Transcript [00:00] I'm with Adam Lurvik from the Committee [00:02] for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting [00:05] and Analysis, and we're looking at the [00:06] UK press. Now, Hamas committed the worst [00:09] atrocity on October the 7th, including [00:11] rape. But how does the Times respond to [00:14] this sort of thing? [00:14] >> The Times published probably the worst, [00:17] the most just reprehensible article in [00:20] 2024. It was co-written by Katherine [00:24] Phelp and a Tel Aviv based journalist [00:26] named Gabrielle Wener. I think I'm [00:29] pronouncing that right. And this was, [00:32] you know, after pretty much everybody, [00:34] including the UN, including the US, [00:36] including the UK, including um Israeli [00:38] women's rights groups had [00:40] documenticulously documented the [00:42] systematic use of rape as a weapon of [00:44] war by Hamas, not just on October 7th, [00:47] but you know, after October 7th. And the [00:50] article you didn't quite go full denial, [00:54] but it was the closest thing to rape [00:55] denial within a mainstream media outlet [00:57] that I've seen. I mean, typically the [00:59] rape denial narrative was is promoted by [01:01] pro Palestinian extremists, but this [01:04] was, you know, this is a obviously a [01:06] mainstream outlet that, you know, isn't [01:08] even usually as bad as outlets like the [01:11] Guardian or the BBC, but they do, in my [01:15] experience of monitoring the outlet for [01:18] a number of years, they allow their [01:19] journalists freedom to go off on their [01:22] own diet tribes. So, so Katherine Phelp [01:25] is someone who has shown her hostility, [01:27] visceral hostility to Israel for years. [01:29] But even more interesting about this hit [01:31] job, this horrible article, which they [01:33] can find on our site, Camera UK. The [01:36] worst thing was that they interviewed a [01:38] Israeli woman's rights group [01:41] representative, and this woman was [01:44] interviewed for the article. And after [01:47] the article was published, she publicly [01:50] condemned the Times and the co-authors [01:53] of the piece for misquing her, for [01:56] taking her words out of context in order [01:58] to advance the desired narrative. The [02:01] narrative being that, you know, [02:03] questions remain over whether or not [02:05] Hamas used rape as a weapon of war. So I [02:09] complained to top editors and you know [02:12] given that this complaint by I think the [02:15] woman's name was Ruth Halpern and you [02:18] know Ruth publicly complained about the [02:20] Times article on LinkedIn like it was a [02:22] public open letter complaining about the [02:26] horrible journalism of that piece and I [02:30] sent the you know sent that link from [02:32] LinkedIn to the Times editor and they [02:34] assured me that it would be investigated [02:37] to this They never heard one thing back. [02:39] The article was never revised or [02:41] amended. No apology was given to Israeli [02:45] women who had been raped. Like it was [02:47] really probably by far the the worst [02:49] thing that they've published in my [02:51] memory. And to this day, there's been no [02:54] apology from anyone at the outlet. [02:57] >> This isn't journalism really. It's just [02:58] agenda, isn't it? [02:59] >> Oh, I mean, look, I I know less about [03:01] the co-author Gabrielle Winger. I mean, [03:03] she's Tel Aviv based and I know less [03:05] about her, but Katherine Phelp and we [03:06] have receipts. I mean, if you go to [03:08] Camera UK and type in Katherine Phelp, [03:10] we have a a tag and you can see that. I [03:13] mean, she's been openly hostile to [03:15] Israel since, you know, I don't know, [03:18] 2013, I think it is, you know, and to [03:20] allow someone with that kind of agenda [03:22] to be a Middle East correspondent and, [03:25] you know, really publish something that [03:27] was just a horrible piece of journalism [03:30] motivated by her contempt for Israel and [03:33] and showing such amazing contempt and [03:35] and lack of empathy towards Israeli rape [03:38] victims, which, you know, as you know, [03:40] the evidence, if anything, has increased [03:42] since since 200 24 and it turns out that [03:45] you know women that were released who [03:46] were held hostage were sexually [03:48] assaulted in horrible ways that men were [03:50] sexually assaulted. The evidence has [03:53] only grown since then and there's been [03:55] no again like this is really one of the [03:58] greatest failures of journalism as it [04:00] regards Israel in the Times history [04:03] going back to at least 2013 and you know [04:06] people on X you know like people [04:08] remember that you know whenever the [04:10] times or Katherine Phelp comes up they [04:12] mention that you know are you going to [04:13] apologize yet but there's been no [04:15] accountability and I actually wrote a [04:17] post at Camera UK called zero [04:19] accountability and That's I [04:22] contextualized that rape denial piece or [04:24] soft rape denial piece with another poor [04:27] piece of journalism by one of the [04:29] co-authors of that piece um Gabriel [04:31] Wineer. So I'm you know this really is [04:35] just it really shames the outlet that [04:37] they never retracted that horrible [04:40] horrible article. [04:41] >> And of course the pro Palestinian mob [04:43] will take that article and believe it as [04:46] truth and they will spread it on the [04:48] streets. you know, all Israel are lying. [04:50] There was no such thing as rape. And [04:52] then the honest man on the street will [04:54] listen to that and he will believe it as [04:56] well. And the lie just spreads and [04:57] spreads, doesn't it? [04:58] >> Yeah. You know, I like to refer to it [05:00] as, you know, I would say that [05:02] mainstream outlets like the Guardian and [05:03] and sometimes even the Times, what [05:06] they're doing is laundering extremist [05:08] views, giving it a mainstream veneer. [05:12] You know, it's one thing if electronic [05:13] and tifada or Palestinian Solidarity [05:17] Campaign post extremist ideas on social [05:20] media or on their websites, but by [05:24] promoting that, you know, these fringe [05:27] extremist ideas on mainstream platforms, [05:29] they're really laundering extremist [05:30] propaganda. And it's really stunning [05:33] coming from Katherine Philp who, you [05:35] know, fancies herself a feminist. And I [05:38] think this is also like part of a larger [05:40] pattern and Israeli women and Jewish [05:42] women have complained about how you know [05:45] many within the feminist movement [05:46] abandoned them after October 7th. You [05:48] know these are people that in any other [05:50] circumstance would have been up in arms [05:51] over Hamas's brutal treatment of women [05:54] and girls and instead they kind of [05:56] decided that you know their hatred of [05:58] Israel superseded their sympathy towards [06:01] women and the victims of abuse against [06:04] women. So I I think we have like a [06:06] perfect storm of just, you know, there's [06:07] something about this anti-Zionist [06:09] ideology that is all consuming that, you [06:12] know, allows otherwise sober people to [06:15] really just really clouds their judgment [06:17] in a way that's not only harmful to [06:20] them, but it just, you know, to the [06:21] degree that they have a mega they have a [06:23] a voice that's widely heard throughout [06:26] the throughout the media, it distorts, [06:29] you know, the views of readers by, you [06:32] know, by exposing them to these [06:34] extremist ideas under the veneer of um [06:37] mainstream news. [06:38] >> Now, we're seeing at the moment, one of [06:40] the big stories outside of the war [06:41] that's happening at the moment is the [06:42] Jeffrey Epstein and his list. People are [06:45] linking him to Mosad. Is this again a [06:47] false narrative trying to blame the Jews [06:50] for everything that Jeffrey Epstein has [06:52] been up to? [06:53] >> Oh, absolutely. Look, look, that's [06:54] something also that's on the fringes of [06:55] the conspiracy theory, you know, section [06:58] on online. some within the new right, [07:02] some within the traditional radical [07:04] left, but also the Times also [07:07] legitimized it. A piece by Gabrielle [07:10] Wenegger a couple weeks ago, she would, [07:11] again, just to remind your listeners [07:13] that she was the co-author of that soft [07:15] rape denial piece that they published in [07:17] 2024. She wrote an article for the Times [07:20] that basically asked the question, you [07:22] know, was Jeffrey Epstein a massage [07:25] agent? Now, first of all, the article [07:27] was horrible, meaning that there was no [07:29] actual evidence. The fact that she [07:31] actually published that shows either [07:33] that that there were no editors involved [07:35] in uh the process or that they just [07:37] didn't care and they wanted clicks. But [07:40] another interesting thing about it is [07:42] that the only piece of evidence that [07:44] Wenegger attempted to insert into the [07:47] article that Epstein was, you know, a uh [07:51] a MSAD agent was some like one sentence [07:54] from a long FBI report that cited a [07:58] unidentified anonymous source as saying [08:00] that he thought that Epstein was a MISA [08:03] agent. Well, a little bit of digging [08:05] turned out that this man's name was [08:08] Charles Johnson, I believe. And Johnson [08:11] is a discredited criminal and someone [08:14] who promotes Holocaust denial. I mean, [08:16] you know, look, the FBI has all sorts of [08:18] sources, right? The fact that one source [08:20] made this unevidenced claim in a [08:23] statement to the FBI means absolutely [08:26] nothing. And the fact that he was a [08:27] Holocaust denier and someone who was [08:29] convicted previously of fraud and and [08:31] other crimes showed, you know, just [08:33] showed just that a Wneer, the Times [08:36] journalist, didn't do due diligence, [08:38] right? She didn't check to see who this [08:40] person was and that she was so insistent [08:44] on promoting this conspiracy theory, you [08:47] know, tying Israel to this serial, you [08:51] know, sex predator that she just didn't [08:54] do basic journalism. And even worse, and [08:57] this is something that, you know, to [08:58] make things worse, to really show what [09:00] bad faith was operating in, she on X on [09:05] Twitter the next day or maybe two days [09:07] later, she tweeted this photo [09:10] purportedly showing Isaac Herdzog, the [09:14] Israeli president, in a photo with [09:16] Epstein. The problem was it was clearly [09:18] an AI fake. In other words, like she [09:21] tweeted this as supposedly evidence of [09:24] further Israeli involvement with Epstein [09:27] when you know a couple of clicks on X [09:30] and a couple of like you know reverse [09:31] image searches would have told her that [09:34] this was clearly a fake. And here he is [09:36] a journalist right the Tel Aviv based [09:38] journalist of a mainstream British [09:39] newspaper promoting ONX a conspiracy [09:42] theory and not only that also promoting [09:45] an AI fake image. Well, it turns out [09:48] that, you know, she eventually [09:50] apologized, but that was only after [09:52] Herzog threatened to sue her. So, I [09:55] mean, this is really amateurish stuff on [09:57] top of everything else. I mean, you [09:58] know, it's amazing that someone can keep [10:01] their job when engaging in such gross [10:03] misconduct, but it seems at the times [10:05] there's there's really no consequences [10:08] for those kinds of errors. [10:10] >> Terrible. Terrible. We just saw a [10:12] terrorist attack in Australia on Bondai [10:15] Beach. How did the Times report on that? [10:17] Were they good at reporting on that? [10:18] >> There was an article in the Times that [10:20] we brought about that's on our site and [10:23] which did a very bad job of trying to [10:27] let's put it this way. This is one of [10:28] the problems with coverage of [10:29] anti-semitic attacks that are motivated [10:31] by anti-inist extremism is that very [10:34] often journalists um go out of their way [10:37] to give the pro Palestinian movement a [10:40] pass. So we did write an article about [10:43] this one piece at the times. Now the the [10:46] article was 80% of it was fine in that [10:50] it it talked about the anti-semitic [10:52] incidents leading up to the Bondi [10:53] massacre but then it inserted as a fact [10:57] that you know that people shouldn't [10:59] conflate pro Palestine activism with [11:02] anti-semitic attacks like the one in [11:04] Bandi you know when in fact you know [11:06] those who have been agitating since [11:09] October 7th in in Australia have been [11:12] anti-semitic extremists that you The [11:15] Bondi massacre was carried out by two [11:19] ISIS supporters who were anti-sionist [11:21] extremists. It attempted essentially to [11:23] create this bizarre, you know, this [11:26] bizarre narrative whereby the pro [11:28] Palestinian activist who, for instance, [11:30] on October 8th, the day after the [11:31] October 7th massacre in Sydney at the [11:34] opera house, you know, had this hate [11:36] march expressing, you know, you know, [11:39] expressions of support for the inifada [11:42] from the river to the sea. Palestine [11:44] will be free. You know, hurly [11:46] anti-semitic epithet at Jews. You know, [11:50] it is very clear to anybody who follows [11:53] the trail from October 7th, 2023 to the [11:57] Bundy Beast massacre that these voices [11:59] that make no you don't try to hide their [12:02] hatred of of of Israel and don't try to [12:05] hide their support for the October 7th [12:07] massacre that this has led to the [12:10] firebombings of synagogues of attacks on [12:13] Jewish homes, Jewish institutions. is [12:15] that, you know, there there have been [12:17] some far rightwing attacks, but the [12:19] journalists of this article tried to [12:22] basically, you know, give the pro [12:23] Palestinian extremist movement uh [12:26] impunity, suggesting that they have [12:28] nothing to do with attacks on Jews when [12:30] the overwhelming majority, according to [12:32] statistics kept by Australian Jewish [12:34] community leaders, the overwhelming [12:36] majority of anti-Jewish incidents have [12:38] been perpetrated by those on the left [12:41] and specifically those within the pro [12:43] Palestinian left. So what started off to [12:45] be a decent article, again, there's this [12:48] disconnect. There's this general [12:50] inability of mainstream media [12:52] journalists to wrap their mind around [12:55] the fact that the anti-Zionist movement [12:57] is a hate movement, that those who wish [13:00] for the destruction of Israel are by [13:01] nature anti-Jewish, and that it results [13:04] in attacks on Jews. Look at Washington [13:06] DC Jewish the the the attack there by a [13:09] pro Palestinian activist that killed two [13:11] embassy staff outside of the Jewish [13:13] museum. Look at the firebombing attack [13:16] in Colorado that killed a elderly Jew at [13:19] a at a prohost rally. You know, look at [13:21] what happened in Manchester, right? The [13:24] Manchester attack. You know, these are [13:26] all perpetrated by anti-Israel/propalian [13:29] extremists. and to try to convince [13:33] people that, you know, there's no [13:35] connection between the two is is a [13:37] really horrible form of gaslighting that [13:39] we've been experiencing since October [13:41] 7th. [13:42] >> Now, there was a an Israel Hamas battle [13:45] around a cemetery. How did the Guardian [13:47] report on that? [13:48] >> Well, you know, I mean, we don't expect [13:50] anything from the Guardian. I mean, [13:51] they, you know, they are the by far the [13:53] worst. They're not as bad as the BBC in [13:55] terms of their influence, right? The BBC [13:57] has global influence and a global reach [13:59] and people assume because the BBC [14:01] reports that it must be true. So it's [14:04] different different in terms of [14:05] influence, but The Guardian is by far [14:06] the worst Western English language [14:08] outlet when it comes to their hatred of [14:10] Israel. But it basically cherrypicked a [14:13] story about a damage to a allied war [14:17] cemetery in Gaza and essentially erased [14:20] the fact that the reason for the damage [14:23] was that a there was a Hamas tunnel, you [14:26] know, built by terrorists right beneath [14:28] the cemetery, that the Israelis blew up [14:30] during the war and that of course caused [14:32] damage to the cemetery and also that [14:34] there was a battle at the cemetery, [14:35] meaning that there was Hamas fighters [14:37] engaged in battle during the war with [14:39] with Israeli soldiers. [14:41] But the I think five or six articles [14:44] they published really hid that you know [14:47] really like hid that lead hid the key [14:50] fact like buried deep in the article as [14:52] just an Israeli claim and just you know [14:55] kept on interviewing people asking you [14:57] what they you know why Israel attacked [15:00] this World War I cemetery and you know [15:02] really trying to rile up their [15:04] Australian and British audiences by [15:07] emphasizing the fact that you know [15:09] Allied soldiers were killed in World War [15:11] I and World War II were buried there. [15:13] Again, if you read the article closely [15:14] and then you do a little bit of digging, [15:16] you see that, you know, the reason why [15:17] the cemetery was damaged was because [15:20] Hamas exploited it just like they [15:22] exploit, you know, mosques and homes and [15:25] hospitals. You know, it was almost as if [15:27] they were going out of their way, the [15:29] Guardian, to give Hamas a pass. In fact, [15:31] in one one of the articles, the word [15:32] Hamas was, I think, was only used once [15:35] in an article putitively about, you [15:37] know, a battle between Israel and Hamas [15:39] in Gaza. So, you know, these are the [15:42] kind of things that incite people who [15:44] already hate Israel. And look, I I want [15:46] to be very clear because I don't, you [15:48] know, ultimately the people that engage [15:49] in anti-semitic violence, they're the [15:51] ones responsible for it. But there's no [15:53] question that media outlets like The [15:55] Guardian play a part in fueling [15:56] anti-semitic uh views that sometimes [15:59] result in violence. And I think they [16:01] need to be held accountable for that. [16:02] They really are. Since October 7th, [16:04] they've even gotten worse. And I didn't [16:06] think that was possible on October 6th. [16:08] >> How does the Guardian treat Hamas when [16:09] it comes to the war in Gaza? Do they [16:11] report about Hamas fairly? [16:13] >> No. Look, they've disappeared Hamas. The [16:16] answer to your question is that [16:18] effectively Hamas doesn't exist. Nothing [16:20] they do matters. They've been erased [16:22] from Gaza. Everything that happens is [16:26] reported in terms of what Israel does. [16:28] you know, Hamas, you know, has since [16:30] October 7th not been the focus of much [16:33] reporting in most media outlets, but [16:35] especially at the Guardian. It seems [16:37] they go out of their way to pretend as [16:39] if Israel is fighting themselves or [16:40] Israel is like, you know, fighting Gaza [16:42] civilians. There are never any fighters [16:44] according to their reports. There's [16:45] never any attacks by Hamas. Never. [16:49] Tunnels that Israel finds, you know, [16:51] which, you know, spans the length of of [16:54] the London tube are never reported. they [16:57] become ghosts, right? So, if you're [17:00] reading media outlets and all you see is [17:03] Israeli attacks and then you see the [17:05] resulting casualties and invariably the [17:07] reports are laden with like, you know, [17:10] focused on the number of civilians or or [17:13] supposed civilians killed. And you never [17:16] see any, you know, much reporting about [17:18] what Hamas does, their decisions they've [17:21] made, the decisions they made on October [17:22] 7th, the decisions they've made over the [17:24] past 2 and a half years to not surrender [17:26] despite the horrible impact the war has [17:29] had on their civilians. They just are [17:31] not an entity. They're not a focus of [17:33] most mainstream media reporting. And [17:36] that's particularly true with the [17:37] Guardian. [17:38] >> Israel is actually currently at war at [17:40] the moment with Iran. We're going [17:42] through the war right at the moment at [17:44] this time. Are you already seeing sloppy [17:46] reporting from what's happening with [17:48] that? [17:49] >> Yeah, in fact, I think you I would I [17:51] would direct your viewers and I think [17:52] maybe when you to our website, we [17:55] published a piece this morning about a [17:57] article about the war by Jeremy Bowen. [17:59] Jeremy Bowen, of course, is is is one of [18:00] the worst one of the really weren't [18:03] really one of the worst and serial [18:05] violators of BBC standards who seems to [18:08] enjoy something of impunity at at the [18:10] corporation. typical tropes about how [18:12] this war is unjustified. [18:15] You know, erasing the context of Iranian [18:17] support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and the [18:20] Houthis, just a one-sided pmic disguised [18:25] as objective journalism, revealing the [18:28] BBC's bias. Um, it really is like this [18:31] was kind of like the opening salvo. Um, [18:33] there wasn't as much reporting over the [18:35] weekend, but to the most recent report [18:37] by Bowen and you know, I also recommend [18:40] your listeners to go to the Jeremy Bowen [18:43] tag on our website at Camera UK. I mean, [18:45] you know, I mentioned that Katherine [18:47] Phillip at the times is a serial [18:49] violator of journalistic norms when it [18:52] comes to reporting about Israel. Well, [18:53] Jeremy Bowen is also, but you know, he [18:56] comes with the, you know, with the [18:58] hallow effect of the BBC. So, you know, [19:00] his voice is heard around the world, [19:02] right? Phelps isn't. So my colleague [19:05] Hadar Sila who focuses on BBC really has [19:09] a good piece just showing how shoddy his [19:11] reporting was about the war and how [19:13] clearly he's inserting his own personal [19:16] views into into the story and you know [19:19] coming away with a predictably [19:21] anti-Israel and really anti-US [19:24] conclusion completely dextualizing the [19:27] war from Iranian support for their axis [19:30] of resistance completely erasing [19:33] Iranians illegal enrichment of of [19:35] nuclear of uranium to unacceptable [19:38] levels according to monitors. Just a [19:41] one-sided piece that you know again [19:43] shows that he really there's very little [19:45] accountability at the BBC when it comes [19:47] to seasoned journalists like like Jeremy [19:50] Bowen. [19:50] >> Is all of this just anti-Israel [19:53] reporting, anti-semitism, or is it just [19:55] sloppy journalism? [19:56] >> Look, I think that it depends on the [19:58] journalist. I mean, I'm not going to, [20:00] you know, say that there's no [20:02] anti-semitism motivating some of this [20:04] coverage, but I I think it's just more a [20:08] anti-Israel inclination. you know, they [20:11] think that um by being they think the [20:13] Palestinians are on the right side of [20:14] the history that they think that Israel [20:16] is on the wrong side of history based [20:18] partly on their embrace of really [20:20] radical ideologies that started off [20:23] decades ago at universities, whether you [20:25] want to call it postcolonialism, [20:27] postmodernism, that they really think [20:29] that the world is neatly divided into [20:31] oppressor and oppressed. And once you [20:34] accept this view, you know, you almost [20:37] have to accept the fact that, you know, [20:39] the more powerful party is typically the [20:42] the guilty one, whether it be the US or [20:44] Israel, right? I mean the Israel is um [20:47] does have a powerful army but I think [20:50] it's a such a fasile and such a such a [20:54] disrupting idea that prevents you from [20:57] understanding that these terrorist [20:59] groups in the Middle East and these [21:01] hostile regimes such as Iran represent [21:04] the biggest threat to the region. They [21:06] are by far, you know, the biggest [21:08] threats to democracy. they're the [21:09] biggest threats to to the very liberal [21:12] values that these journalists purport to [21:15] promote. So while I do think like I said [21:18] anti-semitism plays a factor, you know, [21:20] I think it's more of this ideological [21:22] orientation where they see themselves [21:24] also as activists, right? And they think [21:26] their job is to promote or to defend [21:29] Palestinians, not to report the the news [21:32] accurately. And you know, this kind of [21:34] visceral hostility to Israel just bleeds [21:36] into the reporting. You know, I've often [21:38] said that if you would have told me, [21:39] Paul, on October 6th, 2023, [21:43] what was going to happen on October 7th, [21:45] 2023, and then you would have asked me, [21:48] well, do you think that the coverage in [21:50] the mainstream media towards Israel [21:52] would change for the better? I would [21:53] have said yes. Even I was shocked on [21:55] October 8th and October 9th and October [21:57] 10th by the degree to which the [21:59] mainstream media in the UK and elsewhere [22:02] immediately pivoted from the worst [22:04] anti-semitic massacre since the [22:06] Holocaust to Israel's quote unquote [22:09] disproportionate attack. That's not [22:11] normal. There's I want to emphasize this [22:14] just by basic morality by basic [22:16] standards of journalism that there was a [22:19] horrible moral abdication by media [22:21] outlets in in just failing to you [22:24] reassess failing to have you know one of [22:27] those introspective aha moments where [22:30] normal people would say well maybe our [22:32] propel advocacy over the years has been [22:34] wrong like look what they did look at [22:35] their astonishing barbarism in their [22:38] rape their mutilation their torture [22:41] their murder of children on October 7th [22:44] that it was, you know, just this orgy of [22:46] violence and instead of taking the sides [22:48] of the victims, they decided to just [22:50] double down on their support for the [22:52] Palestinians. So, I think, you know, as [22:54] an Israeli, as someone who works for [22:56] camera, I'm still shocked and appalled [22:59] and and find it just unforgivable the [23:02] just stubbornness, the the insistence [23:04] upon promoting the narrative at all [23:06] costs um despite what happened on [23:09] October 7th. And I think, you know, I [23:11] think mainstream media outlets just [23:13] need, you know, some really radical [23:16] reform. You know, there there is just [23:18] fundamentally there there's moral [23:20] corruption at the core of most of these [23:21] outlets. And, you know, more the [23:23] Guardian than elsewhere, but but it's [23:26] infected coverage at the BBC, at Sky [23:28] News, at Channel 4. And I think, you [23:32] know, it's does it such a disservice to [23:34] the public who were getting fed [23:36] ideological crusades that's being [23:39] paraded around as journalism. And I [23:41] think the impact for society at large is [23:44] can't be understated. [23:45] >> So, Israel is at war with Iran at this [23:48] very moment. So, I imagine we'll have [23:50] you be very, very busy sorting out all [23:53] the lies from the truth. What is your [23:55] website address for people who'd like to [23:57] know more about what is being narrated [23:59] by the the journalists and what is false [24:01] and what is true? [24:02] >> Okay. Well, the um the main camera [24:06] website is is camera.org. All right. But [24:09] if they're interested in just UK [24:11] content, it's camera-k.org. [24:14] So again, that's camera cam ma-.org. [24:21] And you know, so we and we publish at [24:23] least once a day at camera camera UK. [24:26] Also, you know, for those of your [24:27] listeners who are on X, we're very [24:29] active on X. You can find us there. And [24:33] we're also um camera that is on [24:36] Instagram, on Facebook, and on LinkedIn. [24:40] So we're very active on social media. [24:42] So, whichever social media sites your [24:44] listeners are most active on, you know, [24:47] very often the the battle, the cognitive [24:50] warfare that we fight, obviously the [24:52] longer pieces are on our website, but [24:54] you know, we're very active on X because [24:56] that's where a lot of people get their [24:57] news. We're very active on Instagram [24:59] because that's where a lot of young [25:00] people get their news. So, you know, you [25:02] know, we really um over the past year [25:04] especially have increased our pro our [25:06] presence, our prominence, and our [25:08] content on these social media platforms. [25:10] So, I really strongly advise those who [25:12] aren't already following us on those [25:13] platforms to do so. [25:14] >> Great. Well, Adam, thank you very much [25:16] for sharing today. [25:17] >> Been my pleasure. Thanks for having me, [25:18] Paul.
