BUSTING "CODA STORY" FOR THEIR FAKE-NEWS ATTACK ON STOP5G ACTIVISTS CODA MEDIA THROUGH ITS SO-CALLED "DISINFORMATION CHANNEL" LAUNCHED AN ATTACK ON STOP5G ACTIVISTS. REZA GANJAVI UNFOLDED THEIR ATTACK AND FORCED THEM TO CORRECT THEIR HIT PIECE (18 correction demands). THEY WERE FORCED TO COMPLY BUT STILL SNEAKED IN SOME LIES AND DISINFORMATION! THEREFORE, I BELIEVE "CODA STORY" IS NO BETTER THAN THE CHEAPEST GARBAGE-QUALITY TABLOIDS WHICH MAKE UP FAKE STORIES TO ATTRACT READERSHIP. CODA'S "DISINFORMATION CHANNEL" IS NOW ON RECORD FOR CREATING DISINFORMATION! Whether Coda Media is a tool of the wicked wireless industry is not known to us but the industry has spent a LOT of money in lying to people, and attacking people who are calling out and exposing the lies. See EMF section of rezamusic.com for more info.
I, Reza Ganjavi, received a request from a Coda Story (Coda Media) journalist who wanted to interview me on the Stop5G activism. My activism in this field goes beyond just 5G, and spans the entire Wireless Pollution sphere (5G, 4G, WiFi, Bluetooth, Smartmeters, etc.)
Long story (below) short, the reporter, a young nice guy, freelance journalist, wrote an article which Coda refused to show it to me before publication. They sent a photographer here -- and he, a very nice guy, gave me the article. I was shocked when I read it as it contained a lot of cold blooded lies, fake news, disinformation, manipulation and twisting of facts. Turned out that the Editor had cherry picked the Reporter's words and helped the reporter in accentuating the fake news and fabrication of a fake story line based on extremely weak arguments, lies, and fake news.
I pushed back with a list of EIGHTEEN (18) required corrections. After a lot of struggle, including making legal threats, they finally made some of the changes and published the junk tabloid gossip article anyway (largely improved from the original version but still, not as truthful and clean as it should be). I lost all respect for Coda Story and believe they're hypocrites in portraying themselves as fair and interested in truth -- FAR CRY from it.
Emails below, sent by me, gives you an idea what hell I had to go through in fighting Coda's lies and disinformation attack on Stop5G activists.
Last Call -- to Natalia Antelava, CEO of Coda Media
1 March 2020 NATALIA -- What do you want to do about the outright LIES you've published? Just ignore them, ignore my demand, and bully your way to have falsehoods you've fabricated be out there as facts?! You really think you can get away with that?!
I was publishing a letter tonight to tell the world and your donors the story of Coda Media's fabrication of lies and fabrication of disinformation, which makes you no better than cheap, toilette-grade tabloids. Before I publish it, I suddenly thought I'd make one last overture to see if you're still standing by your LIES or you're willing to be decent to stand for truth by correcting the LIES you've fabricated.
I want to know if you're willing to correct your material falsehoods and errors in your pathetic junk article https://codastory.com/disinformation/warscience/5g-internet-misinformation/
Or you want to ignore it.
You have until end of Tuesday your time to let me know. If I hear nothing, I will conclude that you're arrogantly standing by your lies.
I am willing to work with you and my demands for correction are modest and reasonable. Contact me if you want by EoD March 3: < >
Open Letter To Natalia Antelava, CEO of Coda Media
5 Feb 2020
Burhan Wazir <Burhan@codastory.com>
As a fellow writer you know how it is, sometimes we have to put the idea in the right framework. In this case, in an "open letter" framework / tone, though I do not have specific plans to make it "open".
I was contacted by one of Coda Media "Coda Story" reporters for doing a story on our 5G fight. First thing I did was to check out Coda Media's website, and did some due diligence, which gave me the impression of legitimacy, that Coda is not a tabloid, and given what you say about your donors, Coda seemed ethical enough to not be puppets (or as I put it stronger sometimes "prostitutes") of big money, in this case, Big Wireless (like Verizon and New York Times' affair.
Therefore, I allowed your reported to come to my house, and interview me. I trusted him. I trusted you/Coda.
Later, Coda sent a photographer here. Again, he seemed professional and a nice person, so I allowed him in my house, trusted him, and trusted you/Coda.
The photographer gave me a copy of the article that was pending the photo.
I was (negatively) flabbergasted at the level of the inaccuracy of the article, and worse than that, the "fake news", tabloid, hit-piece, vicious, fictitious story line that gave me two speculations:
Same-same, same ol' batting for the wicked wireless industry disinformation and fake-news we fight with on a regular basis (e.g. systemic brainwashing of public by the industry cronies and their government puppets, that high/radio frequency electromagnetic frequency/radiation (RF-EMF) is safe (a big lie) -- this time creeping in through the backdoor to stab us in the back via another hit piece to try to portray our diligent sincere efforts to improve the world, help people, raise the awareness, fight-back against the lies and disinformation of Wireless industry.
Simply sloppy journalism with a tabloid mentality in mind, trying to fabricate a "sexy" yet false story line to entice readers, at the cost of reputation of me, and others who are diligently protesting this catastrophe.
In the process, I learned that this article is for the "disinformation" section of your journal -- and has actually, viciously portrayed me/us, the very people who are fighting disinformation on a daily basis, as centerfold of disinformation because your reporter found some statistically irrelevant and totally bogus and inapplicable statistics (how strong is 1%?) to trash talk our Stop5G Facebook group that has over 25,000 members worldwide.
The sentences were carefully and viciously crafted to manipulate the reader to believe the purported disinformation (1% of posts people submit are from Waking Times which at times is very accurate and surely far more accurate than the junk tabloid Coda Story was about to publish) is linked to the group management. Fact is some 25000 worldwide members submit articles -- we get lots of submissions, and as a management team, we are diligent in not allowing rouge article to slip through but given the volume, and fact we are volunteers and have limited time, something might slip through. But this entire topis is minuscule compared to the real "disinformation" that the Wireless Industry puts out which your article is ignoring (to the benefit of the industry, whether you intend it or not).
If I publish this letter I will list out all the fact twisting, nonsense, lies, and bogus fake news your article wrote which was extremely damaging to us and me. I had a session with the reporter who seems to be a nice guy. I read him some of the feedback I sent to your editor -- and he stated that the editor had written the sentences. In other words, the editor who had no contact with me, took the writer's sentences, twisted them around, cheery picked certain words, and fabricated a tabloid, fake, damaging, defamatory narrative.
I sent a list of 18 demands for correction. That's how trashy the article was.
I was told that most of my demands are implements. But I have a feeling based on the feedback the narrative at the end is not adjusted to remove the pro-industry approach.
I would like you to make sure the following two lines / links are added to the article.
The two people featured in the article, me and Dr. Hardell, actually collaborated in a massive letter that Dr. Hardell wrote to expose the disinformation by a key ICNIRP member. ICNIRP is a hub of disinformation. Please link to the letter at the end of the article where you talk about ICNIRP. It also appears on Dr. Hardell's Foundation website).
It's important that you link to the NTP's rebuttal to ICNIRP's response to NTP otherwise, you end the article, to industry's favor, with ICNIRP's lies and disinformation.
As for the rest of the comments, I have no idea what has been done. They're not showing me the article. But they know if I am defamed or put in a false light, I will have to take legal action -- I will file a civil suite in NY and demand a hefty punitive damage since this was done totally intentionally, and a criminal action in Switzerland where Coda has availed itself by sending your journalist to my house, and defamation and false light are criminal offenses under Swiss and mode European laws.
I will also send you a full text of the demands for correction I sent, if you like.
Then I heard that the photographer is being stiffed by Coda. After I gave my approval to him to release the photos to Coda (he had a professional obligation to respect my wish as the subject of the photos), Coda contacted him and asked for the photos, which meant, Coda did not care about his breach of the privacy in your contract (by giving me the article). Then Coda got his photos, and decided you don't want to use them and you're not going to pay his fee. This is very bad!! Here's a single father who relied on this money, and you stiff him like that after asking him for the photos which meant you did not care about his breach of contract.
Either Coda saw that the pictures look really good -- the person you want to portray and bash in order to trash talk anti-5G movement looks good, sharp, suite and tie, clean shaved, etc. And this didn't fit your agenda.
Or, you just decided to stiff the guy to save peanuts!
Or, I don't know.
It would be very nice of you to pay the fee you promised him. He traveled 7 hours on his own, without pay, and charged you for just the time to take the photos and travel, and you stiff him like that. Not cool! Please pay him, at least as a humanitarian gesture. The peanuts will not break you but it will help him a lot.
And Coda had the nerve to tell him that his disclosing the article to me created problem for you -- it's the exact opposite. It saved you from a sure lawsuit if the original article had been published.
PS -- your reporter is on record for saying he does NOT consider Youtube as a fringe source -- it'd be stupid to do so because Youtube has lots and lots of great, credible videos, including Ms. Atelava's talks.
So, PLEASE DO THE MATH. Add up your own bogus irrelevant statistics and you will see there's not even close to MANY and then think about journalistic integrity and all the good things you tell the public and your donors about yourselves and see the importance of being accurate and not "fake news". And fix that and the other problems.
I said bogus statistics, becuase the number not only do NOT add up to even close to MANY, some of those very few articles that are approved are absolutely accurate and FAR more accurate than Coda Story's tabloid piece which you can easily fix by doing the repairs below. If you refuse, I will have to try to remedy the situation in other ways -- either get a court to force you, and penalize you, and/or, take the time to write about what you exactly are and what you've done and distribute it widely including to your donors because it'd be my social responsibility to call out YOUR disinformation if you do not have the integrity to FIX your disinformation and lies as outlined below.
Please let me know. The longer this article lingers online in its present form the more the damage.
Waiting to hear from you <>
Formal Legal Demand For Correction
5 Feb 2020
Ms. Atelava, CEO, Coda Media
Your article has a number of serious issues that require correction. Please implement these changes immediately. The more people read this article the more damage it will cause. Please let me know if you're going to make these changes or not, and when.
<SENT LIST OF CORRECTIONS TO THE PUBLISHED ARTICLE>
Please let me know what you plan to do about this, so I can weigh my next steps, including legal action if I have to but why not get civilized and spend 5 minutes and address these concerns. TRUTH should be more important to you than pounding out junk tabloid gossip lies.
That's almost as bad as stiffing your photographer after you acknowledged you wanted to continue working with him regardless of his showing me the article (which was a HUGE favor to you). I should charge you for my time you wasted and the editorial corrections I made to your article (including direct written contribution).
Call if you like to discuss.
Coda finally published its bullshit pathetic article which contains a number of lies and disinformation, and it has the guts to publish it under their disinformation section!! They produced piece which IS disinformation under the pretense of exposing disinformation!!! What hypocrisy. And this is AFTER I forced them to correct a whole bunch of other lies and disinformation and outright bullshit they were going to publish which would have surely resulted in me suing them -- and I made this very clear to them.
It was their luck, that I got a hold of their bullshit article BEFORE it was published and forced the suckers to make corrections.
However, they didn't pay the photographer his fee because he showed me the article before it was published -- instead of thanking him that he saved them from a lot of legal trouble, they take the benefited from his angelic act, and then didn't pay him! This is unethical conduct. Had they wanted to terminate their contract with him for this reason, they had plenty of time to do it -- but they didn't -- in fact, they ignored, and therefore, accepted, his violation of their contract (to keep the article confidential), and therefore agreed to continue as per the original contract despite his violating one clause, by asking him to send them the pictures. After he did so, they decided to not pay him! Not cool!
I offered the photographer to fight for him because what Coda did was ethically wrong. But he is going through a divorce and legal issues around that and decided to just write off Coda and their nonsense. At least he got them to pay him for his travel time.
The pathetic article still has a number of material falsehoods, but given they corrected a whole bunch of "errors" and vicious misinformation they made already, I decided not to waste any more time on Coda's lies, and close the case. I might however, send some emails to some of their donors so they know what Coda is about.
Dear Ms. Kiparoidze
Thanks for the note. Yes absolutely! Will do it this weekend... [photo]
By the way, Professor Hardell just released a mega bombshell letter that you might want to add as a PS or "Just In" or something: link
It was my idea to do this letter and it took two months to get Dr. Hardell on board. I helped coordinate it and even wrote some of the text.
It exposes the lies of ICNIRP and their guy, Martin Röösli who's become a guru in Switzerland because we don't have anyone else. He's put in charge of the country's top authorities on EMF health matters and he has no qualifications in medicine or biology, and is very industry biased.
The letter exposes the conflicts of interest and tthe shameless misrepresentations of science -- which results in Swiss people being lied to about safety of EMF exposure.
If you need anything else, feel free to contact me.
I'd love to read the draft of the article and promise, of course, to keep it strictly confidential.
Reza Ganjavi, MBA, BSCS, BAPhil, Magna Cum Laude, Phi Kappa Phi
FYI, Dr. Hardell is the world's top medical authority on the subject of wireless radiation and cancer.
When I was looking for the appropriate scientist to do the letter, everyone pointed to Dr. Hardell as The Man! :-)
22 Jan 2020 Email to Coda Management
- Burhan Wazir, Managing Editor, Coda Media
- Mariam Kiparoidze, Associate Producer, Coda Media
- Thomas Burns, Creative Director, Coda Media
- Natalia Antelava, Co-foundee, Coda Media
- Ilan Greenberg, Co-founder, Coda Media
Burhan, Mariam has apparently dropped the ball on this and has decided to ignore the topic. I just found out that you're the Editor of the article. Please see the email below. We can easily fix the article and it'll be good to go -- but as is, it cannot be published. Please contact me, so we discuss the way forward. Please reach me immediately via email or phone <>
Mariam, I emailed you last night with a VERY CLEAR statement (see below) that
I do NOT allow to use my image within the article if you publish the article as is.
I do NOT approve the article because it has a number of factual errors and highly damaging, false, defamatory, and otherwise unlawful statements.
I warned you that if you publish the article as is, I will be forced to file criminal and civil actions against Coda Media
I informed you that the article can easily be fixed and asked you to contact me so I can provide a list of changes. I need to hear that from Burhan or yourself or Thomas, that you're open to correcting the article. Then we can agree on the way forward.
YET, despite that, instead of contacting me, you contact the photographer and stress about getting my pictures quickly -- I guess because you want to rush into publishing the article as is. This is unbelievable.
You keep asking for my photo from the photographer, despite the fact that I have expressly asked you to NOT publish the article as is because it has a number of factual errors, and it violates several laws as a result.
Let me make this VERY CLEAR:
YOU DO NOT HAVE MY PERMISSION TO USE MY IMAGE IN YOUR ARTICLE, unless we agree to the content of the article. I already told you that it takes a little bit of work -- a few things -- to make the article factually correct.
And you DO NOT HAVE MY APPROVAL TO PUBLISH YOUR ARTICLE WITH THE GRAVE FACTUAL ERRORS THAT IT CONTAINS.
AND you have been EXPRESSLY INFORMED THAT THE ARTICLE YOU'RE ABOUT TO PUBLISH HAS SEVERAL FACTUAL ERRORS THAT ARE VERY DAMAGING AND DEFAMATORY AND VIOLATE A NUMBER OF CRIMINAL LAWS IN SWITZERLAND, AND CIVIL LAWS IN THE USA.
You can be sure, if you publish the article as is, and use my image without my permission, I will IMMEDIATELY file a criminal complaint against the reporter, You, Thomas, and the Coda Story, in Switzerland and file civil lawsuit against Coda in the USA, and later in Switzerland once the criminal case progresses.
Your choice is very clear: Contact me instead of ignoring me -- and I will send you the list of corrections -- and you make the corrections and we'll be good to go. Or dump the story completely.
Please advise. By ignoring me this problem will just get worse.
I am working on it. This article is SO BAD -- SO DECEPTIVE -- and contains so much DISINFORMATION that it's sucking my time for hours trying to propose corrections.
The changes won't be much since I'm already doing most of the work for you.
I will send the response in the next few hours.
Dear Mariam, I am working with Burham to hopefully get this disastrous article which is full of disinformation corrected.
I have requested that Olivier to NOT send you the picture until this topic is clarified.
I hope you understand and respect my wish, and do not pressure Olivier who is an excellent photographer, very professional, and a very good human.
Thanks and regards
22 Jan 2020 Emails to photographer - the photographer is a very nice decent person and respected my wish to not send photos to Coda without my permission.
Thanks a lot dear Olivier.
I look forward to hearing from you.
In principle, please do not send anything to Coda without my approval.
Thanks a lot
I'm spending hours going through this bogus article to fix the issues.
The author's boss contacted me and wants to see the list of changes. I will send it in the next couple of hours.
Please hold off the photos. I'll get back to you soon.
There's nothing they can do about it legally. You're holding the photos due to your professional ethics because the subject has asked you to, temporarily, until a dispute is settled. Don't worry. Just hang in there.
Thanks a lot.
So you know the article was full of lies and falsehoods. I hope you didn't believe the junk they wrote. I told them if they publish it as-is, I will sue them and they do NOT have my permission to use the photo -- but I showed them a "carrot" that if they're willing , I can work with them to correct it. Let's see what they say.
Please don't send them anything till we talk. Thanks.
Thank you very much. The reporter wrote me -- I know the editor's name now -- and am writing to him. Please stay put (do nothing) for now. I will keep you informed. Thanks a million.
22 Jan 2020 Email - after I saw the article was full of lies
Dear Mariam, Thomas
5G Article has a number of grave errors and lies that can be easily corrected.
Defamation and issuing damaging statements about a person is criminal conduct under Swiss law which applies to you since your reporter was here to collect information and therefore subjected you to Swiss law.
I like to give you the benefit of doubt that these are merely mistakes and not intentional misrepresentations.
I have outlined the corrections that need to be made to the article to make it fair and accurate. If you plan to publish the article without the changes, be warned that
a) You do NOT have permission to use my photos
b) I will be forced to take legal action against Coda Story
Please let me know if you like to see the list of changes that must be made to correct the errors in the article -- or you've frozen the article and plan to publish it as is (see above). I believe the changes can be easily made to the article.
PS -- from your website: "We care about accuracy and our information sources".
The 5G story is full of inaccuracies -- from small typing issues, to getting important phrases everyone knows wrong, to MAJOR falsehoods. These can be easily corrected.
This article is so extremely distorted that obviously it breaks at least three different Swiss criminal laws. I think it's best to can it. Write off what you spent on it, and flush it down the toilette. Unless you are TRULY and HONESTLY interested in fair reporting, in which case, we can work on fixing it.
Let me know what you like to do:
a) work with me to correct the falsehoods (we're not talking about opinions here but material falsehoods posed as facts)
b) easiest option, since this is sucking a lot of my time and my time is expensive, to can it (cancel the article altogether).
23 to 27 Jan 2020, I sent several messages to the Editor who had a hand in the fabrication of the fake news.
Selected sections from those emails I sent
First off, there's a huge philosophical issue here in the way you're positioned the article.
I suppose your division looks for "disinformation" stories and if it can't find any, it fabricates them ... this is extremely wrong, false, damaging, vicious... Coda outright LIED about certain things... you have ZERO evidence for such an outrageous attempt. This is journalism as its worse. This is lack of integrity, and if one puts it in the scheme of the bigger issue, i.e. REAL DISINFORMATION propagated by big money, first question that comes up is who are you batting for.
If your organization has the integrity to be FAIR, IMPARTIAL, and exercise the journalistic integrity to inquire into TRUTH, it wouldn't manipulate the pieces to fit an agenda. The word "investigative" journalist implies real spirit of investigation which is search for truth, and not creation of Fake News however sensational your lies may be. Are your donors donating to you to make fake news?
If this was just sloppy reporting -- which partially seems to be, and more (making a wicked story line to be sensational for your subscribers) -- then you should shift your strategy, which is easily done. Instead, you can have a BALANCED approach by making sure you reference the HUGE DISINFORMATION of the wireless industry. I have sent you the info before but it was ignored. Here are two important reference points again:
Example of disinformation propagated by big wireless industry, in this case, Swisscom which is owned 51% by the Swiss Federal Government. Here's a concrete example of how they lie to people. In their patent filing they admit that WiFi causes DNA damage and Cancer -- but publicly they say it's safe.
Dr. Hardell & over 20 other top scientists (who've done direct research in EMF health impacts) reveal the conflict of interest, and more importantly, misrepresentation of science, by a key member of ICNIRP. Falsifying science to fool masses in matters of public health, with bias for big money, is a HUGE DISINFORMATION topic that your article should focus on.
You've completely ignored the REAL DISINFORMATION (of Wireless Industry and their cronies) that is the real problem.
So here we are, trying to fight the huge disinformation by Big Wireless (like activists did in 1940's against Big Tobacco), and here comes a journal that purports to be neutral and is attacking us with lies, defamatory statements, puts us in false light, and it ignores the real disinformation!
In the detailed comments below you will see more clearly what I mean
DETAILED LIST OF REQUIRED CHANGES < SENT LIST OF ABOUT 18 LIES, DISINFORMATION, FALSEHOODS, ETC., WHICH THE ORIGINAL VERSION OF THE ARTICLE CONTAINED>.
<SNIPPED LOOOOOONG LIST OF ISSUES WITH THE PIECE OF TRASH ARTICLE which Coda intended to publish without me seeing it first !!!!!!!!!!! Thank God and thanks to the photographer that I got to see it and forced Coda to correct a lot of their lies / vicious "mistakes" etc. -- but some still remain in the final version>
As stated already, I recommend you can the article entirely -- or make the corrections I suggested (please work with me on that, I can help you, and keep the communication open) -- and run a story on the massive organized-crime-level brainwashing and disinformation campaign of the wireless industry and their puppets
Read this letter -- it may help you understand where the real disinformation is -- it's NOT where your team's article portrays it to be with fake statistics, and vicious manipulation of discrete items in an attempt to fabricate a fake story line. Coda's reputation as I understand it cannot afford such tabloid-like article which IS disinformation in itself.
Please read this letter carefully
Your group ought to do an article on how the wireless industry is trying to brainwash people by lying to them about safety, thereby endangering their very essence: their DNA. Here's their own admission.
Waiting to hear what you've decided to do with the article: delete it or correct it. Please let me know. Thanks much.
Regarding the detailed feedback I sent you (see below), please keep me in the loop on what you want to do about this "fake news" and your gross case of disinformation that is highly damaging to my reputation and has numerous factual errors and false arguments. I have evidence that Coda has already broken the law.
There's a VERY strong case to argue Coda's malicious attempts... even a 5 year can tell you how stupid and logically fallacious that statement is, but of course it's there because you want to build a FAKE case... This is bad, cheap, unethical journalism. I will NOT tolerate this...
I hope that you will take my comments / feedback which took me HOURS to wrote -- and the associated distress (I woke up with a nightmare about this before writing this email) -- seriously to avoid serious legal problems and other negative implications.
Aside from legal issues, donors of Coda Media expect journalistic integrity -- and not tabloid-like reporting which this article is all about -- it's the lowest quality of Tabloid writing and worse than all the 1% so called dodgy outlets that you make fun of (I have read far more credible stories in Scientific American that you attack as dodgy, than your cheap hit piece.
Coda has already broken the law. I need to know quickly what you plan to do with my comments and this article. Are you going to incorporate my comments? publish as is? delete the article? I am happy with option (1) and (3). Option (2) is knowingly picking a fight with a tough fighter, and knowingly acting unlawfully.
Please let me know where you're at with this article. If you want to go with option (1) then let's work together and qucikly we can turn this into a good article. Feel free to call (numbers below).
Here are some real statistics not the imaginary ones in your "fake news" article. I ran an analysis of the last 200 posts in the Stop5G group. Only ONE was from the alleged rouge source your article states -- and even that one seems like a credible article, which cites a credible source. 46% of the posts do NOT contain external links (are text, photos, etc. that people share). 39% are Youtube. No way you can argue Youtube is a rouge source. Check this list.
The remaining 15% are from many sources, Twitter, global rally organizing committees, Children Health Defense Fund, and other news organizations. On the face of it I don't see ANY rouge article, let alone the image your article portrays of this group being one of disinformation, which is simply NOT the case.
If you like to see the detailed analysis let me know. I spent money hiring someone (since I didn't have the time) to go through and make the list because I was convinced the article is making a false claim, and that belief was confirmed.
I'd be happy to work with you to get this article into a REALISTIC, ACCURATE article but it needs rework, per the list I sent before.
Please let me know what you plan to do.
Thanks & Kind Regards
That's not sufficient. Indirect libel is also libel!
... that is libelous for me. Especially, when he puts in a separate sentence... With a carriage return, to accentuate, manipulate what I say by separating my sentences.
So please revisit your take on "which directly reference you only" -- if the topic is not clear, you may like to consult with an attorney.
Also keep in mind defamation and false light are criminal offenses in Switzerland.
To avoid problems, please let me see the article BEFORE you publish it.
Thanks & Regards
I also think you have an obligation ( at least to journalistic integrity ) to write an accurate article with a truthful story line. This article is a bunch of fabricated weak lies that are connected together to support a fiction.
As such, it is "fake news" and "disinformation" itself.
I look forward to the corrections and seeing an honest article.
I pointed out a number of corrections that are important to consider.
A number of them impact me directly.
A number of them impact me indirectly but implicit statements can also be unlawful and put a person in false light and defame a person.
A number of them are corrections to errors and sloppy terminology / phrases in the article -- so I provided feedback to you (for free) to improve your article.
28 Jan 2020 Email to photographer, after talking to reporter
FYI, I had a long talk with the reporter. Looks like Coda manipulated his statements to make the article more gossipy (typical tabloid).
He understands my points and says that he will request that some points are changed.
So the topic is moving. A big milestone still ahead (when we agree on the article -- at least to make sure it doesn't contain lies...).
I will be in touch with you.
28 Jan 2020 Email to Coda mamagement after talking to reporter
Takeaways from Talk with Filip // Desperately trying to avert litigation
Dear Burhan [cc management]
I had a long talk with Filip, further to your email saying you will review points that are "directly" about me. I reached out to him because I assumed he'll be editing / correcting the article, to help him understand my points on the errors in the article and the fake, weak, gossipy, disinformation, tabloid story line, and to make sure he understands legal issues with false light and implicit libel.
Unless you take serious steps to correct your "fake news" tabloid article, I retract my agreement for the interview and being presented in this article which was based on the assumption (based on your website info) that Coda has journalistic integrity. I would have NEVER agreed to if I knew how even Coda seems to be in the business of twisting truth for ulterior motives -- comparing Filip's original statements to your version, it's obvious that you twisted some of his lines according to some wicked motive (see below).
1) Some of the HUGELY problematic, damaging, unlawful statements were not written by Filip, but by yourself or whoever edited the article in your team. Words were cherry-picked from his statements, to construct phrases that give a totally different meaning, which neither I said or meant, nor is the fact, nor was meant by Filip. WHY? I can think of 3 possible motives (some or all of these):
a) To add zest and pizzazz to make the article more gossipy and tabloid-like, which is the exact "sensationalism" that your article complains about.
b) If Coda is in the pocket of the criminal wireless industry, it's your intention to trash-talk real activists and real action against the crooks.
c) You did NOT understand what he meant -- or understood but decided to twist it anyway.
At the cost of my reputation. I will NOT tolerate your disinformation and will fight it, and I have the means, and am a very tough fighter.
2) He said he agreed with some of my points and will relay that changes need to be made. He also agreed that it's good that these things came up, to avoid problems later.
2) "Some", and not "all" because we disagree on a minor point -- that I don't care about, but my feedback was to help you have a higher quality article, e.g., to an average reader, Scientific America and Youtube are categorized as "fringe media" by this article.
3) Burhan, you also twisted Filip's line in this utterly stupid, gossipy, tabloid, irrelevant, and logical-disaster statement: <snipped>
I explained the logical fallacy to Filip and he got it "I agree with you that it doesn't make logical sense". Burhan, this is explained better in my original feedback -- if you don't understand it, please call me up.
Again: WHY did you twist his statement like this? See points 1(a)(b)(c) above. Main motive in this case seems to be your wicked intention ... in this whole fake-news tabloid article.
4) I pointed out a number of other issues with the article, from grammatical errors to wrong use of key terminology that just makes you guys sound incompetent: you write an article and don't do any research on proper use of terminology.
5) He also understood the problem with some other issues that I outlined in the original feedback, how it puts me in false light, how it's utterly and factually false...
6) Regarding NTP, ICNIRP, Filip understood my point. Journalistic integrity calls for getting to the truth, and at least to the bottom what is available. Coda ought to publish the scientific response to ICNIRP's lies about NTP (see my original feedback for the link).
7) Journalistic integrity and inquiry requires that you INVESTIGATE. The ICNIRP guy gave a totally bullshit lie to Filip and seems that Filip took it as face value. I already told him to a) push back and ask for his source - which did not happen b) check with Dr. Hardell or other 3rd parties -- all of those who are not in the pocked of the industry will tell you that the ICNIRP boss is lying. (see my original feedback about "purportedly").
I don't care too much about such periphery point. But such sloppy reporting sends the wrong message -- which based on what Filip is telling me, was not his intention.
8) Another instance of you twisting Filip's statement is regarding my comment about "faster internet" vs. "faster download" -- you totally bastardized his statement and twisted it into a very problematic, false line. WHY? See points 1(a)(b)(c) above.
Note that in my original feedback, I provided corrected versions of these very problematic sentences to help you.
...If you don't have a wicked agenda, organizationally or personal pro-industry bias (intellectual or financial) and want to have a fair article to HELP PEOPLE, then you should take my comments seriously. We don't need more fake-news and lies and disinformation in this world.
Your job, if you have any ethics, is AT LEAST to not contribute to moral decadence we're facing in the world (with Trump as its major catalyst). I suppose Ilan probably had a positive motive, beside money, in starting Coda. it's lost in this article in its present form.
Given the disastrous state of this article, and the twisting and manipulation of the original author's lines, and other problems, as I told Filip, and he agreed, PLEASE let's keep in touch and communicate. We can disagree on things, but it's far better to agree to disagree now than in a court room. I'm desperately trying to avoid litigation.
28 Jan 2020 Email to Coda Reporter
Filip -- you're perhaps too young to understand the implications and gravity of this situation. I don't like your hardball attitude in this email -- generally I've had a positive impression of you but the email below is NOT the right attitiude, when Coda produces a bogus, unlawful tabloid article and then doesn't even want to show it to me -- it was the grace of God or luck or whatever you call it -- for me and for you guys that I saw this article before publication. Coda has wasted incredible amount of my time putting out disinformation -- and now you give me this hardball stance.
1) I explained to Burhan already that this is a myopic view to say "pertains to you directly" -- look up implicit libelous statement or ask a lawyer. Ask him to send you copies of my emails where I thoroughly explain the topic.
2) I will NOT allow the photographer to send you my pictures and do NOT allow you to use my photographs without my permission -- and I will file a criminal complaint if you implictly or explicitly defame me, put me in the false light, or otherwise violate my rights (those are criminal offenses under Swiss law, German law, and much of the Europe, and I don't know where Ilan is but under Israeli law it is also criminal as well as civil) as well as file civil claims, and take the fight online if you decide to pick a fight, and if you intentionally post such unlawful statements, I am obliged to inform your major donors who are under the impression, like I was, that you're a fair, decent media, and not a tabloid which twists facts and intentionally puts out disinformation.
I will send you the edits.
@Ilan, maybe your guys don't grasp the gravity of this situation. I'm trying to avert legal action. I've offered to cooperate with you, have spent time explaining to Filip the problems, have explained them to Burhan, and have spent godly amount of time and distress on this topic, and have even said, I am NOT taking a hardball stance -- I'm flexible, and we can agree to disagree -- but it's better to do that BEFORE this article is published, and not in a legal fight. So please, give them the ok to share the article with me before they publish it. I am NOT going to nitpick. If you don't you do NOT have my authorization to use any of my images, and I will fight any unlawful statements to the end.
29 Jan 2020 Email to Coda
Dear Mariam, Thomas, Burhan
I hereby formally retract the permission I granted you to use the pictures I sent you, which are my copyright.
I know you said they were not good enough. But regardless, you are NOT allowed to use them for any purpose without my express written permission, which presently I do NOT grant.
As far as the pictures that Olivier took, at the moment you are also NOT allowed to use them. I will see how the cooperation with Filip/Burhan proceeds and if this article can be adjusted away from its current tabloid trash job thanks to Burhan cherry picking Filip's words... etcc.
The wireless industry is the main source of disinformation -- see this letter.
that I coordinated and worked hard with Dr. Hardell who wrote it and it's endorsed by over 20 top experts who have done studies on EMF health effects (unlike some scientists who are prostitutes of the industry). This is the cause we're fighting for -- for health -- for human race -- and I will not let a rouge article trash talk us by disparaging us in a vicious manner that it currently appears. I'm cautiously optimistic that the article can be corrected and gotten out of the tabloid-level its turned into ...
Thanks & Regards
29 Jan 2020 SENT LIST OF 18 CORRECTION DEMANDS TO CODA
Email to photographer:
Sent a list of 18 modifications -- 12 required, 6 optional, to the author who's editing the article now. Fingers crossed. Please let me know if they contact you and don't send them anything. I'll take care of you and won't forget your kindness and help you've given me.
Thanks so much.
29 Jan 2020 Email to Dr. Hardell who's also featured in the article. In fact I worked hard at gettig the reporter to talk to Dr. Hardell and for Dr. Hardell to accept talking to him -- otherwise, Coda would have been happy just to repeat ICNIRP's lies.
Coda (which interviewed you) turns out to have written a junk piece that's aimed at trash-talking our efforts. The part they wrote about you is alright -- but I demanded that they add the NTP response to ICNIRP's response -- and your letter to Sommaruga.
That's part of a list of 18 update requests (12 required, 6 optional) I sent to fix their disinformation. They intentionally twisted facts, lied, to make a fake story line to bash 5G activism - classic "fake news".
I'm on their case, without too much leverage (except withholding the photos) -- but if they publish as is, I will surely sue them and will inform their donors.
Lesson learned for me -- talked to the Danish journalist who gave me good tips on dealing with journalists, next time. (e.g. demand that the article cannot be published without my approval).
From another email to Dr. Hardell
I sent a list of some 18 demands for correction to the Coda Story -- their editor manipulated the lines. The author also built a weak, fake story line to fit their agenda. I threatened to sue them (and I mean it) if they published the lies they came up with.
Here's my key concern: They are supposed to be credible but they've proven to be a gossip channel -- the editor's manipulation of the reporter's lines is proof.
They're trying to build a story line that trash talks ANTI-5G activism, to appear under their "disinformation" column: https://codastory.com/disinformation/ and reprinted in Guardian etc.
Even the section where they talk about you / they talk about NTP, and they post ICNIRP's garbage response to NTP, but they refuse to post the NTP scientist's response to ICNIRP's response. This means ICNIRP gets the last word. Only because it fits into their narrative to discredit our actions.
They are using totally irrelevant statistic -- that 1% of the posting on the Stop5G group came from "waking times" for example so the whole group must be fringe -- while fact is, even that 1% is credible articles.
The other key issue is they say nothing about the real disinformation (which is industry's lies). I insisted they mention your letter about Roosli. I'm almost sure they won't because it cracks their "fake news" story line.
30 Jan 2020 TO 5 FEB Emails
Several email exchanges happened during this period -- with Coda agreeing to make the changes -- but not letting me see the final results -- and them deciding not to pay the photographer -- me fighting for the photographer out of ethical principle because I sincerely believe how Coda treated the photographer was WRONG -- Coda finally publishing the stupid article -- yes, they made some of the corrections but the article still has a number of key factual errors / lies / disinformation / bullshit which Coda had to leave in there because they seem to be more interested in tabloid-style gossip even if it's false, than truth.
See emails at the top of this file from Feb 5, and March 1.
108 West 39th Street, Suite 1000, New York, New York 10018, U.S.A.
Natalia Antelava, Co-founder, CEO, Editor in Chief, Coda Media
Ilan Greenberg, Co-founder, Coda Media
Burhan Wazir, Managing Editor, Coda Media
Mariam Kiparoidze, Associate Producer, Coda Media
Thomas Burns, Creative Director, Coda Media
A freelance reporter
A freelance photographer
From a press release: "Coda Story is a 501(c)3 U.S non-profit with offices in New York City and Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia. Coda is supported by foundation grants and private donations. Further revenue is generated by animation and video production for clients producing journalism in the public interest."
Non-profit which stiffed a contractor. The photographer gave in to Coda's refusal to pay him. Coda's excuse was that he broke their contract by sending me the garbage fake-news article they had written which was full of lies. Problem from contract law perspective is that even after these facts were known, Coda still requested the photographer to send them the pictures, which meant the contract was in force. But they broke it by refusing to pay him.
Coda's reference to "Public-interest" is malarkey since Coda Story is on record for producing FAKE NEWS!