Eye Say, and Lord Gnome Answers

My interactions with Private Eye started in May 1995, shortly after I'd started bleating on usenet. I tried to get the Eye
interested in my case, as I thought they more than anyone have their finger on the pulse, and would surely already know
something about my case. In my first email to them, entitled "pas de bouteille?" (wot no bottle?), I asked if they had the
nerve to publish what was known to many thousands of people. Their email flunky answered; 

Date: Thu, 11 May 95 13:40 BST-1
From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye)
Subject: Re: pas de bouteille?

In-Reply-To: <199505102232.SAA19988@freenet.carleton.ca>
Bottle? Dunno really - but I've passed your mail on to the Ed for his
consideration.

Steve Mann
(strobes)
==========================================================
Date: Mon, 15 May 95 12:51 BST-1
From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye)
Subject: Re: hello again

In-Reply-To: <199505122236.SAA02574@freenet.carleton.ca>
Hello yourself...

Thanks for the email. Unfortunately, I can't say whether or not the Eye
will do anything with this... I'm only the messenger. As the only
computer-literate peron in the Gnome organisation, I get to read all the
email and then pass it on to the Editor.

Sorry -- not very helpful, I know.

Steve Mann
(strobes)

The following year I gave PE another little prod, which yielded the following; 

Date: Tue, 13 Feb 96 11:38 GMT
From: strobes@cix.compulink.co.uk (Private Eye Magazine)
Subject: Re: Previous communication

In-Reply-To: <199602102320.SAA26182@[snip]>
Sorry not to reply sooner... we've been swamped with email and I have
very little time to answer it.

However, the editor sees all the email received here and I'm afraid he
hasn't expressed an interest in your story so I can only assume that he
feels it isn't for us.

Sorry.
strobes

Given that I couldn't provide the evidence to persuade the Eye of the credibility of my claims, I did the next best thing,
which was to take out classified adverts in their "Eye Say" and "Eye Tech" columns. My motivation for doing so is obvious;
the Eye is read both by many thousands of ordinary folk, but also makes its way into the homes and consciousness of the UK's
political and media elite. It is also a known favourite with "Five". What better way of taking the fight to the enemy? 

The first small ad appeared on 10 Jan 1997 in issue 915 in "Eye Say". It ran in that column on 24/1/97 and 7/2/97. On 21/2/97
it ran in "Eye Tech", and on 7/3/97 and 21/3/97 again in "Eye Say". 

I then changed the ad's wording to read "BBC Newsreaders Conspiracy", and the new wording ran in "Eye Say" from 4/4/97 issue 921,
18/4/97 to 2/5/97. The word "xenophobic" in the first advert had been intended to convey the sense of exclusion through the bigotry
of my enemies, both on the basis of race and mental condition, but it seemed a bit too non-specific. "BBC Newscasters Conspiracy" was
a little more immediate, although readers had to actually wade through the website to find out what it was that the newscasters were
conspiring to do. 

My next effort tried to spice up the text. "MI5/BBC Conspiracy" ran for six issues in "Eye Say", from 5/9/97 issue 931 until 31/10/97.
I suppose there is something a little sad about somebody who knows he has mental illness, placing adverts about a conspiracy in which
MI5's watchers enable BBC newscasters to personally and directly communicate with him while reading the news. It is pretty sad, but
unfortunately it is also true, both in the objective reality we all inhabit, as well as in my own mind. 

There followed a hiatus of about a year until I resumed advertising on 2 October 1998. I paid over