Dr Alf I think knows the answer to his own question.

I track up to 125 websites for news and compare it with what I see, things I learn from people who are more knowledgable and what the BBC, CNN, Fox, ITV, RT, Al Jazeera and others put out.

I look at You Tube and compare what these different sources say on the same subjects.

With the BBC, I compare what somebody says today with their version of events a week, month, 3 months and a year from today and earlier.

The resemblance between anything that remotely looks or sounds like the truth is practically nonexistent, unless the BBC is reporting an ongoing hostage siege or live event.

To understand what is being reported, you need to be able to understand hand movements, the use of NLP and different body language to rubbish interviewees in the minds of the audience, the use of shapes and sigils to create a mental state and the BBC’s use of repetition.

It uses the phrases “force of nature” and “climate change” heavily and in a tone of voice that suggests that every event known to mankind from an ingrowing toenail, to gales, traffic congestion, someone committing crimes by the light of the full moon, feral cats and horse-meat in burger,s can all be laid at the door of these two things.

When you understand all that, plus the use of drumming and the process of zooming in to the motionless face of the presenter as the drumming reaches a crescendo, then you understand the process of anchoring the audience to every word that is said.

The colors used on the set and the way people dress is not accidental either, nor is the composition of panels used on Question Time and the composition of the studio audiences.

A good rule of thumb is to assume that 80% of what you are told is misleading nonsense, lies or incomplete data and that 20% more closely resembles the truth.

To get to that 20%, you have to apply critical thinking, commonsense knowledge of history and geography and understand where people are coming from.

Which in turn means you cannot simply take them at face value.

With reporters, unless they are mavericks like the left-wing Australian Jon Pilger or are honest seekers of truth from the Daily Telegraph hunting for corrupt and shyster-like MP’s, you have to assume they are peddling a Government line or something they have been told.

In one broadcast the BBC had a reporter standing in front of date and banana trees who said in a clear voice “I am standing here reporting to you live from Baghdad”, “Saddam Hussein has been captured”. Date and banana trees produce fruit in and around July and the summer months, yet Saddam Hussein was captured we are told,in December even though the man they caught did not totally resemble Saddam Hussein in that the dictator had eyes set widely apart and the captured man had eyes closely set in his head. The second shot of the moment of capture of Saddam could not have been taken at the same time as the first shot of the reporter by the date and banana trees which of course cast shadows inconsistent with the purported timeline.

John Gelmini