When news stories broke, investigative news stories, controversial news stories, they broke for good reason. They were backed up by evidence and by courageous editors. They were stories which rocked the establishment, not because they were designed to rock the establishment, but because the stories needed to be told, regardless of who was affected by them.

Here are some reasons I have come up with why stories should not be covered up:

National interest – wrong

National security – wrong

To protect the integrity of office – wrong

Because the object of the investigation has a lot of money and power – wrong

Because the object of the investigation is influential – wrong

Because the object of the investigation knows the owner of the paper – wrong

Because the object of the investigation is a sponsor of the paper – wrong

Because the object of the investigation contributes to the governing party – wrong

Because the object of the investigation is a good person, usually – wrong

Because the object of the investigation is a ranking official of an ally – wrong

Because the object of the investigation has diplomatic immunity – wrong

None of these reasons is an excuse to either cover up a story or avoid taking someone to court. If any of these excuses are used to cover up a story or to not drag someone before the courts, then we do not live in a democracy. This is for two reasons:

1) In every acceptable definition of democracy, there is a rule of law.

2) In every acceptable definition of democracy, the law is applied equally and fairly to everyone.

Any divergence from this path, for any reason, is a sign of a failed democracy.

If our main national news providers are involved in a programme of deliberately hiding the truth, the objective reporting of their journalists from the public, then we truly live in a failed state. Then the public is simply not considered mature enough or capable enough of understanding what is happening in the world. That is plainly wrong.

If we want to have a media that represents the quality of reporting we deserve as intelligent and analytical beings then we need to demand that. Alternatively, we walk away from it, and stop paying the license fee.

Thank you as always Esheru for your knowledge, analysis and your time.

TwoandaMic clocking out.

Enjoy!

Here is the link to the article referred to in the podcast: https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/bbc-civil-war-gaza-israel-biased-coverage

I welcome opinions of every kind so please come and find me on social media at:

Instagram: TwoandaMic

Twitter: TwoandaMic1

Should I really have to ask? 😉 If you like the developing story of this social journey unfurling in my series of podcasts, feel more than free, feel partially responsible for spreading the word by subscribing and sharing and where possible, liking. It is greatly appreciated! Thank you!

Oh, and if there is a possibility to do some rating, that would be nice as well. Thank you.

PS. The transcript has been generated automatically and does not always reflect what has been said with 100% accuracy. I hope however that it will still provide some clarity on the content...!