With Russia under attack from all sides of the western political and media establishment, two pieces of journalism from mainstream British publications have been singled out as balanced works, standing against a tide of inflammatory propaganda.
The two pieces in question are Rod Liddle’s generally good piece in The Spectator called ‘Stop this stupid sabre-rattling against Russia and To all the self-identifying liberals cheering about Russia Today’s bank accounts being frozen, did you ever consider your own bias,’ by Matthew Turner in The Independent.
Whilst many fair minded individuals have praised the editorial decision to print such balanced pieces in mainstream media, I’m sorry to say that you’ve been duped. You’ve fallen victim to one of the oldest tricks in the propaganda playbook. Here’s why:
Propaganda cannot succeed if it is constantly blatant and monotonous, this is especially true in the age of the internet. In order to successfully propagate an agenda driven narrative, one must occasionally insert points of contradiction in order to make the audience believe there is a genuine debate rather than a constant chorus of journalists lining up to say the same thing in slightly different ways.
The reason that the Spectator and Independent printed stories which weren’t overtly anti-Russia was because it lends credence to their front-page stories which lambaste Russia. What’s more, this is a technique used to silence voices in the western world who are genuine and consistent in their calls for de-escalation in the new not so cold war with Russia.
Two illustrative case studies are George Galloway in Britain and Ron Paul in America. Both men have been consistent, intellectually minded critics of the anti-Russia hysteria in the west and they approach it from two different political traditions. Galloway is a socialist and Paul is a libertarian. Both men have reached the conclusion that anti-Russian sentiment in the west has pushed the world closer to war and is bad for human beings everywhere.
When it comes to hearing balance from political figures in the west, Galloway and Paul ought to be the ‘go to guys’ for such commentary. Yet instead of reporting on their statements, the western establishment attempts to constantly marginalise them.
Ron Paul was lacerated and mocked by the Republican Party during his attempts to secure the party’s nomination to be an anti-war presidential candidate and Galloway was expelled from the Labour party by Tony Blair, due to his unrelenting opposition to the war in Iraq.
When ignoring these men isn’t enough, the western media cart out ‘opposition pieces’ from mainstream figures in an attempt to say ‘look, we’re not as overtly biased as we look’. This makes it all the easier to ignore and marginalise consistently anti-war figures whether they be on the left or right.
Mainstream politics and media are terrified of the fact that due to new media and social media, the mainstream isn’t so mainstream any more. The messages of Galloway and Paul are being heard ever more widely due to their ability to distribute information through channels which bypass the powers that be.
So do not be fooled by the bones mainstream media throws to fair minded people in an attempt to show balance where there is none. Instead, focus on the voices of consistent opposition to a war hungry political and media establishment. If you’re reading this, chances are, you are already doing so.