Summary: How the controversial European Patent Office (EPO) is working behind the scenes in order to police its portrayal and also shape news about the EPO

ONE aspect of the EPO which we never explored in depth is the so-called 'communications' department (a more recent euphemism for propaganda). Don't forget the circumstances under which Vincent Bénard left (there were other such stories -- some even more shocking -- at that time).

Based on our reliable sources, who had experience with the EPO's media- or trend-setting team, the PR team of the Office has the "sweet talkers". These are the people who will pretend to be your friends or "buddies", as journalists who were subjected to similar treatment from Microsoft PR agencies called it. This is what some of these people are professionally trained to do. Moreover, we managed to learn that they also have the people who are actually pressuring (even over the phone) not to publish certain things. Well, pressuring publications is not PR, it's almost a form of bullying. We learned that editors and publishers are given marching orders for writers (commissioning work). If there was a propaganda minister at Munich, who would it be?

"Moreover, we managed to learn that they also have the people who are actually pressuring (even over the phone) not to publish certain things."We learned that the EPO's PR team has, at times, attempted to change existing (to be published) stories by asking publishers to make them balanced rather than "biased", meaning not favourable to the EPO's image. Rainer ("Press spokesperson" is his job title) is allegedly doing a lot of the communications, sometimes Jeremy also (watch how he and IAM 'magazine' worked hand in glove, so to speak). We can't help but wonder what made the BBC spike a negative story about the EPO. Jana Mittermaier is not directly involved all that much, at least not with media organisations. She had studied in the UK, where Jeremy also came from.

Remember that the EPO is an international body, not a European body, so wasting money on improving its image isn't even designed/intended to serve European interests. The "E" in EPO is very misleading. Recall the greenwashing PR campaign (expensive EPO-commissioned 'study'), coinciding with climate talks in Paris. This one example and other patterns of PR as of late serve to show just how desperate the EPO is for positive messages (it's willing to pay to 'manufacture' these).

"The EPO is quite a greased-up propaganda machine."One other thing we learned is that -- much as we predicted all along -- it is now confirmed that the EPO's PR team sends (in mass or bulk) press releases to a lot of sites, attempting to seed their so-called 'story' du jour (sometimes commissioned 'study'). This method is rather effective at getting one's message out there if one is not shy to stoop down to this level. A lot of PR people lost this sense of shame as do this habitually ("everyone's doing it!"), sending lots of junk even to complete strangers whom they never ever spoke to.

Perhaps the most shocking thing that we learned is that the editors in some publications put pressure on their writers to write articles or something similar (more like "announcements") based on press releases sent by the EPO. This is based on what we learned privately. It's not just hearsay.

The EPO is quite a greased-up propaganda machine. Techrights is up against something that calls itself "patent office" but has a massive PR operation (and fancy events for so-called 'inventors' of the year); it's something which calls itself "European" but is run by and for globalists. A lot of the PR too (operating at a budget of nearly $100,000 per month!) has been outsourced to the United States. ⬆