And of course the lovely Science Media Centre is on the case:
Note that the SMC is of course funded by Pfizer, the manufacturers of one of the vaccines in question, and by most other leading western vaccine manufacturers (inc GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi):
http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/pages/about/funding.htm
The SMC claim to be impartial in their influence over UK press reporting of scientific issues, arguing that they are funded by a wide range of industrial interests and not just by one company. However, they are funded by all the leading multinationals who have interests in the press reporting of science which affects their industry (they are also funded by 5 of the top 6 pesticide manufacters, for example), and in relation to any controversial scientific issues which affect those interests the SMC clearly report those issues with a bias to defend the interests of those corporations.
The SMC's pro-industrial stance in the control of the meda reporting of science is of course entirely consistent with the stated aims of those (like director Fiona Fox) who control the SMC. Bizarre though it may sound, the UK's press reporting of scientific issues is controlled by this small group of former Revolutionary Communist Party members, who 20 years ago set out their new post-Marxist infiltrationist philosophy, arguing that the public denial of any human suffering resulting from scientific and industrial development was justified by the greater good resulting from scientific progress.