24. al disinformation from user disinformation when it comes to online harms.  Both have the capacity to cause serious harm and both must be captured by any legislative strategy to address online harms.

Conclusion (3):

Established news publishers have themselves been responsible for publishing false information (“fake news”) regarding COVID-19 as news stories.  Any approach to online harm and disinformation will be ineffective if it addresses UGC exclusively, while permitting established publishers with the largest reach (and a higher degree of trust among its readers) to republish conspiracy theories and fake news with impunity.

The role of IPSO

27. In addition to newspaper website UGC, the industry’s complaints-handling body IPSO also claims responsibility for tackling editorial disinformation.
28. At time of writing, IPSO has done nothing in response to any of the stories referred to in the Appendix.  Even if IPSO were to act, precedent suggests that none will be remedied promptly with a correction or adjudication of similar prominence to the original false story[15].
29. Typically, around 100 days elapse between the publication of an article and an IPSO adjudication[16].  Often this is longer.  In that time, many millions of citizens could have been misled.

Conclusion (4):

The complaints-handler IPSO which claims to regulate both news media publishers and their social media platforms has failed to maintain basic standards of accuracy in respect of COVID-19 reporting.

30. In addition to established media outlets, there are many other information/news websites which are publishing disinformation about COVID-19.

31. These websites exist across the internet; many of them specialising in disinformation.

Here are three examples:

Brutalproof.net named as an anti-semitic conspiracy theory website:

32. A legislative strategy which engages with UGC only will not address these websites.  Such an approach would be unacceptable.  Legislative action on disinformation and online harms must extend to publishers of disinformation more broadly than private citizens alone.

Conclusion (5):

There are vast numbers of news and information websites across the internet, which are neither part of the established media nor social media platforms, which are publishing false information about COVID-19 which will not be captured by a “UGC-only” approach to online harms and disinformation.

Annex:

5G conspiracy theorists post under Sun article on 5G locations as masts attacked across the UK

Background

On April 4th reports were published that 5G phone masts had been attacked across the UK.[17]

On April 6th, The Sun newspaper published an article which included maps showing 5G coverage across the UK[18].  It is possible from viewing the map to get an approximate idea of where masts are located.

Comments which alleged that 5G was unsafe soon appeared under the article.  They remain accessible under the article, with some of them published 14 days ago (as of April 20th 2020).

Since the article was published, reports have been published that 53 masts have now been the subject of attacks in total.[19]

Comment

Readers will be interested in how and where they will be able to access 5G technology.  It is not wrong for newspapers to cover this.

But in the context of a global pandemic during which a conspiracy theory has been widely spread that 5G is linked to the virus, publication of such an article must be handled with care.

Instead, not only did the article effectively allow readers a way to approximately locate where masts had been erected, in the knowledge that 20 attacks had already been reported around the UK, but comments alleging that this technology was unsafe were published and left accessible to The Sun’s millions of online readers for two weeks (and counting).

This is a further example, not of COVID-19 coverage but on a related issue, where UGC appearing on a newspaper’s social media platform has included clear, uncorrected disinformation.  On this occasion, that disinformation could very well have put 5G equipment – and lives according to a statement by EE – at risk.[20]

Timeline

The full timeline of these events is as follows:

4th April:                            Reports published of videos showing 5G masts being set alight.[21]

6th April (10.25am):              The Sun publish the article “Is 5G in your area? Mast maps reveal if you can upgrade to ultra-fast mobile internet”[22]

A comment is published:

Massively concerned and terrified for my grandchildrens future. 26,000 scientists have objected to this and I have not consented to being exposed to this dangerous  level of radiation. This will seriously damage peoples health and all life on earth .BAN 5g

7th April:              A comment is published:

“You’ve only got to look at the pedigree of these people in the ‘club’ pushing this ‘stuff’ : eg: ‘vaccinate the world’ Gates – dad boss of Planned Parenthood, started by eugenicist Margaret Sanger friend of Hitler. Find some of the pronouncements of Betrand Russell.

The dummies carrying out the orders to ‘get ahead’, are like the compartmentalised lower levels of Masonry who know nothing of the truth.”

A comment is published:

“Some people are suggesting a link between disease and radiation in that the vibrations induced in the body’s cells allows entry of viruses. A microwave oven works by oscillating water molecules at 2.4ish GHz – the same as WIFI – you couldn’t make it up! (I think wifi also uses 5GHz)

Recall how Cameron – now living the nice country life – said we should accept that many (50%?) of people would get cancer.”

9th April:              A comment is published:

Judging by the poll the vast majority of people DO NOT want this .nobody has been consulted.This surely isn’t legal .The people dont consent .The studies prove it’s highly dangerous so why is this being forced upon us .ask why?

18th April:              Reports are published that 53 masts have now been targeted for attacks.[23]  None of these comments have been removed.  The Sun website reaches more than 7m people on a daily basis.

FREEMASONS ARE CONTROLLED BY THE JEWISH MONEY LENDERS.