Mark Zuckerberg, Meta CEO and Facebook founder, sent a letter on 26 August 2024 to Rep Jim Jordan, the Republican chair of the House Judiciary Committee. He seems to express regret about failing to speak out when the Biden administration pressured the social network to “censor” some Covid-19 posts during the pandemic.
Well fancy that, the world says! We would never have guessed he was biased, when he was banning anybody on the Facebook platform who dared to ask questions, put forward another view or in any way oppose the Covid nonsense. Zuck may be getting ahead of himself, knowing a change in regime is likely in November, but Meta promoted an untested and ineffective vaccine that has caused untold misery, injuries and deaths. The public were excluded from any criticism of the vaccine on Meta.
Last month New Zealanders had some serious facts not disclosed to them. This time the bias was an omission about the risk to public health of fluoride being added to Tauranga’s water supply. Did the media demonstrate bias in their article by intentionally not reporting?
Robert Coe, Dr Alanna Ratna and Jodie Bruning made presentations at a Tauranga Council meeting on 26 August, each given a five-minute slot. A large number of the public were in the room and the crowd overflowed into the foyer. They appreciated the professional and compelling way the three speakers made their points.
Alisha Evans, the local reporter followed the meeting up with a good article published both in the NZ Herald (27 August) and the Weekend Sun (30 August). Evans cites Coe’s and Ratna’s content, but does not even mention Bruning, the third speaker, let alone the content of her presentation.
This type of media bias in reporting is suspicious. Bruning gave the reporter her notes, including her power point presentation. The editors control content and we ask them: why the stark omission? The wider public have a right to know why Bruning’s presentation was ignored.
Does local media not want the public to know what sociologist Bruning spoke about?
1. “The Director General misleading officials”
2. “Fluoride not being an essential nutrient”
3. “No risk assessment has ever been completed on this hazardous substance”
4. “The public have been written out of any capacity to critique the Ministry of Health’s demand”
The business that employs Alisha Evans, The Local Democracy Reporting (LDR) programme “is a free public-interest news service dedicated to strengthening coverage of local authorities, rūnanga and other similar organisations”. On this issue their reporting has not lived up to their name description of democracy in action.
Selectively refraining from informing the public is unfair, one sided and, worse, leaves the public in the dark about fluoridation. Withholding the content of a speech, obviously does not allow appraisal of this contestable issue and, as Bruning’s message clearly states, “does not support the public right to be independently informed on issues concerning ecosystems and human health”.
LDR reporters may still be co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Meta has admitted they were pressured by the Biden Government to censor some content around the Covid-19 pandemic. It could be NZ editors are being pressured to censor some content around the former Director General’s directive to add this substance to our water.
If editors exclude controversial content that might sit at the heart of the matter regarding the most challenging issues, they really do seem to be just puppets of central government and big business.
Perhaps they are running scared of their funders?
Here is Jodie Bruning’s speech for those who missed it:
A previous Good Oil post following the council meeting: https://goodoil.news/bloomfield-is-behind-it-again-2/
