Dictating Social Attitudes.

THE B.B.C.'S OFTEN DAMAGING

INFLUENCE ON ALL OUR LIVES.

Newspaper and magazine editors, along with Facebook, Linked-In, Twitter and You-Tube, etc., have some influence on many but not all of our lives.  And most of them permit (and even encourage) meaningful input from the general public.

But of all the media available to the great British public, the output of the British Broadcasting Corporation via both Radio and T.V. clearly has by far the greatest influence, but seldom permits more than a modicum of input from its listeners and watchers – most often under rather carefully controlled circumstances.

I personally love and admire the B.B.C. and most of what it achieves both Radio and T.V-wise, but am disturbed to find it claiming to be “unbiased” and “independent” of government and other influences, whilst at the same time manifesting deeply entrenched and damaging positions on a few vital subjects.

One particular subject which screams bias, and even prejudice, is the field of “mental health”, where psychiatry has been failing us for nearly two centuries.

Regular programmes such as: “All In The Mind” still peddle the ancient ideas of well over a century ago, based on Wundt 1832, Pavlov 1849, Freud 1856, Adler 1870 Jung 1875, Ellis and others, all of whom have majorly contributed to the views and practices of clinical psychology, psycho-therapy and psychiatry as we know them today – and as psychiatrists damagingly still practise every day.

It is interesting however, that more recent giants of psychiatric theory and practice – such as Emeritus Professor Thomas Szasz, former holder of the Chair of Psychiatry at New York State University and Dr Peter Breggin, author of “Toxic Psychiatry” and Chairman of Wales ‘MIND’, have together with many other enlightened and internationally revered psychiatrists, spent a major part of their professional lives condemning the status-quo psychiatry of Wundt, Pavlov and Freud, etc., as being not only out-of-date, but also ineffective and even in fact a downright dangerous threat to the lives of a majority of mental patients undergoing such treatments.

However, even without these expert denunciations, psychiatry’s lack of successful results have themselves been increasingly condemning psychiatrists and their work for well over a century, with repeated treatment failures screaming out for something safe and effective to take psychiatry’s place.

And in 1950, with the publishing of the revolutionary book: “DIANETICS: The Modern Science of Mental Health” (a true and proper science of the mind, based on non-damaging, straightforward and basically simple procedures for handling mental and emotional problems) was launched, and since then has, in 66 years, become by far the most widely used and successful mental health study and therapy across the whole world.

Yet “psychiatry” and “psychology”, both of which amazingly still offer no agreed upon definition for “mind”, and of which several psych schools actually deny the mind's existence, continue to be “authoritatively” featured by the BBC on a regular basis.

Which apparently mean that the BBC, which stands on the very crossroads of the world's news channels, astonishingly evidences no knowledge of the battle for scientific veracity which has been going on between psychiatry and Dianetics for the last 66 years !

Instead, “the BEEB” goes on pushing totally disproven, mainly corrupt, dangerous and scientifically implausible ancient psychiatry, whilst on PANORAMA condemning the modern and effective true science of DIANETICS® and its originator.

THIS CAN REALLY MEAN ONLY ONE THING.

Namely, that at least part of the BBC is riddled with psychologists and psychiatric “advisors” busily protecting their jobs and their income and the whole tottering edifice of psychiatry's version of “mental health” in this country.

In this endeavour, psychiatrists are backed by the pharmaceutical purveyors of addictive medication, for whom psychiatry acts as that industry's main “drug-pushers” by prescribing (and advocating the prescribing by G.Ps and other doctors) of addictive, and sometimes also hypnotic, drugs on a palliative basis intended to temporarily relieve symptoms rather than procuring permanent and complete cures.

Why would our really quite Beautiful Broadcasting Corporation lean over to protect the failing and damaging psychiatric version of “Mental Health” and descend to lambasting and totally falsely condemning psychiatry's vastly superior opponent "DIANETICS: The Modern Science of Mental Health", IF the relevant production and programming departments were NOT staffed at decision-making level with psych fifth-columnists bent on their own survival rather than on what is best for the rest of humanity and the BBC's veracity ?

One way to go is to remove all programmes promoting psychiatry as well as all condemnations of L. Ron Hubbard's work.  Another way to go would be to devote as much honest production and programme time to DIANETICS as is currently assigned to “psychiatry”.

But the obvious way to go is to do as we all sensibly do with our cars, fridges, computers and gas boilers, etc.

When they get too old, too dangerous, too expensive and obviously out of date, we change them for a newer, safer and more efficient and effective model.

In the field of Mental Health that modern model is: DIANETICS – available in all of the world's major languages and taught and practised in most of the major towns and cities of the world.

“DIANETICS: The Modern Science of Mental Health” is also the Number ONE “New York TIMES” Best-Seller of the last 66 years, and is available from most high street book-shops, or can be borrowed from your local lending library.   It is also available in audio-book form.

If you would like further information on Psychiatry, go to the website of C.C.H.R. (The Citizen's Commission on Human Rights), and for further honest and accurate information on DIANETICS, you may like to contact S.A.F.E. for discussion on (01342) 810151, any weekday between 11.00am and 9.00pm.

S.A.F.E. Is A Not-For-Profit Community Support Group Formed in 1975.

___________________________________________________________________

Editors and Programme Producers, the Guardians of Britain's Morale:

MEDIA BOSSES HAVE IT

WITHIN THEIR POWER TO MAKE

 BREXIT COMFORTABLE AND EASY

. . . . OR OTHERWISE.

Media bosses definitely know their readers and audiences, and to capture as many of them as customers as possible, tend to make the news as exciting as possible for as many as possible – because that sells TV licences, newspapers and magazines, etc.

Normal, boring, conservative and only mildly interesting statements don't grab a viewer's, reader's or listener's attention as much as fearful, argumentative, sexual and controversial items do, as a result of which they introduce as much fear and controversy as possible into their news output, their “tweets” and their blog “posts”, in the hope of claiming the largest headlines and thus the largest audiences and sales.

This is neither wrong, exaggerated nor difficult when they are reporting the activities of some politicians, terrorists, gangsters or other criminals,

But when it comes to the pros and cons of getting Britain out of the European Union as cleanly and healthily as possible, it is clear that too many commentators find it easier to make the Brexit situation more exciting and mysteriously controversial because of its uncertainties, than the mundane ”business as usual” considerations of those who voted to “remain” in the E.U.

Mrs May rightly said that “Brexit” means “Brexit”, and the factor which is going to make Britain's exit from the Union into the best result for Britain, is the morale of our nation's population.

People at every level within our society are wondering what is going to happen, when it should be obvious to everybody that what is going to happen is what we MAKE happen. And that what we think now and do or fail to do now, are the factors which create the high level of morale which is needed as we move through the various steps of exiting from the European Union.

Reporters, editors, producers and other political and economic observers in truth have no more idea of what is going to happen than the bosses, the employees, the man in the street and the housewife in her home. And it is those professional observers' own uncertainties which make them attribute similar uncertainty to the bosses, the employees and everybody else.

As a result of which we more and more get the possibility of a self-fulfilling prophesy being generated out of media purveyors' own spectator-like unknowingness and uncertainties.

Coupled with attacks from government opposition parties, these personal doubts and uncertainties from media-makers will inevitably start to affect the morale of decision-makers around the nation and – yes, we will have a self-fulfilling prophesy about how doubtful and uncertain is Britain's position and how we must be increasingly cautious, careful and resistant to any form of risk taking or long term planning or decision-making until “we can be sure about what is going to happen”.

Which brings us back to square one, because the one thing we can be certain of is that: what we MAKE happen is going to be what happens !

During the last world war, it was the positive morale generated by the British Press and radio which kept us going through some of the darkest hours. And today we need a similar Churchillian attitude to any doubt and uncertainty which might arise about our future over the next two or three years.

A successful Brexit is infinitely more important than any Party differences, even for those who voted to remain. Because it is a “brexited” nation that the government which will be elected in 2020 is going to have to make work well – no matter that government's colour or creed.

And a Brexit which works well is very much in the hands of our Press and other media workers, who can help us all by avoiding pessimistic, worrying, doubtful and uncertain comments and speculations, when optimistic certainty and enthusiasm is what triumphs most in life.

No matter who or what you are, ALL personal views of the future cannot possibly be more than pure speculation. So – lovely and responsible opinion-leading editors, producers and journalists – please lead us towards an optimistic Brexited future full of hope for a Britain which remains part of Europe, but which stands successfully outside the European Union.

Especially as protesting or criticising Brexit is not going to stop it happening, but will only make things worse for all of us – including you.

S.A.F.E. Is A Not-For-Profit Community Support Group Formed In 1975.

________________________________________________________________________________