Nothing one reads or hears on Brexit from the British media can be trusted. This is because the subject is so contentious that the media feel themselves impelled to choose sides and, as a consequence, their coverage - in terms of what they cover and how they present it - reflects their own prejudices.
Even a reputable British newspaper like the Guardian - famous for its independence and regard for the facts - has succumbed, and has allowed its commitment to the "European" cause to colour its treatment of the Brexit issue to the extent that it has become a veritable cheerleader for anti-Brexit sentiment.
There has been a barrage from the British media about the supposedly disastrous consequences of Brexit, and particularly of a "no deal" Brexit. What are we, at 19,000km from the action, to make of it?
Like the British, we have been conditioned to believe that, because the exit process has been difficult (and has been made so by the EU), the desired outcome of that process is a dreadful mistake. But we should look dispassionately at the facts. We should recognise that the 2016 referendum produced a narrow but decisive verdict from the British people on their 40 year-long experience of EU membership. They decided that EU membership should end.
The Leavers seem to have been primarily motivated by a determination to re-establish British sovereignty - that is, control over their own government and laws, and borders - and to end the hefty annual membership fee paid into EU coffers as the price of supposed economic benefits that have never materialised. The economic outcomes of membership have in fact been disastrous - a slow rate of growth, perennial trade deficits, the decimation of manufacturing industry, the loss of jobs, and higher food prices.