Please check out these websites:
https://wrenchinthegears.com
https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com
https://questioningcovid.com
http://www.stopcp.com/GlobalResetPSYOP/GlobalResetPSYOPMindMap.html
https://everydayconcerned.net/2020/09/04/breaking-major-investigative-report-by-association-of-french-reserve-army-officers-finds-covid-19-pandemic-to-have-a-hidden-agenda-for-global-totalitarianism-nanotech-chipping-of-all-5g-irradia/
Pam Popper: https://makeamericansfreeagain.com
Del Bigtree: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/highwire
https://www.technocracy.news
As someone on the left, a remain voter and until recently Labour member, I just couldn’t agree more with this article. It basically articulates everything I want to say without actually having to write it …
The left has completely abandoned all of it’s principles in order to play politics. I think for many the political game is more important than the outcomes of peoples lives. Let’s not forget that this ridiculous public health response is going to disproportionately affect the lives of the vulnerable.
If you’re on the real left, if you believe in left wing principles genuinely because you have a deep rooted empathy for people who are less advantaged than you and you want to see policies that help to create greater equality in society and not create further inequalities, then we should band together with rational people of all political persuasions to oppose this destructive madness.
Anyway, it’s all been said, thank you
I have been appalled by how nearly all the leftists and liberals have fallen hook, line and sinker for the virus scare. I know so many Anarchists who are afraid to shake hands, make farcical displays at social distancing. That so many hitherto intelligent people who were skeptical and suspicious of governments and the media, have turned into pathetic whimpering conformist children. Yet it gets more ridiculous. As a result of the far right claiming that CoVid is a scheme by Bill Gates to control the world, leftists and liberals are now rushing to Gates’ defense. There is hardly unanimous conclusions by medical professionals, public health experts and scientists about CoVid19. Of course the dissenting perspectives are excluded from the international mainstream media and/or immediately denounced and discredited by their peers. I’m afraid that the Left’s handling of CoVid and the lockdowns will result them being discredited for at least a generation.
I think this offers a great possibility to respond to far-right conspiracy theories. Bill Gates does have an enormous amount of influence on global affairs through his wealth and his foundation that is concerning on many areas. Most particularly concerning is that he is treated as an authority on diseases by the media even though he has no relevant education or vocational experience in the medical profession. I think by validating the legitimate concerns, that opens up an opportunity to dialogue, and some people on the far-right might be won over to the left’s way of thinking. There is so much concern about offering a gateway to the far-right. Why can’t that gateway work in the other direction?
I agree with many points in the article, but I find the attack on anarchists uncalled for. Most anarchists I know are wonderful people unable to harm a fly (communist libertarians of the Kropotkian type). The critique seems out of the place, especially as part of an article that tries to reconcile different political views into a common front. It’s true that some renowned anarchists have had a very disappointing reaction to this crisis, but so have most of the people I know, no matter their ideology.
Anyway, greetings from Spain and please keep up the fight.
This should be republished Toby as 3 years later it still holds up and has considerable foresight and insight that few on the left or right had at the time. This author from the left has integrity and is worth reading. I didn’t know there were any on the left left! Which is why many like Lee Anderson (and me too) have got it right and left the left. Right? And I bet Phil Shannon will soon join Del and stand as another “little run away”.