Search This Blog

Thursday, August 4, 2022

M&A Attractiveness Index Score ranks UK as number one investment destination in Europe

 The United Kingdom is now the top target in Europe for inbound and domestic investment, according to the latest M&A Attractiveness Index Score, as published by the Mergers and Acquisitions Research Centre (MARC) at Bayes Business School (formerly Cass).

The latest annual ranking – the first to incorporate the true effects that the Covid pandemic has had on individual nations as foreign direct investment targets – compared deal activity and attractiveness to investors of 148 countries worldwide.

Compiled by Dr Naaguesh Appadu, Research Fellow at Bayes, the report also provides additional analysis into the opportunities and challenges facing countries, including the clear emergence of environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations from investors when completing a deal and the importance of strong national infrastructures.

The latest data includes a ranking for countries without the consideration of Covid in its methodology as well, allowing for a snapshot of how the pandemic has affected investment decisions around the world. 

Key findings from the report include:

  • The United Kingdom has risen six places year-on-year to 3rd globally – under the updated methodology – behind the United States (1st) and Singapore (2nd). In doing so, the UK leapfrogs the Netherlands and Germany to become the most attractive European country for inbound and domestic investment.
  • Fiji (up 12 places to 46th), Brunei (up 11 places to 30th), Australia (up 10 places to 11th) and Mauritius (up 10 places to 50th) are the biggest risers in the list, showing an emergence in South East Asia. All four nations plus New Zealand (15th) also rank significantly higher than they would have done without consideration for Covid – displaying robust investor confidence in the stricter national measures adopted by each respectively.
  • Advancements in ESG concerns for investors are seen as the biggest strength among many of the top 20-ranked countries, with infrastructure and asset quality cited as the predominant characteristic behind the top three countries (United States, Singapore, United Kingdom).
  • Conversely, socio-economic factors represented the greatest market challenge to the top eight ranked countries, and 15 out of the top 20. These factors include size and demographics of the population, death and recovery rates related to Covid-19 and unemployment levels.

The data provide the first in-depth look at how Covid has impacted on many countries and regions across the world, while suggesting potential direction of travel for countries following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – even though the longer-term effects of this are yet to be seen.

Dr Appadu said:

“The M&A Attractiveness Index Score examines where investment activity is most heavily focussed, and predicts regional trends.

“Since our first report in 2009, we have evolved and improved the methodology to create greater accuracy in line with changing market forces across the globe. This year, we have successfully managed to integrate the effects of Covid-19 into our modelling to be able to look more closely at the winners and losers of the pandemic.

“The UK continues to defy expectations post-Brexit, rising six places globally based on the most recent calculation methodology and becoming the most attractive European target for investment. The UK’s response to Covid, including the furlough scheme which helped businesses survive and the speed in delivering vaccinations, has no doubt contributed to its sustainability as an attractive place for investment.

“Interestingly, members of the European Union have endured mixed fortunes since the start of the pandemic. Despite making steady progress in the rankings, Covid appears to have held back Germany (8th), Spain (13th) and Italy (30th) – all of whom were declared as coronavirus hotspots at different stages of the pandemic.

“Sector specifics are also important to observe, with technology and healthcare in high demand during pandemic lockdowns – while hospitality, tourism and leisure generally felt the pinch of a lack of investment. Countries and regions that were able to attract investment in the former were always well positioned to perform better than those specialising in the latter.

“It will be fascinating to see how global patterns continue to develop, particularly in relation to recent events in Ukraine.”

Methodology

The Index is designed to evaluate the capacity of a given country to attract and sustain M&A activity. It is a weighted average composite of twenty-one indicators that aggregate into six factor groups: Regulatory and Political, Economic and Financial, Technological, Socio-economic, Infrastructure and Assets and Environmental, Social and Governance. In order to reach the final score for each country, 75 per cent is weighted to the index with the remaining 25 per cent weighted by that year’s domestic and in-bound cross-border M&A activity.

The United Kingdom is now the top target in Europe for inbound and domestic investment, according to the latest M&A Attractiveness Index Score, as published by the Mergers and Acquisitions Research Centre (MARC) at Bayes Business School (formerly Cass).

The latest annual ranking – the first to incorporate the true effects that the Covid pandemic has had on individual nations as foreign direct investment targets – compared deal activity and attractiveness to investors of 148 countries worldwide.

Compiled by Dr Naaguesh Appadu, Research Fellow at Bayes, the report also provides additional analysis into the opportunities and challenges facing countries, including the clear emergence of environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations from investors when completing a deal and the importance of strong national infrastructures.

The latest data includes a ranking for countries without the consideration of Covid in its methodology as well, allowing for a snapshot of how the pandemic has affected investment decisions around the world. 

Key findings from the report include:

  • The United Kingdom has risen six places year-on-year to 3rd globally – under the updated methodology – behind the United States (1st) and Singapore (2nd). In doing so, the UK leapfrogs the Netherlands and Germany to become the most attractive European country for inbound and domestic investment.
  • Fiji (up 12 places to 46th), Brunei (up 11 places to 30th), Australia (up 10 places to 11th) and Mauritius (up 10 places to 50th) are the biggest risers in the list, showing an emergence in South East Asia. All four nations plus New Zealand (15th) also rank significantly higher than they would have done without consideration for Covid – displaying robust investor confidence in the stricter national measures adopted by each respectively.
  • Advancements in ESG concerns for investors are seen as the biggest strength among many of the top 20-ranked countries, with infrastructure and asset quality cited as the predominant characteristic behind the top three countries (United States, Singapore, United Kingdom).
  • Conversely, socio-economic factors represented the greatest market challenge to the top eight ranked countries, and 15 out of the top 20. These factors include size and demographics of the population, death and recovery rates related to Covid-19 and unemployment levels.

The data provide the first in-depth look at how Covid has impacted on many countries and regions across the world, while suggesting potential direction of travel for countries following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – even though the longer-term effects of this are yet to be seen.

Dr Appadu said:

“The M&A Attractiveness Index Score examines where investment activity is most heavily focussed, and predicts regional trends.

“Since our first report in 2009, we have evolved and improved the methodology to create greater accuracy in line with changing market forces across the globe. This year, we have successfully managed to integrate the effects of Covid-19 into our modelling to be able to look more closely at the winners and losers of the pandemic.

“The UK continues to defy expectations post-Brexit, rising six places globally based on the most recent calculation methodology and becoming the most attractive European target for investment. The UK’s response to Covid, including the furlough scheme which helped businesses survive and the speed in delivering vaccinations, has no doubt contributed to its sustainability as an attractive place for investment.

“Interestingly, members of the European Union have endured mixed fortunes since the start of the pandemic. Despite making steady progress in the rankings, Covid appears to have held back Germany (8th), Spain (13th) and Italy (30th) – all of whom were declared as coronavirus hotspots at different stages of the pandemic.

“Sector specifics are also important to observe, with technology and healthcare in high demand during pandemic lockdowns – while hospitality, tourism and leisure generally felt the pinch of a lack of investment. Countries and regions that were able to attract investment in the former were always well positioned to perform better than those specialising in the latter.

“It will be fascinating to see how global patterns continue to develop, particularly in relation to recent events in Ukraine.”

Methodology

The Index is designed to evaluate the capacity of a given country to attract and sustain M&A activity. It is a weighted average composite of twenty-one indicators that aggregate into six factor groups: Regulatory and Political, Economic and Financial, Technological, Socio-economic, Infrastructure and Assets and Environmental, Social and Governance. In order to reach the final score for each country, 75 per cent is weighted to the index with the remaining 25 per cent weighted by that year’s domestic and in-bound cross-border M&A activity.

Download a full copy of M&A Attractiveness Index 2021 report from the MARC website.

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/960896

IDing patients at high risk of blood clot formation

 Blood clots are thought to occur in as many as a third of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. In many cases these clots can be deadly, such as pulmonary embolisms—blood clots that travel to the lungs. In fact, in nearly one third of patients with COVID-19, these clots led to death.

An abnormal immune response is thought to be the major driver of severe COVID-19. One protein, called soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor, or suPAR, circulates in the blood and originates from immune cells and has been shown to play a major role in complications of COVID-19.

Salim Hayek, M.D., Medical Director of the University of Michigan Frankel Cardiovascular Center Clinics, Shengyuan Luo, M.D., internal medicine resident physician at Rush University Medical Center and a team of researchers from around the world have been studying suPAR and its relationship to critical outcomes in COVID-19 cases.

In a publication by the International Study of Inflammation in COVID-19, a multinational observational study of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, researchers found that higher suPAR levels were associated with increased risk of blood clot formation.

Their new findings, published in the Journal of the American Heart Association, suggest that suPAR levels in hospitalized COVID patients were associated with venous thromboembolism including pulmonary embolism independently from a marker of blood clot formation called D-dimer.

“Traditionally, clinicians utilize D-dimer, a blood clot breakdown product, to assess VTE activity,” Luo said. “However, this marker has proven to be less predictive in COVID-19, as blood clot formation is in large part caused by a uniquely abnormal immune response to the virus.”

The authors therefore conceived that combining suPAR, a marker of the immune system, and D-dimer could improve the reliability of determining who is at high or low risk of blood clot formation among COVID hospitalized patients.

“Even before the pandemic, before COVID-19, we had this idea about suPAR,” Hayek said. “We were seeing levels of the suPAR marker as the strongest risk factor for bad outcomes in other viral infections and in heart and kidney disease.” 

When researchers discovered the severity of blood clots forming in COVID-19 patients early in the pandemic, they turned to suPAR for more insight. Earlier studies showed that suPAR levels were three to five times higher in COVID-19 patients and often associated with disease complications.

“We had previously shown that patients with high suPAR levels are at much higher risk of death, kidney injury, respiratory failure needing mechanical ventilation and now venous thromboembolism,” said Hayek.

Study findings

In the study, researchers compiled data from 1,960 adults who were hospitalized for COVID-19 and who had their suPAR levels measured at the time of admission to the hospital. All patients were monitored until they were either discharged, or in some cases, until death.

Important attributes for patients in this study included: age, sex, race, and body mass index. Additional medical conditions assessed upon admission included: diabetes, hypertension, congestive heart failure, stroke and other critical cardiology and inflammatory diseases.

Researchers measured D-dimer and suPAR levels over a 30-day period during patients’ hospitalizations and diagnosed VTE (deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) using ultrasounds of the lower extremities and scans of the lungs.

Results showed that VTE occurred in 163 patients, and of those, 65 patients developed deep vein thrombosis, 88 patients developed a pulmonary embolus, and 10 patients developed both. Patients who developed blood clots had suPAR levels nearly 50% higher than those who did not develop clots. And, when suPAR levels were combined with D-dimer, researchers could classify 41% of study participants to have low-risk for occurrence of VTE.

“There is a modest positive correlation between suPAR and D-dimer levels; they both tend to trend in the same direction,” explained Hayek.

Now that the association is made between suPAR levels and blood clot formation, clinicians could assess who is at high or low risk, which will help them decide what therapies to use to treat them. For example, someone at high risk could be given medications before blood clot formation.

Studying suPAR and its link to the immune system has positive implications within critical COVID-19 patients, and beyond.

“In the background, there’s been a lot of work showing that this molecule (suPAR) is doing something bad to the body when levels are high,” Hayek said. “Companies are developing drugs to target suPAR, and so we might be measuring this on a regular basis.”

Hayek is optimistic about preventing critical outcomes within COVID-19 and other infectious diseases, and what the Michigan Medicine COVID-19 Cohort and the International Study of Inflammation in COVID-19 have been able to accomplish since the start of the pandemic.

Current studies are underway to test anti-suPAR therapies in patients with COVID-19.

“In the next year or so, we might be able to impact critical care in several other populations with implications that go beyond COVID,” said Hayek.

 

Additional authors: Shengyuan Luo, MBBS, M.H.S; Alexi Vasbinder, Ph.D, RN; Jeanne M. Du-Fay-de-Lavallaz, M.D.; Joanne Michelle D. Gomez, M.D.; Tisha Suboc, M.D.; Elizabeth Anderson, M.P.H; Annika Tekumulla; Husam Shadid, M.D.; Hanna Berlin, M.D.; Michael Pan, M.D.; Tariq U. Azam, M.D.; Ibrahim Khaleel, M.D.; Kishan Padalia, M.D.; Chelsea Meloche, M.D.; Patrick O’Hayer, M.D.; Tonimarie Catalan, B.S.; Pennelope Blakely, B.S.; Christopher Launius, B.S.; Kingsley-Michael Amadi, B.S.; Rodica Pop-Busui, M.D., Ph.D.; Sven H. Loosen, M.D.; Athanasios Chalkias, M.D.; Frank Tacke, M.D.; Evangelos J. Giamarellos-Bourboulis, M.D., Ph.D.; Izzet Altintas, M.D.; Jesper Eugen-Olsen, Ph.D.; Kim A. Williams, M.D.; Annabelle Santos Volgman, M.D.; Jochen Reiser, M.D., Ph.D.

Study cited: “Soluble Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor and Venous Thromboembolism in COVID-19,” Journal of the American Heart AssociationDOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.025198

 

Cancers and heart disease could be diagnosed more easily with new rapid test

 Imperial researchers have built a new easy-to-use test that could diagnose non-infectious diseases like heart attacks and cancers more quickly.

The new test works by detecting molecular signals in the body called biomarkers, which are already used in things like COVID-19 testing where the presence of SARS-CoV-2 genes indicates COVID-19.  There are also biomarkers for non-infectious diseases: for example, prostate specific antigen (PSA) in the blood can sometimes act as a biomarker to indicate the presence of prostate cancer.

Diagnostic tests based on RNA or DNA often require controlled temperatures and involve multiple steps. The new test can be used at room temperature in a user-friendly process.

The researchers hope this could enable quicker and easier diagnostics in settings like GP surgeries, as well as in resource-limited clinics in developing countries.

The new test, called CrisprZyme, has been developed by a team of researchers led by Imperial College London, MIT, and Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in Berlin. They say the test could boost access to biomarker diagnostics. The results of preliminary lab studies of the test are published today in Nature Nanotechnology.

First author Dr Marta Broto, of Imperial’s Department of Materials, said: “As well as potentially boosting access to diagnostics in developing countries, this technology could bring us a step closer to personalised diagnostics at home or at the GP surgery. By making clinical diagnostic tests simpler, we will be able to provide clinicians with the right tools to test at the same GP surgery instead of having to reschedule for follow-up analyses and blood tests.”

CRISPR-inspired

CrisprZyme builds on CRISPR diagnostic tests, which use RNA – the messenger that helps create proteins – to detect biomarkers in biological fluids like blood or urine. In their current form, these tests detect RNA and then amplify this RNA by creating many copies so that the signal is easier to read.

However, these amplifying technologies must be temperature controlled to work, which requires expensive equipment. Additionally, although they tell medics whether an infectious disease is present, they cannot provide information about how much biomarker is present, which is important for monitoring non-infectious diseases like heart diseases and cancer.

CrisprZyme improves this technology by replacing the amplification process with colorimetric analysis – a method that determines the amount of biomarker present without the need for amplification. This eliminates the need for temperature control and additional steps, and can also reveal how much of a biomarker is present in a sample.

Senior author Professor Molly Stevens FRS FREng, of Imperial’s Departments of Materials and Bioengineering, said: “Our test, like others, indicates when a biomarker is present, but CrisprZyme is a simpler diagnostic than those currently available. What also sets it apart is that it can tell us just how much biomarker is present, which can help us not just with diagnosing a disease, but with monitoring its progress over time and in response to treatment.”

“Following further development and testing in the lab, we hope this could help take us a step closer to personalised medicine whereby treatment is tailored more specifically to patients’ needs.”

To eliminate the amplification step, the researchers used nanozymes – tiny synthetic materials that behave like enzymes. Their enzymatic-like activity increases the signal of the test making the colorimetric analysis easier to read.

The technology does not quite remove all the steps, as the sample must still be treated with chemicals to extract the desired biomarker before it’s run through the test. The researchers are continuing to upgrade their technology by studying alternatives for sample treatment to make it even more user-friendly.

This work was funded by the British Heart Foundation, the EPSRC IRC in Early Warning Sensing Systems for Infectious Diseases (i-sense), the Department of Defense Prostate Cancer Research Program, the Royal Academy of Engineering, and the Rosetrees Trust.

Marker Therapeutics Shares Double After Hours, FDA Approves IND for MT-601

 Shares of Marker Therapeutics Inc. jumped in after-hours trading Thursday, following news the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the company's investigational new drug application for MT-601 to treat certain patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

At 5:54 p.m. ET, the company's shares were trading 100% higher at 66 cents a share. Volume in the after-hours market was over 2.4 million shares.

Peter L. Hoang, the company's president and chief executive, said, "FDA clearance of our IND for MT-601 is a significant milestone as we advance our pipeline in a number of company-sponsored trials." He added that MT-601 targets six tumor-associated antigens highly expressed in lymphoma, and said, "we look forward to initiating our company-sponsored Phase 1 study next year."

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/MARKER-THERAPEUTICS-INC-46699740/news/Marker-Therapeutics-Shares-Double-After-Hours-FDA-Approves-IND-for-MT-601-41208644/

Amgen 2Q Profit Jumped After Write-Off From 2021 Acquisition

 Amgen Inc.'s profit jumped in the second quarter after a write-off associated with an acquisition last year reduced operating expenses.

The Thousand Oaks, Calif.-based company reported net income of $1.32 billion in the three months through June, compared with $464 million in the same period a year earlier. Earnings per share reached $2.45 from 81 cents and adjusted earnings per share rose to $4.65 from $1.77. Revenue increased to $6.6 billion from $6.5 billion in the year-earlier period.

The sales figure was slightly better than expected, and the profit number underperformed market expectations. The median forecast by analysts surveyed by FactSet was for sales of $6.5 billion and net income of $2.4 billion.

Amgen said the rise in profit was driven by lower operating expenses after writing off $1.5 billion in acquired in-process research and development associated with the acquisition of Five Prime Therapeutics in the second quarter of last year. Total operating expenses fell to $4.4 billion from $5.7 billion a year earlier.

Amgen said earlier Thursday that it plans to buy ChemoCentryx Inc. for $3.7 billion in cash, giving Amgen access to a treatment for ANCA-associated vasculitis that was approved by the Food and Drug Administration last year.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/AMGEN-INC-4847/news/Amgen-2Q-Profit-Jumped-After-Write-Off-From-2021-Acquisition-41207048/

DeSantis Sends Cops To Physically Remove Suspended 'Soros-Backed' State Attorney

 Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has suspended State Attorney Andrew Warren for 'picking and choosing which laws to enforce based on his personal agenda,' and has appointed Susan Lopez as his replacement during the suspension.

Warren, who had served the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, has most recently refused to follow state policy criminalizing abortion in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade - and repeatedly refused to enforce laws cracking down on child sex-change surgeries, according to DeSantis.

The liberal state attorney also declined to prosecute 67 protesters arrested in George Floyd demonstrations, and said in 2017 that he would only pursue the death penalty "in the very worst cases," and not where "mental illness played a role."

"We are suspending Soros-backed 13th circuit state attorney Andrew Warren for neglecting his duties as he pledges not to uphold the laws of the state," DeSantis' office said in a statement, per Fox News.

Update: DeSantis sent state police to physically remove Warren from his office, "with access only to retrieve his personal belongings, and (ii) to ensure that no files, papers, documents, notes, records, computers, or removable storage media are removed from the Office of the State Attorney..."

DeSantis made the announcement at a Thursday press conference surrounded by Hillsborough County Sheriff Chad Chronister, Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody and others.

"The constitution of Florida has vested the veto power in the governor, not in individual state attorneys," DeSantis said. "so, when you flagrantly violate your oath of office .. when you make yourself above the law, you have violated your duty and you have neglected your duty, and you are displaying a lack of competence to be able to perform those duties," he continued.

"And so today we are suspending state attorney Andrew Warren, effective immediately," DeSantis concluded to applause.

DeSantis' office issued a statement regarding the suspension.

"This isn't about abortion or any one thing, it's about having accountability to our system of law and order to prosecute crime. There has been a pattern developing in Hillsborough County where one person picks and chooses which laws he wishes to enforce," DeSantis' office stated.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/desantis-suspends-state-attorney-violating-oath-refusing-enforce-laws

Besties: Twitter, Facebook, Google, CDC, NIH, & WHO

 by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

Many of us with a libertarian frame of mind presume as a matter of theory that the interests of business are at odds with those of government. That’s generally true for businesses of a certain size. The regulations and taxes one faces in running an enterprise in the “land of free” are utterly shocking, as any small business owner can tell you. Even gaining the legal right to pay an employee is an arduous undertaking. 

But matters change for any large businesses, especially industry leaders.

Here the problem of mutual capture – business deeply involved in regulatory agencies to the point that which is the hand and which is the glove is not clear – is pervasive. It’s been an issue since the Gilded Age, as historians know.

The bigger the government, the bigger the problem of these government-business partnerships. 

It’s always worse in a war, when the opportunities for racketeering by ostensibly private enterprise are legion. That includes the war on the virus, which has been brutal on small businesses but a fabulous reward for large media enterprises. 

Rarely do we experience this in such a direct way as we did during the pandemic.

We were amazed to see huge corporations that control vast amounts of digital communications openly censoring on behalf of the CDC and the WHO.

We know because they said so, and still do. Perhaps we might have assumed that administrators of these companies were as confused about the science as the politicians were. Maybe it was civic pride at work here. 

A trove of emails obtained by America First Legal tells a far more alarming story. The 286-page stack of correspondence reveals a cozy and daily working relationship between people in a position of control between Twitter, Facebook, Google, the CDC, NIH, and the WHO. They shared strategies, advertising ideas, and messaging. They talked up grants and privileges for each other, all designed to crush and exclude contrary narratives. They set up meetings and shared mutual compliments. 

They became besties. 

In one page, the CDC flagged posts that it did not like and Twitter responded. This was a period in which people were being targeted for banning by Twitter. It was never clear why some posts got through and some were triggers for bans. Now we know why: the CDC essentially produced a hit list. 

Among those targeted was Naomi Wolf, who, so far as I know, was the first to reveal the relationship between vaccination and irregular menstrual patterns. For talking about this subject, she was permanently banned by Twitter. This direct hit was ordered by the CDC itself. 

Now, you might say, whatever you might believe about the flagged posts, this is a violation of the First Amendment! It’s fine for Twitter to have its own terms of use and kick people off as it sees fit. It’s something else entirely when the company is acting on the exhortations of deep-state bureaucrats who find themselves annoyed that someone believes in the right to exercise free speech. Surely there will be years of court challenges to this practice, as there should be. 

What you have here is a government profoundly aware of the legal limits on its own ability to shut down dissenting voices, and thereby leaning on private enterprise to do the deed. But very clearly they did not have to lean too hard. Tragically, there were high-end people at these companies who were very excited to do the government’s bidding. That was all about suppressing human liberty, and gagging the people who worried that this might not be a good idea.

Feels Like Feudalism 

Ever since reading through these emails, I’ve been struck by the strange friendliness of all the emails. There is obvious absence of the supposed conflict between enterprise and government that animates most conversation between left, right, and libertarian. Indeed, they all seem highly collegial and filled with mutual flattery, as if making these connections and plotting the messaging amounted to doing a solid and professional job. The lack of self-awareness is palpable. 

The relationship between Big Tech – and all aspiring reporters and enterprises – is very clearly complex, and elusive of ideological categorization. It is also corrupt, exploitative of the interests of the people, and at odds with the interest of Enlightenment values. How can freedom stand a chance when it is so viciously squeezed between the controlling interest groups, who are the powerful in society? 

They believe they are the lords and we are the peasants. 

Here is an example of what I mean. Last week, Anthony Fauci deigned to appear in the show Rising, as sponsored by The Hill. It was in this interview that Fauci said that if he had it to do over again, he would have pushed “more stringent restrictions.” He also claimed that he “didn’t recommend locking anything down,” which is unbearably untrue

What’s more interesting is the backdrop to preparation for the interview. A leading reporter for the show is Kim Iversen, who would have loved the chance to question Fauci based on her extensive reporting and knowledge of all things Covid. At the last moment, she was blocked from being on. 

The remaining two reporters were clearly aware of the corporate need to go pretty easy on Fauci. Why? We know from his extensive emails that he is hyper-focused on curating his media appearances. He doesn’t want uncomfortable questions. He turns down most requests and is thereby in a position to extract concessions from venues. The venues want him on the show to drive traffic and credibility. 

You can watch the appearance here and make your own judgment on how it went in the absence of Ms. Iversen. 

Ms. Iversen is a rare case of a reporter who has no interest in playing the game. After all this transpired, she quit the show based on her conviction that if she cannot report the truth, there really is no point in staying with a company. Clearly, in her view, The Hill was more interested in maintaining good relations with deep-state actors than in reporting the truth. So she bailed, and god bless her for that.

This is but a small look at the much deeper problem, which is the symbiotic relationship between the administrative state, Big Tech, and Big Media. They work together to forge a narrative and stick to it. We know that now better than we ever have. This involves shutting down dissident voices and curating content in a way that serves ruling-class interests. 

Two weeks ago, I wrote the following:

This is why, while journalists can often hound elected politicians and their appointees, from Watergate to Russiagate and every “gate” in between, they tend towards a hands-off approach to the massive administrative bureaucracies that hold the real power in modern democracies. The press and the deep state live off each other. What that means is ominous to consider: what you read in the papers and hear on TV from the industry-dominant sources is nothing more than an amplification of deep-state priorities and propaganda. The problem has been growing for well over a hundred years and now it is the source of enormous corruption on all sides. 

I observed this before the recent revelations of the direct relationship between social media and Covid enforcers. You are welcome to look at the emails here and form your own judgment. What we see here is not tension, much less conflict, but unity. Unity in what? My strong impression is that it is unity in power. They know they have it, are thrilled to exercise it, and happy to be in touch with others of the same ilk. 

For want of a better phrase, we might call this profound “class consciousness” of the 1% of technology admins and bureaucratic managers in government. The distinction between the two is no longer clear, which should be confounding for any political worldview that posits an inherent conflict between public and private. 

We can add to this class observation something even more tactile. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which exercised outsized influence on the pandemic response, has also funded nearly all mainstream media venues to the tune of $315 million, the details of which are reported here

From this we can observe that it is not only class but also money: more precisely, the two go together. It makes it all-the-more offensive that this philanthropic empire which pushed the lockdowns and funded the media empires that controlled the narrative was built in the old fashioned way: by making and selling computers and software. 

There’s an apocryphal quote attributed to Vladimir Lenin that predicted how capitalists would sell the rope from which they would eventually hang. He probably never said that. The truth of our times is just as grim. The freedoms that have been taken away from us made possible the fortunes that have led to the advance of serfdom and poverty the world over. 

Making matters worse, there’s an ongoing plot to make it very difficult even to complain about it. Unless you happen upon the right channels, media sources, research institutes, and journalists, you can be made to believe that you are nothing but what they consider you to be: a peasant without rights, free only to do and say that to which they grant you permission. And no more. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/besties-twitter-facebook-google-cdc-nih-who