Member since: Fri Sep 23, 2011, 05:20 PM
Number of posts: 3,682
Number of posts: 3,682
I've noticed that it's usually CTers and what I call the Orthodox Left (those that think RT is a legitimate news source) that use the term "mainstream media" or "MSM" on DU.
Here's Markos "Daily Kos" Moulitsas on the subject back in 2007:
"MSM" vs. "Traditional Media"
It's become in vogue by progressives to adopt the right-wing acronym "MSM" to refer to the "mainstream media". It's quite common on this site as well as elsewhere (Arianna uses it here).
I've written before about this (too lazy to search for it). It's a ridiculous term to adopt.
First of all, it's a right-wing pejorative, and I'd rather we not adopt their language and frames.
But more importantly, by calling them "mainstream media", we are saying that we ourselves aren't mainstream, and that's not something I'm willing to concede. This site gets far more readers than most "mainstream media" publications, so why are they mainstream, while we are, by definition, the fringe?
Let the right wingers place themselves out of the mainstream. That's where they belong, with Mr. 25% and the dead-enders who believe fairy tales of a pacified, democratic, pro-Israel Iraq and raft-building kangaroos.
Mouslitsas essentially predicted the future. As this analysis of Nate Silver and the 2012 election shows, it was the GOP's shunning of the "MSM" that divorced it from reality so badly that they actually thought that Romney was going to win:
How Conservative Media Lost to the MSM and Failed the Rank and File
Nate Silver was right. His ideological antagonists were wrong. And that's just the beginning of the right's self-created information disadvantage.
Barack Obama just trounced a Republican opponent for the second time. But unlike four years ago, when most conservatives saw it coming, Tuesday's result was, for them, an unpleasant surprise. So many on the right had predicted a Mitt Romney victory, or even a blowout -- Dick Morris, George Will, and Michael Barone all predicted the GOP would break 300 electoral votes.... Even Karl Rove, supposed political genius, missed the bulls-eye. These voices drove the coverage on Fox News, talk radio, the Drudge Report, and conservative blogs.
Those audiences were misinformed.
Substitute RT for FOX News, Counterpunch for the Drudge Report, "The Real News Network" (I just can't write that without quotes) plus Ring of Fire for talk radio, and sources like Firedoglake.com, ConsortiumNews, Robert Parry, & John Pilger for conservative blogs. You end up with the same separation from reality that got the GOP in big trouble.
Now, I know the New York Times, and most of the traditional media, horribly blew it during the WMD days. They will continue to be less than perfect at best and to be blowing it again at worst. But that doesn't mean we ignore the entire traditional media; what that means is we have to use these sources critically; to take the info as part of our general background of knowledge. It's totally ridiculous to say you'll never believe the "MSM" ever again; in fact I notice those that use the term as a punching bag are the first to cite the traditional media when it supports them. They just don't like the news that disagrees with their dogma.
I read tons of news from different sources. Many news magazines are doing great journalism, to not much notice. I read magazines like The Economist because the scholarship and breadth of their reporting is outstanding, but I know that their fiscal conservatism limits what they present.
I listen to Democracy Now, and I suggest that those who need convincing on this subject do what I do, in reverse. I listen to Democracy Now because they cover stories that are not covered very often in the broadcast media, but I listen to it with my critical filters turned on, because I sometimes find them to be less than thorough, a bit lazy, and a bit too Orthodox Left. That's the same way you take the traditional media--don't automatically believe everything you hear, but don't mindlessly reject it all, either.
And in the meantime, stop saying "MSM". It looks stupid.
Posted by uhnope | Fri Jul 31, 2015, 04:26 PM (16 replies)
Most DUers already know that Counterpunch has no credibility, but this new analysis is the final nail in the CP coffin. They draw you in with Chomsky or Amy Goodman but they mostly publish far-right, racist (white supremacist) authors.
ON EDIT: And clicking on CP gives them revenue so don't do it (Hat tip NuclearDem)
How ‘America’s Best Political Newsletter’ Mainstreams the Far Right
CounterPunch, which bills itself as ‘America’s best political newsletter’, offering ‘independent investigative journalism’, tends to figure quite prominently in the reading lists of left-leaning activists, who doubtlessly appreciate its consistent antiwar stance, its critical analysis on US economic and foreign policy and US-sponsored Israeli apartheid, and the regular contributions from such leading Left writers as John Pilger, Noam Chomsky, Paul Street, Jeremy Scahill, and Tariq Ali. Indeed, CounterPunch generally tends to be thought of as a Left media outlet. However, in writing for, and sharing articles published on, CP, Leftists are unwittingly helping to promote the agenda of the far right.
In addition to the authors relied on by CP for its left cred, ‘America’s best political newsletter’ also regularly publishes ‘independent investigative journalism’ by a wide variety of white supremacists, including Paul Craig Roberts, editor of the white nationalist website VDare, Ron Paul (who poses for photo ops with neo-Nazis and warns of ‘race war’), and Alison Weir, holocaust denier Israel Shamir, and that perennial saboteur of the Palestinian solidarity movement, Gilad Atzmon, author of the racist The Wandering Who.
Although there are some who have expressed concern on this problematic mix, when I have raised this issue in discussions with others in left activist circles, I have often found that it is dismissed as a triviality. In these discussions, the white supremacist contingent tends to be attributed to an unwillingness to bow to ‘political correctness’ or a mere desire to ‘piss off liberals’, and generally believed to be an insignificant deviation from an otherwise clear leftist editorial line, the sort of thing only an ‘ideological purist’ could get excited about.
My own research into the editorial practices at CounterPunch shows otherwise. Not only have white supremacist authors long been a fixture at CP; their ideology is shared by members of the editorial collective. All in all, it is entirely reasonable to say that the formation of a Querfront (an alliance between the far right and the left) is a longstanding project of the newsletter, consistently endorsed by the decisions taken by CP editors and their own stated positions.
READ IT http://meldungen-aus-dem-exil.noblogs.org/post/2015/07/19/counterpunch-or-suckerpunch/
Posted by uhnope | Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:15 PM (157 replies)
It's getting bizarre. Why does a progressive and probably antiwar website let active proponents of an actual fascist regime, that is actively waging war, run wild? Criticize them and you get:
LEAVE PUTIN ALONE! LEAVE RT ALONE
Ever notice that the Putin sympathizers repeat the same few sources over and over again?
They seem to have a fondness for the anti-Semitic, Holocaust-denying website:
"Vineyard of the Saker"
Holocaust denial: http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2011/03/predictably-youtube-censors-alan.html
Here's a good DU summary showing how the website says the Ukrainian gov't is "99% comprised of Jewish Zionists" : http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016100356#post26
DU has been not allowing this website to be linked to for some time, because it's a lot like Stormfront or Vdare: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014808123#post4
The washed-up apologists club:
The most laughable: Robert Parry. Back in the 80s he did good work; now he's a bad joke. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=854333
Oh yes (Haters hate Putin because he's been too peaceful)
& his Consortium News http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=854333
John Pilger. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017234336
Stephen Cohen. The once-respected scholar has so embarrassed himself lately that academia doesn't want money if his name is on it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016112713#post2
see also http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251357086#post1
see also https://disunitedstates.org/?p=6170
And where does this money in Cohen's name come from? His one-percenter wife, Katrina vanden Heuvel, the editor and publisher of The Nation. Speaking of which:
The Nation http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2014/07/stephen_cohen_vladimir_putin_s_apologist_the_nation_just_published_the_most.html
Lawrence Wilkerson: Good whistleblower gone bad--now he's a professional gadfly/conspiracy theorist who goes on the Kremlin media to self-promote his very wrong predictions about the always-evil US.
I hate to add:
Seymour Hersh (great work during the Vietnam War but now he's lost it, having devolved into "the US must be wrong in every conflict" territory)
Thom Hartmann--I agree with Hartmann's politics 99% of the time, but having his show on RT has really made him knuckle under to the guy paying his rent.
Of course Russia Today AKA Putin TV
Counterpunch: they've really lost it
Glenn Greenwald: http://www.newsday.com/opinion/columnists/cathy-young/u-s-critic-blind-to-putin-media-control-cathy-young-1.7346637
Paul Craig Roberts: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025726000
Someone possibly named Michael Collins: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1403/S00159/the-childrens-crusade-obama-and-merkel-go-after-russia.htm
There's definitely something fishy about "The Real News Network"
Posted by uhnope | Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:18 PM (3 replies)
"It seems every time the world pays attention to Russia Today, the Kremlin-backed "news" channel, someone who works there realized they probably shouldn't.
Earlier this year, during the Russian invasion of Crimea, RT anchor Liz Wahl resigned on-air, refusing to be "part of a network that whitewashes the actions of Putin." (Fellow anchor Abby Martin also criticized the network, but still works there.) Following yesterday's anti-Ukraine coverage of the passenger jet shot out of the sky, another journalist has quit in a very public way. But at least it wasn't on TV. Just Twitter."* The Young Turks hosts Cenk Uygur, Ben Mankiewicz (Turner Classic Movies), Michael Shure, and John Iadarola (TYT University) break it down.
Posted by uhnope | Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:18 PM (21 replies)
I've noticed that magical thinking, conspiracy theorizing and pure projection is common to many who, for whatever reason, need to defend the homophobic totalitarianism of Putin (and this thinking just happens to perfectly match Putin's own propaganda.) Your post is a good example.
You jump from an article about the distaste in academia for Cohen's embarrassing public appearances and writings, which have really gone overboard in the last year, and instantly start to talk about a conspiracy by "neocons/neolibs" to "restart the Cold War."
Some notable questions about your rant:
In what alternate universe has the Obama administration tried to "disallow" people from watching RT? What the heck are you referring to when you cite a "serious...violation of the Rights of Americans to watch, read anything they want to pay for." And don't you feel just a bit strange saying this, since Putin really has shut down nearly all independent media in Russia?
(This is a rhetorical question. Putin sympathizers on DU never answer questions about their defense of Putin's basically fascist ways.)
So let me engage in some conspiratorial speculation of my own: This Dissertation Fellowship money that Cohen's wife, a member of the 1%, wanted to donate to promote Cohen's name--I bet Cohen also wanted to control who gets it, so that he can influence the amount of Putin toadies in academia, and that's another reason the Association for Slavic, East European and Eurasian Studies balked at taking his wife's dirty money.
Posted by uhnope | Wed Jan 28, 2015, 09:58 PM (0 replies)
Posted by uhnope | Wed Jan 14, 2015, 06:27 PM (10 replies)
A combination of pro-EU protests occupying the main square, rumors that the protesters might soon receive serious weapons, chaos during changing events, and incompetence/corruption at the highest levels led to Yanukovych suddenly without any supporters, without any security protecting him or even his house. He now lives in Russia.
Interviews with the main players.
Sorry, Nuland Conspiracy Buffs: not a CIA plot in sight, actually. It's more the old Eastern Europe tale of a cynical security-state apparatus that recognized when a leader was suddenly powerless (and that knew the leader was beholden to another country, anyway.)
Key line: "Few outside the Russian propaganda bubble ever seriously entertained the Kremlin’s line" (about a western plot) --but somehow, many Putin explainers repeat it here on a regular basis
Ukraine Leader Was Defeated Even Before He Was Ousted
Ashen-faced after a sleepless night of marathon negotiations, Viktor F. Yanukovych hesitated, shaking his pen above the text placed before him in the chandeliered hall. Then, under the unsmiling gaze of European diplomats and his political enemies, the beleaguered Ukrainian president scrawled his signature, sealing a deal that he believed would keep him in power, at least for a few more months.
But even as Mr. Yanukovych sat down with his political foes at the presidential administration building on the afternoon of Friday, Feb. 21, his last authority was fast draining away. In a flurry of frantic calls to opposition lawmakers, police officials and security commanders were making clear that they were more worried about their own safety than protecting Mr. Yanukovych and his government.
By that evening, he was gone, evacuated from the capital by helicopter, setting the stage for the most severe bout of
Russia has attributed Mr. Yanukovych’s ouster to what it portrays as a violent, “neo-fascist” coup supported and even choreographed by the West and dressed up as a popular uprising. The Kremlin has cited this assertion, along with historical ties, as the main justification for its annexation of Crimea in March and its subsequent support for an armed revolt by pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine’s industrial heartland in the east.
Few outside the Russian propaganda bubble ever seriously entertained the Kremlin’s line. But almost a year after the fall of Mr. Yanukovych’s government, questions remain about how and why it collapsed so quickly and completely.
Posted by uhnope | Sun Jan 11, 2015, 12:59 PM (3 replies)
(Reuters) - Sergei Bobylyov once ran a successful chain of computer shops in Russia called Sunrise. Now, the 43-year-old father of two is serving nine years for fraud in a case his family blames on a corrupt legal system abused by people out to steal his business.
His wife and daughters hope though that a six-month amnesty for jailed entrepreneurs, ordered by President Vladimir Putin and signed into law by parliament last week, will set him free.
More than 100,000 businessmen, many of whom are innocent, are in prison or face criminal proceedings, according to Boris Titov, hired in 2012 by Putin to protect entrepreneurs' rights.
Under the amnesty, between 3,000 and 10,000 people may be freed, according to official and lobby group estimates.
Critics point out that the amnesty fails to address corruption or tackle flaws in the legal system. Lengthy jail terms are too often handed down in cases that should be settled by civil suits and judges are too easily bought, with some publishing verdicts direct from the prosecutor's charge sheet - including spelling mistakes, they say.
They also say Putin tailored the amnesty to keep political opponents, former oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky in particular, behind bars.
Calling it "an act of humanity", Putin announced the amnesty to applause from investors at an investor conference in St Petersburg last month, saying it was vital to create a more business-friendly environment in Russia.
The hostile legal environment has made it hard to succeed in business, legitimately, in Russia. A recent poll by the Levada Center, an independent opinion research group, said 38 percent of entrepreneurs want to emigrate.
At the centre of the problem is a legal system in which the collusion of law enforcement and justice officials is widely available, at a price.
"Someone needs to think about the law, and the system of law enforcement, prosecutors and judges, and change it from the bottom up," said Yana Yakovleva of Business Solidarity, a business rights campaigner.
On top of bureaucracy, criminal prosecution is another all-too-real problem for Russia's businesses. By 2011, one in six businesspeople in Russia had faced criminal charges, according to research by the Moscow-based Center for Legal and Economic Studies. About 120,000 people are serving prison sentences in Russia for economic crimes.
Yakovleva, the head of the business advocacy group, was a co-owner of a chemical company in 2006 when she was thrown in jail. She spent seven months in custody before her case was dropped. She claims the charges were brought by anti-narcotics police after she and her business partner refused to pay kickbacks on sales of an industrial solvent used in drug production.
"It doesn't matter if you abide by all the laws," said Yakovleva. " can always pay you a visit and accuse you of any absurd thing, which will then be approved by a court."
Posted by uhnope | Fri Jan 9, 2015, 05:51 PM (0 replies)
"Cult" might be too strong--they seem pretty harmless. But a hilarious vid.
In 1992 Richard Metzger produced a show which intended to expose the stranger cultural facets of America. Popular alternative icons of the time were asked to act as hosts of the show, interviewing different people in places that fit the model for the show.
Unarius, a cult based out of El Cajon, California, which believes in the existence of UFO's, who allegedly have direct contact with the "Space Brothers," aliens, many of which live in an underground city in Mars, and who practice "Past Life Therapy," among other unique practices and beliefs, were a perfect subject for the show.
Metzger recruited Jello Biafra (original frontman for the Dead Kennedys) to do an in depth interview of Unarius, questioning members and key leaders of the movement, including their founder,"Archangel Uriel" aka Ruth Norman.
Soon after filming this interview in 1992, all of the original footage was stolen and never recovered.
In 2014 Jello Biafra gave a copy of the rough footage to his friend Erleen Nada (musician and video artist), who had a long time fascination with Unarius. Driven by a need to share this incredible interview with the world, Erleen Nada edited the footage (with Richard Metzger's approval), to make it comprehensive for public viewing, and available for viewing on the internet.
Here for the first time ever, 22 years after the filming of this show, is the fascinating interview between Jello Biafra and Unarius.
Fore more info on this interview visit Dangerous Minds.net:
Posted by uhnope | Thu Jan 8, 2015, 11:19 PM (4 replies)
Pro-Kremlin news site Lifenews.ru:
Russian website Lifenews.ru ran an interview with a political analyst named Alexei Martynov, who suggested the militants were "the US intelligence services." Claiming the notion that the Muhammad cartoons motivated the attack "looks funny," Martynov said, "I am sure that American 'curators' are behind the events in Paris, behind those Islamists, in one way or another. The US is conveniently wreaking havoc in Europe with the goal of muzzling the common sense voices that are calling to restore cooperation with Russia."
Rush Limbaugh claimed that Obama's proclamation in his 2012 United Nations speech following the Benghazi attacks—"the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam"—emboldened the Paris attackers. "You have the president of the United States rationalizing barbaric behavior," Limbaugh said. "These actions have consequences."
Posted by uhnope | Thu Jan 8, 2015, 05:58 PM (2 replies)