Lies, obvious lies and official lies cannot compete with the TRUTH; therefore the TRUTH has to go because the WHOLE STINKING SYSTEM is based on LIES.

The truth has long been mostly driven out of the MSM. The net and some books is all the honest media we have left.

After they have gotten rid of truth on the net I expect to see the book burnings commence.

I am hacked off too.
So does that mean I can join them?
No, I guess not-- we are not hacked off at the same things.

@ Jeannette

"So, attacking the true free press (the internet) was the reason for all the hacking scandal "outrage?"

Yes .. it is said for every "crisis" .. in this case the "hacking scandal" .. there is "opportunity" .. in this case .. to "attack the true free press".

After all .. the "powers that be" have pretty much controlled the "court systems" in the U.K and U.S.

For instance .. the GMC legal apparatus unleashed on Dr. Andrew Wakefield to discredit both himself and his work .. or .. the U.S. Supreme Court decision restricting parents to Vaccine Court absent ANY appeal process in State or Federal Courts.

So .. it makes sense to me .. these "powers that be" would make every effort to control the only court left to the people .. that being the "court of public opinion".

In any event .. we are lucky to have someone like John who maintains a constant vigil over these people .. because .. someone has to LOUDLY "sound the alarm" whenever our liberties are threatened.

John-- The degree to which the Royal Charter will effect science and health reporting makes your title particularly fitting. Of course the charter will also effect reporting on war, exploitation, domestic subjugation and surveillance and financial crimes and its fitting in that sense too. But the press restrictions on the reporting of commercial science clarify a certain definitiion of the closed society perfectly.

In "The Open Society and its Enemies: The Spell of Plato," Karl Raimund Popper describes the difference between the modern "open society" and the tribal "closed society." According to Popper, one of the distinctions of the closed society is the blurring of "natural laws" (the rising and setting of the sun, gravity, etc.)with "normative laws" (legal restrictions, rules of ethical and moral conduct, etc.) which is what, for Popper, defines closed/tribal societies as "magical."

What could better define the current tragectory of commercial science and its government subsidiaries? A greater part of new "magic" is technological and seems to hinge on the fact that so much of the controversy over commercial science and the ways it impacts human health and the policies of these government subsidiaries of certain industries boil down to arguments over cellular level effects-- tumors and infertility caused by GMOs, autism and chronic disease caused by vaccines, cancer and failing human health caused by pesticides, pollution, etc.

The cellular natural world is somewhat akin to astrophysics on many levels--as far as accessibility to the average citizen, as far as what is not yet known about it-- and is pretty rich ground to simply invent findings (bend natural laws)and cover up damage with tobacco science to mesh with policy (normative laws), i.e., magic.

Popper writes, "Most of us, it seems, have a strong inclination to accept the peculiarities of our social environment as it they were 'natural'." And it looks like that inclination just got encouragement in the form of a boot in its back with the Royal Charter.

The philosophical analysis sound dry and less terrifying than it really is. A "closed society" to Popper is really nothing less than totalitarianism.

Interesting that this very significant story is not in the news - anywhere. Did I miss it? Is any mainstream outlet covering this?

I hate to say it, but this tactic was inevitable. No doubt, Britain is a testing ground for a more widespread initiative. The question is, what to do about it. It's our move.

Great work John China is looking liberal these days..

Excellent report John.
We are witnessing creative attempts by people who, as many of us are aware, invariably lose battle after battle when their published opinions - largely rhetoric to avoid the necessity of producing hard evidence - are so easily deconstructed whether on autism, that major cause of autism, vaccination, or inalienable rights to free speech and democratic representation of facts, opinions and ideas.
Having lost their battles they seek like-minded incompetents to form organisations, invariably closed to freedom of speech and thought, such as Hacked off and Sense About Science appear to be, from where they launch unconvincing rhetoric through political allies.
The great shame for Britain, and the British, is that so much creativity seems wasted on designing ways and means to disseminate such unconvincing opinions, and to obfuscate issues and evade apology when they fail to convince, rather than on the creation of evidenced, convincing, socially beneficial argument.