The Telegraph jumps the gun on World War III World War III might have begun this week, according to British broadsheet The Telegraph. Users browsing the news on the Google smartphone app found themselves presented with the alarming headline, "China invades Taiwan: Japan steps in." Google News showing a Telegraph headline with the text 'China invades Taiwan: Japan steps …
Meh. The Telegraph used to be a relatively respectable right-of-centre "quality" newspaper, but nowadays it's really not much more than a slightly more literate, but similarly extremist and hate-filled, version of the Daily Mail. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this had been an intentional headline just for pure clickbaity-ness and to remind people that it still, sadly, exists…
If you want to know what sort of publication the Telegraph is, then a few links to the Columnists "issues" that certain people are facing :
https://www.thepoke.com/2024/09/17/break-out-tiny-violins-for-telegraph-columnists-millionaire-friends/
https://www.thepoke.com/2024/10/31/this-telegraph-couple-complaining-theyd-been-hung-out-to-dry-by-rachel-reeves-budget-had-people-hollering-into-next-week/
https://www.thepoke.com/2024/06/19/telegraph-column-people-should-remember-how-had-they-good-it-under-the-tories/
And my favourite :
https://www.thepoke.com/2024/11/25/no-sympathy-for-castle-owner-complaining-that-tax-changes-will-affect-him/
Indeed, the Daily Telegraph (DT) has, increasingly noticeably during the past quarter-century, declined in stature as an organ for news, analysis, and opinion. At one time, the items of news the paper chose to publish were presented dispassionately, sometimes enhanced by a twist of humour. Similarly, analysis strove to be balanced, and clearly distinguished from reporting. Commissioned 'opinion pieces' were clearly delineated from news and analysis. Similarly, editorials could thunder to the delight of faithful readers without being mistaken for reportage.
All the historically 'broadsheet' newspapers have shifted away from an ethos of reliable gravitas: the DT and Guardian mostly so but in differing manners. Underlying causes are speculative, but likely are a mix of the following: (i) a changing commercial environment, (ii) decline in the number of potential readers of the previously anticipated educational/cultural level, and (iii) a concomitant match of the aforementioned decline in the pool of aspirant journalists, including those destined for editorial positions.
The DT's fall from grace has been exacerbated by increased reliance upon income from mail order goods and from sponsored 'content'. Inevitably, the target demographic has broadened. Crudely put, the DT at one time appealed to people with a bit of money and some taste, but now seeks anybody with disposable income who can be gulled by flighty pieces on 'lifestyle', 'celebrity', and conformity to what now has become 'influencer culture'.
In the past, the DT had appeal to people of a 'small c' conservative outlook, those not hostile to 'big C' Conservatism of the kind pertaining before Neoliberal economic and social policies were introduced during the 80s and subsequently embedded in all three major political parties. For some while, the DT appears aligned to policies emanating from the government in power, whether Con/Lib coalition, Con alone, or 'Newest' Labour.
The DT, and other media, knuckled-down to being handmaidens to Johnson's bizarre Covid-19 epidemic management orthodoxy and to NATO's ambitions based upon the USA 'Brzeziński doctrine': the era of MSM's enthusiastic participation in censorship and propagandising. The DT, perhaps other media also, stooped to going beyond censoring (i.e, deleting) readers' online comments and engaged in criminal deception by 'shadow-banning' some paying subscribers' comments. The State adopted a stratagem akin to that of Nazi Germany by attempting to forbid access to alternative news sources (e.g. RT). Records show that in comparison with recent times, the UK suppresses dissident opinion far more keenly than during WW2, perhaps a throwback to WW1.
It will be fascinating to watch how the DT and other 'loyal' media cope with the latest twist in the game of pillorying Russia now Mr Trump is in a hairsbreadth of making the EU/UK declare the USA a trade enemy rather than competitor.
> Ia hairsbreadth of making the EU/UK declare the USA a trade enemy rather than competitor.
We are too reliant on the US to do that though. We depend in them militarily (which may change with higher spending) we rely heavily on American suppliers for IT - the government heavily uses AWS and similar, everyone relies on MS, Google and Apple at work and as consumers, card and phone payment systems are American.....
Unless we are prepared to spend a lot of time and money we have to grin and bear it.
I ahve been warning about the foolishness of relying so much on the US for years, not happy to be proved right, but a tad smug.
...... Words Can and Do So Easily Create, Remotely Command and Virtually Control and Practically Destroy both Orderly Epic Psychotic and Manic CHAOS* Driven Worlds ‽
*Clouds Hosting Advanced Operating Systems ....... [with Clouds being just another cover name for AI in a foreign language providing it a convenient and acceptable alien disguise for LOVE RAT** Operations and Special Advanced IntelAIgent Research Services]
** Live Operational Virtual Environment Remote Access Trojan.
The posit here is that the answer to those awkward questions is an unqualified and resounding YES ....... and Earthly SCADA Systems are catastrophically vulnerable to remote alien exploitation and export of wealth situations to render them incapable of effective future gain of function with zero facility to either compete against or oppose the Engagement of Existential Threat ACTors.
I had a rude awakening about this relatively recently (a year or so ago).
I've avoided them for a while because of their blatant biases and "truth distortions", but I accidentally stumbled across one article that was so batshit crazy I had to confirm I hadn't stumbled onto a parody site.
Newspapers are experts on deliberately making click-bait headlines like this to gain attention.
Headline: “Expert reports on bananas causing cancer”
Article: “They don’t”
Headline: “x hates y”
Article: “x denies they hate y after repeated rumours”
I’d be very surprised if this wasn’t completely deliberate, yet they’ve reversed once found out (once they’ve received the advertising intended from this marketing exercise)
"if you have diabetes you need to avoid X" = notice (to people selling X) that "protection" money is due (again)
"you really must X if you have diabetes" = notice that payment has been received (from people selling X)
---
"I do my double-show, quick!" said Mick the Prick, fresh out the nick.
"I sell cheap holiday. The minute they leave, then a visit I pay."
- "Battle of Epping Forest", Genesis, "Selling England by the Pound"
Does anyone actually read these rags nowadays? Never much better than fish wrappers even in their heyday but fish now requires something more hygienic. Not that your average foaming, carpet biting Alf Garnet Tory would have been up to much in the literary line.
I wouldn't be surprised if their AI assisted subeditor sluiced out the Torygraph headlines of the 1895 Japanese incorporation of Formosa into their empire and mixed it up with the usual 21st century Taiwan Strait argy-bargy seasoned with a dollop of Trumpisstani secret sauce.
This Telegraph piece is actually relatively well written.
It suggests that, were there to be an actual invasion of Taiwan by China (2027 horizon), it would take Japanese and "American, Australian and Taiwanese fighters" to even the odds. But such "efforts may fall victim to the bizarre politics of Trump" and Gabbard who argued for "a softer stance toward China" with respect to Intelligence.
To turn this into WWIII requires considering a fuller Axis of Evil where Russia, North Korea, Pakistan, and TikTok BFFs align with China, while Australia, Canada, India, Europe, Ukraine and allies constitute the Freedom fighting anti-totalitarian opposing force. This is not addressed in the piece.
Either way, the 64,000 lb gorilla-in-the-room question remains of how the Trump administration would act: as Putin's poodle, or as Freedom fighter?
Trump's policies are all based on the expectation of new cold war with China. Even Gabbard is arguing for a relatively less confrontational approach, rather than a soft approach compared to previous US governments (and the tariffs show she has lost thta argument)
I would not bet on Russia backing China too strongly - they will happily sell them weapons and supplies though. I do not think Russia is that important.
I do not think that alliance could defeat a super power with US support.
Whenever future crushings arms are not required to be of physical manufacture for practical realisation and employment/deployment, John Brown (no body), there’ll be more than just Russia terrified of being without necessary weapons and munitions for the exercise of coersive leadership from the high ground commanding battle for almighty victory by overwhelming forces with unlimited resources for then is all irrevocably changed and requires more than just a small prime number of radical and fundamental Quantum Leap Shifts in Thinking to both initially engage and subsequently maintain and retain prime and premium vested party interests which would be absolutely vital for secondary partner survival.
*..... JUST IN: Army Developing New Space Electronic Warfare System ..... https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2025/5/2/army-developing-new-space-electronic-warfare-system
Ps ...... What do you think, El Regers? Is Uncle Sam late once again to a leading global conflict with grand tales of universal significance to leak or kiss and tell?
Pps, BTW, ICYMI ...... that last Ps question was a rhetorical one. Your future thinking is already being done for you nowadays ...... although that is nothing really new which hasn’t been done before now, although presently and for the foreseeable future is it more capable hearts and minds and hands than was never ever possible nor available before ....... so don’t be fooled into thinking nothing has really been changed and things are going to remain very much the same as they have recently been ........ for that is not what you can expect to have to accept and engage with no matter what any of your leaderships and their tame mainstream media propaganda channels might tell you ...... or omit to tell you.
Remember Orson Welles (I think?) and his 1938 spoof radio broadcast claiming that "the Martians have landed". It caused amazing panic at the time, no doubt because of his sober gravitas. I bet it is still out there somewhere on the internet... But responsible?? Really??
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
