On December 9 last year, ČT broadcast the program Máte slovo, where she refused to let the previously invited lawyer Jindřich Rajchlo in as a guest, who immediately drew attention to this on your Facebook.
He also commented on this topic in interview for the program Incorrect.
I will just remind you that this censorship intervention, as Jindřich Rajchl talks about it, was directly under the pressure of Professor Šeb (one of the guests - a big supporter of compulsory vaccination) and probably also directly from the Ministry of Health.
The ČT Council received a number of complaints about this broadcast due to its absolute imbalance and incorrectness (you can watch the recording here).
And now, this Wednesday, the Council finally decided, rather surprisingly:
"The council notes that moderator Jílková was not telling the truth..."
"The Council took the position that there was a gross violation of the CT Code by the presenter...”
The full text of the statement
In Prague on May 18, 2022
Dear Master,
On May 18, 2022, the CT Council dealt with your complaint about the program Mát slovo broadcast on December 9, 2021 on CT1. Since the council received more complaints about the program in question, the council evaluated them and divided them into the following four areas: 1/ Influence on the selection of guests
2/ The false statement of Mrs. Michaela Jílková that JUDr. Rajchl was invited to the audience, but did not come of his own free will
3/ Censorship of text messages sent by CT viewers during the program Máte slovo
4/ Violation of the principle of maintaining objectivity on the part of ČT, where the complainants point to the gross tendency and imbalance in the conduct of the discussion by the presenter of the program, Michaela Jílková.
1) The Council states, that on this point, it cannot issue a decision on the validity or illegitimacy of the complaint. The matter goes beyond its normal possibilities of monitoring when processing complaints, and the Council does not have the means, which, for example, the court has, to verify — who, when, how and with whom exactly communicated, because it is a claim of the complainant against the claim of ČT. It is not possible for the Council to assess whether the change in the case of the invitation of JUDr. Rajchla decided the program's dramaturg himself and prof. In the communication, he was just "warming up his importance", or was the change really made based on the intervention of prof. Sheba.
2) The Council states, that presenter Jílková was not telling the truth when she told the audience: "Mr. Rajchl was invited to the audience. I was looking forward to him. It is his business that he did not come.” This statement of the presenter is in direct contradiction not only to what JUDr. Rajchl, but also with the statement of the show's dramaturg.
There is no doubt that JUDr. Rajchl was in the gatehouse CT before filming the show, he demanded entry and was not allowed. That it was not some kind of misunderstanding follows directly from the opinion of dramaturg Smrž, which he sent to the Council, where it is written: "So both Messrs. Mareček and Rajchl, aware that they were not counted in the discussion in the studio, deliberately came to the reception that evening, in order to acquire "compromising" material that they planned to share with other vaccination deniers in support of their political goals, they were not really going to participate in the program on the evening of December 9, 2021."
3) Dramaturg of the show rejected claims of censorship of received text messages and stated in a statement to the ČT Council: "All text messages from viewers that do not contain vulgar, racist or xenophobic views will be shown on the screen and will arrive on time. Just because of the high interest and the high number of messages, it may not reach everyone. During the peak of the epidemic in the fall, SMS senders were extremely interested in the topic of mandatory vaccination."
In order to be able to better assess this issue, the Council decided to request statistics from the management of ČT, which will show the number of all received non-vulgar, non-racist and non-xenophobic SMSes that came during the broadcast of the program in question, as well as the number of SMSes displayed.
4) The Council took the position that that there was a gross violation of the CT Code by the moderator. Specifically, Article 5.14 ("Czech Television editors must act in such a way that the viewer cannot recognize their opinion on the matter they are reporting on when appearing in news and current affairs programs)". And that despite being alone CT she described this episode as a program that should be approached "with caution" because the chosen topic of the coronavirus epidemic is "accompanied by gross manipulations of public opinion".
The council substantiates its opinion with, for example, the following sentences that were heard in the program:
Jílková: "Are you going to let the experts answer your misinformation?", "Where do you get the assurance that you, with your education, understand Torna more than the two professors here?", "Why do you think you're right when you don't have the education to do so?"
This interview of Mrs. Jílková with the head of the Vinohradská hospital Zeman is also proof of the violation of the principle of impartiality of the moderator:
Jílková: "Doctor, I'm begging you, you don't work in the intensive care unit." Zeman: "But I worked there."
Jílková: "No, you're not there now."
Zeman: "I'm not there now, but do you think I can't imagine it?"
Jílková: "No, probably not."
Based on this violation of the Code, the Council asked the General Director of ČT to inform the Council of the consequences he drew from the above findings, both towards the authors of the report and directly towards JUDr. Rajchl.
On behalf of the Council of Czech Television, with kind regards
M.Sc. Pavel Matocha
Chairman of the Council of Czech Television
You will best support my work buys books,
if you don't read, you can and otherwise....
Do you still remember this scandal from the program Mát slovo, when the covid authority dictated to Czech Television who it could invite to its program to discuss covid measures, and who it could ban from television?
The tradition of servility and pre-shitness of Czech journalists continues. The monotonous chatter of two vaccination fanatics Prymula and Chlíbek in a discussion about the covid era on news interrupted the moderator with a shameful confession of a mainstream press officer, uttered naively between speeches in the middle of the hour-long discussion: "We invited, or wanted to invite, for example, Mr. Jiří Beran to the studio, you [Prymula] did not want to talk to him about it here in the studio." (at 30:07 min.)
In short, the great Mr. Prymula did not want to discuss with someone who would disturb too much the official interpretation of covid-tyranny according to the official interpretation and assignment of the WHO. That is why he ordered the journalists from Novinek that if they invite Prof. Aries, he won't come to their studio. And our "independent" journalists again willingly bowed their heads and met the covid-fanatic, and instead of the "problematic" Aries, they invited his friend Colonel Chlíbek so that they could echo each other.
The incriminated screen from the discussion here
These TV shows – Mát slovo, Otázky Václav Moravec, Partie – what kind of people watch it?
Lobotomies 😛
This program should be called "Slovo má Jílková", not Máte slovo. CT should be financed from the state budget so that it is possible to monitor the use of funds. Currently, this is not the case. And the viewer should choose whether and to whom to contribute. Today they call it Concession tax, but this tax is simply a tax, because it is imposed by law.
Do not trust the government, avoid all mass media (ČT, CNN, Seznam, Idnes…..).
The truth is constantly under attack, read independent (alternative) news while you still can!
Good day,
unfortunately, Cht really lies and does not provide objective information. I can imagine the pressure I was subjected to, Mrs. Jílková. But Mrs. Jílková, I do not accept the measure of guilt.