Another New UK Government Unit Created To Police 'Untrue Narratives'
Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham used his first United Nations speech this week to announce a 'National Centre for Information Defence' - a new state machine to "detect, attribute and disrupt" what ministers call hostile information attacks, and to stop a "distorted and untrue narrative about Britain."
Burnham wrapped it in Russia, bots, deepfakes and "community cohesion." Critics are adamant the move is purely aimed at ensuring the government has full control over the flow of information.
Speaking in New York, Burnham said there is "no national security without a strong, cohesive society" and that this cohesion "has been under attack."
He described an "industrial-scale assault by hostile actors on the information environment." He blamed Russian agencies for bots, fake websites, falsified newspaper articles and forged branding of 28 British organisations "including universities and the BBC."
Burnham also claimed they had "amplified far-right narratives" and tried to interfere with the 2019 general election. He called attempts to stoke unrest after "horrific events" repulsive.
The centre will sit first in the Office for the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It is supposed to work with the intelligence agencies, government departments, police and social media companies. Ministers assert it will also "build national resilience" by helping communities spot disinformation - and prevent that "distorted and untrue" picture of Britain.
Burnham went further, warning of an "insidious campaign that reaches into people's homes and twists what they feel about their own country and community - creating a narrative of decline, stoking division and sowing despair."
The United Kingdom, he said, had "tiptoed around this for too long." Over the last decade, he claimed, "we have given too much ground to those who want to run a negative, corrosive narrative about life in Britain, which bears no resemblance to reality. Well, no more."
The government already treats public anger about migration, crime, two-tier policing and a collapsing high street as a "narrative" problem rather than a facts problem.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage blasted, "Andy Burnham is setting up a Ministry of Truth to clamp down on free speech." In the accompanying clip he said ministers would use Russia as the excuse, then slide into shutting down "far-right tropes."
"This will be like George Orwell's Ministry of Information, and this will be used to clamp down on free speech," he said, adding "Never ever trust this authoritarian Government."
Ironically, stripped of the Russia garnish, the language reads like early Soviet information control.
Defence Secretary Wes Streeting was sent out to hose it down on GB News. Alex Armstrong put the question straight: people fear the unit will be "weaponised to target British citizens who simply disagree with your Government. Can you promise today that that will not be the case?"
Streeting said yes. "One of the great things about Britain and one of the things that I have a responsibility to defend is the freedom and democracy that we all enjoy."
That includes, he said, "the freedom to disagree, the freedom for people to challenge their Government, to challenge Government policy, to criticise robustly what we are doing."
The centre, he insisted, exists to attribute and rebut hostile state work. "We're not interested in policing domestic political dissent."
Fraser Myers of Spiked heard the same words and reached the opposite conclusion.
Labour's record is why nobody should take the promise at face value. Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo said action against genuine foreign campaigns is legitimate, but "we have already seen the mantle of countering 'disinformation' being abused by our Government in attempts to malign and silence dissent."
Units including the Counter Disinformation Unit, the Rapid Response Unit, RICU and the MoD's 77th Brigade have, she said, been "involved in recording, flagging and triggering the censorship of Britons' lawful speech." MPs, journalists, campaigners and ordinary people have appeared in so-called disinformation reports "for lawful, truthful speech critical of the Government."
UnHerd's account of the 77th Brigade is worse. The Ministry of Defence once claimed the unit "does not, and has never, conducted any kind of action against British citizens." Documents showed it tracking identifiable British accounts during Covid, including tweets from then-Green MP Caroline Lucas.
The civilian Counter Disinformation Unit logged Peter Tatchell for criticising the monarchy and Conservative MP David Davis for attacking lockdown policy - after ministers said the unit did "not monitor political debate." Time and again the public was told these teams looked abroad. Time and again they looked inward.
This is the same apparatus we've repeatedly mapped:
Nile Gardiner, a former Thatcher aide, told GB News that Burnham's UN address was "talk of control and censorship" and "exactly the kind of messaging that the Trump administration absolutely hates."
The White House has already hauled British officials into the US embassy over the Online Safety Act, under-16 social media bans, and plans to push "trusted" outlets - BBC, ITV, Channel 4 - through the platforms.
While Burnham builds a centre to police "untrue narratives," Labour is also looking at how to keep the BBC's pipeline funded even as viewers walk away. Ministers are considering dumping the £180 licence fee for an £11-a-month "Home Internet Levy" on every household with broadband, whether anyone watches live TV or not.
Culture officials have discussed the Social Market Foundation plan. BBC director-general Matt Brittin has called the licence fee a "busted flush" and pushed for a mandatory household levy.
A DCMS spokesman said Charter Review is looking at options that are "sustainable and fair." Fair, in this case, means you pay for the state broadcaster through your router.
They might as well say that if you want running water or electricity, you also have to pay for the BBC.
The same week, communications regulator Ofcom was accused of sitting on data that undercuts the BBC's moral monopoly. The regulator's own news consumption survey found 74 per cent of GB News viewers rate that channel trustworthy, against 71 per cent for Sky News viewers and 66 per cent for BBC viewers.
GB News and Sky both scored 63 per cent on impartiality among their own audiences; the BBC scored 53 per cent.
Seventy-two per cent of GB News viewers said it offered a broad range of views. Ofcom left those figures out of its headline report and produced them after GB News asked.
The regulator blamed an "administrative error."
Whitehall already has plans to force-feed the BBC through YouTube and the social platforms in the name of fighting "disinformation" - the same BBC that memory-holes comedy sketches when the satire no longer fits the narrative.
Reform's Zia Yusef asked a simple question, three times: what single piece of misinformation has Vladimir Putin actually seeded in the minds of British people?
Hostile states run influence operations. That is not in dispute. What Burnham has built is a centre inside his own office, working with police and the platforms, to police free thought. The people who will staff it already decided that noticing decline is the problem. The people who will be "resilient" are the ones told to distrust their own eyes.
Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 09:20
Continue reading...
[ H/T ZeroHedge ]
Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham used his first United Nations speech this week to announce a 'National Centre for Information Defence' - a new state machine to "detect, attribute and disrupt" what ministers call hostile information attacks, and to stop a "distorted and untrue narrative about Britain."
Burnham wrapped it in Russia, bots, deepfakes and "community cohesion." Critics are adamant the move is purely aimed at ensuring the government has full control over the flow of information.
Speaking in New York, Burnham said there is "no national security without a strong, cohesive society" and that this cohesion "has been under attack."
He described an "industrial-scale assault by hostile actors on the information environment." He blamed Russian agencies for bots, fake websites, falsified newspaper articles and forged branding of 28 British organisations "including universities and the BBC."
Burnham also claimed they had "amplified far-right narratives" and tried to interfere with the 2019 general election. He called attempts to stoke unrest after "horrific events" repulsive.
The centre will sit first in the Office for the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It is supposed to work with the intelligence agencies, government departments, police and social media companies. Ministers assert it will also "build national resilience" by helping communities spot disinformation - and prevent that "distorted and untrue" picture of Britain.
Burnham went further, warning of an "insidious campaign that reaches into people's homes and twists what they feel about their own country and community - creating a narrative of decline, stoking division and sowing despair."
The United Kingdom, he said, had "tiptoed around this for too long." Over the last decade, he claimed, "we have given too much ground to those who want to run a negative, corrosive narrative about life in Britain, which bears no resemblance to reality. Well, no more."
The government already treats public anger about migration, crime, two-tier policing and a collapsing high street as a "narrative" problem rather than a facts problem.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage blasted, "Andy Burnham is setting up a Ministry of Truth to clamp down on free speech." In the accompanying clip he said ministers would use Russia as the excuse, then slide into shutting down "far-right tropes."
"This will be like George Orwell's Ministry of Information, and this will be used to clamp down on free speech," he said, adding "Never ever trust this authoritarian Government."
Ironically, stripped of the Russia garnish, the language reads like early Soviet information control.
Defence Secretary Wes Streeting was sent out to hose it down on GB News. Alex Armstrong put the question straight: people fear the unit will be "weaponised to target British citizens who simply disagree with your Government. Can you promise today that that will not be the case?"
Streeting said yes. "One of the great things about Britain and one of the things that I have a responsibility to defend is the freedom and democracy that we all enjoy."
That includes, he said, "the freedom to disagree, the freedom for people to challenge their Government, to challenge Government policy, to criticise robustly what we are doing."
The centre, he insisted, exists to attribute and rebut hostile state work. "We're not interested in policing domestic political dissent."
Fraser Myers of Spiked heard the same words and reached the opposite conclusion.
Labour's record is why nobody should take the promise at face value. Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo said action against genuine foreign campaigns is legitimate, but "we have already seen the mantle of countering 'disinformation' being abused by our Government in attempts to malign and silence dissent."
Units including the Counter Disinformation Unit, the Rapid Response Unit, RICU and the MoD's 77th Brigade have, she said, been "involved in recording, flagging and triggering the censorship of Britons' lawful speech." MPs, journalists, campaigners and ordinary people have appeared in so-called disinformation reports "for lawful, truthful speech critical of the Government."
UnHerd's account of the 77th Brigade is worse. The Ministry of Defence once claimed the unit "does not, and has never, conducted any kind of action against British citizens." Documents showed it tracking identifiable British accounts during Covid, including tweets from then-Green MP Caroline Lucas.
The civilian Counter Disinformation Unit logged Peter Tatchell for criticising the monarchy and Conservative MP David Davis for attacking lockdown policy - after ministers said the unit did "not monitor political debate." Time and again the public was told these teams looked abroad. Time and again they looked inward.
This is the same apparatus we've repeatedly mapped:
Nile Gardiner, a former Thatcher aide, told GB News that Burnham's UN address was "talk of control and censorship" and "exactly the kind of messaging that the Trump administration absolutely hates."
The White House has already hauled British officials into the US embassy over the Online Safety Act, under-16 social media bans, and plans to push "trusted" outlets - BBC, ITV, Channel 4 - through the platforms.
While Burnham builds a centre to police "untrue narratives," Labour is also looking at how to keep the BBC's pipeline funded even as viewers walk away. Ministers are considering dumping the £180 licence fee for an £11-a-month "Home Internet Levy" on every household with broadband, whether anyone watches live TV or not.
Culture officials have discussed the Social Market Foundation plan. BBC director-general Matt Brittin has called the licence fee a "busted flush" and pushed for a mandatory household levy.
A DCMS spokesman said Charter Review is looking at options that are "sustainable and fair." Fair, in this case, means you pay for the state broadcaster through your router.
They might as well say that if you want running water or electricity, you also have to pay for the BBC.
The same week, communications regulator Ofcom was accused of sitting on data that undercuts the BBC's moral monopoly. The regulator's own news consumption survey found 74 per cent of GB News viewers rate that channel trustworthy, against 71 per cent for Sky News viewers and 66 per cent for BBC viewers.
GB News and Sky both scored 63 per cent on impartiality among their own audiences; the BBC scored 53 per cent.
Seventy-two per cent of GB News viewers said it offered a broad range of views. Ofcom left those figures out of its headline report and produced them after GB News asked.
The regulator blamed an "administrative error."
Whitehall already has plans to force-feed the BBC through YouTube and the social platforms in the name of fighting "disinformation" - the same BBC that memory-holes comedy sketches when the satire no longer fits the narrative.
Reform's Zia Yusef asked a simple question, three times: what single piece of misinformation has Vladimir Putin actually seeded in the minds of British people?
Hostile states run influence operations. That is not in dispute. What Burnham has built is a centre inside his own office, working with police and the platforms, to police free thought. The people who will staff it already decided that noticing decline is the problem. The people who will be "resilient" are the ones told to distrust their own eyes.
Tyler Durden Sat, 09/26/2026 - 09:20
Continue reading...
[ H/T ZeroHedge ]
