One day they will close down those news outlets that speak the truth and come knocking at the doors of those who deliver the message. I would pick Britain as the country that is likely to do this - a la Orwell.
This about the liberal media pretty much says it:
“Nothing
delights British former lefties more than an opportunity to defend
power while pretending it is a brave stance in defence of a left
liberal principle.”
---SMR
This
is from Peter Lavelle:
"Je
suis CrossTalk"
Don't
let them shut me down! Please!
A couple of comments from the Guardian:
British
media stations are trying to divert the truth from the people in
UK!!! RT tells the truth how it is, which is why our stations are
getting annoyed... Down with the bbc, and thankyou so much Russia!!!
.....
“So
will the BBC face sanctions for it's bias when it came to the
Scottish referendum and the conflict caused by Israel, will it fuck. How
many Palestinians have been murdered in the past month by Israel yet
it;s constant news when 1 idf soldier is attacked?”
Russia
Today faces inquiry over anti-western comments in Ukraine debate
Media
regulator to launch investigation into views expressed during
Crosstalk programme on Kremlin-backed broadcaster
Russia Today has launched a dedicated UK TV channel that broadcasts five hours of programmes a day made out of its new London studios. Photograph: Dzhavakhadze Zurab/ITAR-TASS Photo/Corbis
2
March, 2014
Russia
Today is to be investigated by media regulator Ofcom over
anti-western comments in a late-night discussion on Ukraine – its
sixth ongoing inquiry into the Kremlin-backed news channel following
complaints by viewers.
The
regulator, which threatened Russia Today, or RT, with statutory
sanctions after repeated breaches of broadcasting regulations on
impartiality last year, faces a new investigation over its Crosstalk
programme broadcast on 23 December last year.
The
programme is understood to have featured a number of anti-western
views in the discussion between the presenter and three studio
guests, prompting one viewer to complain.
RT
was summoned to a meeting with Ofcom last year after four separate
reports, all broadcast in March last year and all dealing with the
situation in Ukraine, were judged to have breached the code governing
UK broadcasters.
RT,
which began broadcasting in the UK nine years ago and a launched a
dedicated UK channel last year, has previously breached UK
broadcasting regulations on 10 occasions on a wide range of issues,
including due impartiality, graphic images, and issues related to
advertising.
Put
on notice by Ofcom since its most recent breach last November, if the
channel is deemed to have breached due impartiality rules again the
regulator will consider taking further action, including the
possibility of a fine.
It
is the sixth ongoing investigation into RT and the third to relate to
its coverage of events in Ukraine.
Ofcom
was already investigating the channel’s 13 July programme The
Truthseeker: Genocide in Ukraine, which was broadcast on the RT
channel in Europe but not in the UK, and its 18 July documentary,
Ukraine’s Refugees.
Separately,
Ofcom launched two investigations into RT’s Syria coverage, both
relating to its broadcast, The Truthseeker: Media ‘Staged’ Syria
Chem Attack, on 23 March last year.
The
regulator is also looking into graphic images of an Isis gunman
shooting a row of people, broadcast on RT on 20 August last year.
An
Ofcom spokesman said: “Ofcom has launched an investigation into
whether this programme about the situation in Ukraine, which included
anti-western comments, was duly impartial.”
A
spokeswoman for RT said that Ofcom had assessed the channel’s
coverage of the crash of MH17 “with regards to bias and has not
found any problems that merited investigation, nor any breach of
standards”.
From Glenn Greenwald
UK
MEDIA REGULATOR AGAIN THREATENS RT FOR “BIAS”: THIS TIME, AIRING
“ANTI-WESTERN VIEWS”
Glenn
Greenwald
2
March, 2014
In
2001, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II used
the occasion of the
annual “Queen’s Speech” to unveil a new statutory proposal
to regulate all media operating in her realm, one
provision of which was the creation of the “Office of
Communications” (Ofcom) to monitor and punish television
outlets which
exhibit “bias.” In
2008, the BBC heralded the
Queen’s Speech as “one of the high points of the parliamentary
calendar, unrivalled in its spectacle and tradition,” as the
monarch “delivers the speech from the grand throne in the House of
Lords.” The press monitor’s Twitter account boasts: “We
keep an eye on the UK’s telecoms, television, radio and postal
industries to make sure they’re doing the best for all of us.”
Ofcom
has rarely punished establishment British media outlets for “bias”
even though the British media is notoriously and slavishly loyal to
the state and other British political and financial elites. Just last
week, Guardian editor
Seumus Milne noted:
“as one
academic study after
another has
demonstrated . . . . from the coverage
of wars to
economics, [the BBC] has a pro-government, elite and corporate
anchor. The BBC is full of Conservatives and former New Labour
apparatchiks with almost identical views about politics, business and
the world.” Indeed, of all the countless media outlets around the
world covering NSA reporting over the last 18 months, the BBC has
easily been the worst: the most overtly biased in favor of
mass surveillance and official claims. Ofcom’s authority over
BBC is limited, but plenty of British media outlets – certainly
most of its largest ones – are driven by these same biases.
During
my first week writing at the
Guardian,
a long-time observer (and one-time member) of the British media
warned me about the extreme group think bias of UK journalists,
and I
quoted that warning in
the context of describing their extreme and deeply personal animus
toward WikiLeaks: “Nothing delights British former lefties more
than an opportunity to defend power while pretending it is a brave
stance in defence of a left liberal principle.” Needless to say,
none of that extreme, power-serving media bias – including the
avalanche of deceit and lies much of the British media peddled to
sell Tony Blair’s invasion of Iraq – has ever provoked any
punishment from Ofcom.
By
rather stark contrast, Ofcom has repeatedly threatened the
Russian-state television outlet RT with revocation of its license.
Last November, that outlet launched a
British-specific, London-based version of its network, but previously
had been broadcasting its standard English-speaking programming in
the UK. At the time of its launch, the
Guardian noted that
RT “is facing six separate investigations by media regulator
Ofcom.”
That
investigative history included a finding last fall whereby
the network was
“threatened with statutory sanctions by [] Ofcom after the
Kremlin-backed news channel breached broadcasting regulations on
impartiality with its coverage of the Ukraine crisis.” RT
executives were “summoned to a meeting with Ofcom after it was
found guilty of breaching the code governing UK broadcasters” and
told they could face revocation of their license if these breaches of
“impartiality rules” continued.
Today,
Ofcom announced a new “bias” investigation into RT. The offense
this time, according
to the
Guardian,
is the broadcasting of “anti-western comments in a late-night
discussion on Ukraine.” Specifically, “the programme is
understood to have featured a number of anti-western views in the
discussion between the presenter and three studio guests.”
Unfortunately,
RT told the
Intercept this
morning that it was barred by Ofcom regulations even from commenting
on this new investigation. Not only are they being threatened for the
crime of airing “anti-western views,” but they are prohibited by
law from publicly discussing these threats.
That RT
is “biased” is true as far as it goes, but it doesn’t go very
far at all. It is expressly funded by the Russian government to
present a Russian viewpoint of the world. But all media outlets
composed of and run by human beings are “biased,” and that
certainly includes the leading British outlets, which rail against
Russia (and every other perceived adversary of the west) at least as
much as RT defends it.
All
of this underscores the propagandistic purpose of touting “media
objectivity” versus “bias.” The former simply does not exist.
Revealingly, it is British journalists themselves who are most vocal
in demanding that Her Majesty’s Government bar RT from
broadcasting on “bias” grounds: fathom how authoritarian a
society must be if it gets its
journalists to
play the leading role in demanding that the state ban (or imprison)
journalists it dislikes. So notably, the
most vocal among the
anti-RT crowd on
the ground that it spreads lies and propaganda – such as Nick
Cohen and Oliver
Kamm–
were also the most aggressive peddlers of the pro-UK-government
conspiracy theories and lies that led to the Iraq War.
That
people like this,
with their histories
of pro-government propaganda, are the ones demanding punishment
of RT for “bias” tells you all you need to know about what is
really at play here. What’s really driving this is illustrated by
the edict
issued today by
one of the High Priests of U.S. Foreign Policy, Brookings President
and former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot:
This
is about nothing more than ensuring that western citizens are
not exposed to the side of The Enemy. Notably, Ofcom previously
revoked the
license of PressTV, the state-run television agency of Iran, after
first fining
it £100,000 for
an interview with an imprisoned journalist which was said to be
coerced. Western countries love to depict citizens of their long
list of adversaries as being propagandized – whether it be China,
Iran, Russia, North Korea, ISIS, Al Qaeda, Syria, Venezuela, Ecuador,
etc. etc. – even as they themselves work in all sorts of ways to
ban their own citizens from exposure to those adversaries’
views, such as when a U.S. court imprisoned
a Muslim American for
years for the “crime” of including a Hezbollah channel in the
cable TV package he sold in Brooklyn (of course, these purported
concerns about propaganda and a free press magically
and tellingly disappear when
the suppression is done by regimes compliant with the U.S. and its
allies).
Purporting
to compel media “objectivity” is always about
imposing a very specific and subjective agenda masquerading as
impartiality. The chair
of Ofcom is Colette
Bowe, who was previously the chief information officer at the
Department of Trade and Industry as well as a board member of Morgan
Stanley and Electra Private Equity. She is also “a former executive
chairman of Fleming Fund Management, chief executive of the Personal
Investment Authority, and a director of the Securities and Investment
Board.” Does anyone belief her concept of “objectivity” and
“impartiality” will be anything other than the prevailing
conventional wisdom and orthodoxies of the British elite?
The
UK Government loves to lecture the world about infringements of
liberty generally and press freedom specifically. It does so as it
threatens to revoke the broadcasting license of a media outlet for
broadcasting “anti-western” views and other perspectives at odds
with the UK Government, all while shielding (and venerating) the
equally virulent biases from pro-state television in the UK. That is
the classic hallmark of how a government propagandizes its citizens:
ensuring that they hear only those views of which the government
approves and which serves its interests and agenda.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.