Journalists aren’t too deferential and timid, as the ex-Newsnight presenter claims. They are only too ready to bare their teeth when it serves establishment interests
You sir, are a formidable explainer of British hypocrisy and political theater. Andrew Marr works for the BBC and Tom Friedman works for the NYTimes. They don’t report so much as sell.
On a related matter, a colleague of yours, Patrick Lawrence has written brilliantly about how the reputation of in-country reporters has been sullied by what he calls “passive activists” wherein they peddle the acceptable narrative by simply reading what is handed to them instead of sharing what they know to be true.
The bias of all commercial media is beyond debate when the subject is war or government. You and Lawrence and a few others are indispensable. Thank you sincerely for your efforts.
The BBC runs the global Trusted News Initiative which provides the near total mainstream media censorship of factual information on Covid. That renders moot any discussion of its impartiality.
That puts Maitliss very firmly in the proper context in much the same way Chomsky did with Marr. By definition the BBC cannot as a state broadcaster be impartial, the funding issues aside. In general terms in my view the left simply does not take narrative control seriously enough. There are too many idealigues going down pointless political rabbit holes because they spent ages reading things like Marx's 18th Brumaire when they should have been reading 1984 and Animal Farm. Unless you change or gain ascendancy in narrative control your message will be eternally refashioned as illustrated by examples in this excellent article.
Of course. Look how vicious the palace lackeys and establishment courtiers have been towards Julian Assange. You'd think he was Emmanuel Goldstein, the way they rage.
You sir, are a formidable explainer of British hypocrisy and political theater. Andrew Marr works for the BBC and Tom Friedman works for the NYTimes. They don’t report so much as sell.
On a related matter, a colleague of yours, Patrick Lawrence has written brilliantly about how the reputation of in-country reporters has been sullied by what he calls “passive activists” wherein they peddle the acceptable narrative by simply reading what is handed to them instead of sharing what they know to be true.
The bias of all commercial media is beyond debate when the subject is war or government. You and Lawrence and a few others are indispensable. Thank you sincerely for your efforts.
That was a very sophisticated analysis, catching subtleties that are easily missed.
Drake Chamberlin
Media & Communication Action Project
https://m-cap.org/
The BBC runs the global Trusted News Initiative which provides the near total mainstream media censorship of factual information on Covid. That renders moot any discussion of its impartiality.
That puts Maitliss very firmly in the proper context in much the same way Chomsky did with Marr. By definition the BBC cannot as a state broadcaster be impartial, the funding issues aside. In general terms in my view the left simply does not take narrative control seriously enough. There are too many idealigues going down pointless political rabbit holes because they spent ages reading things like Marx's 18th Brumaire when they should have been reading 1984 and Animal Farm. Unless you change or gain ascendancy in narrative control your message will be eternally refashioned as illustrated by examples in this excellent article.
Of course. Look how vicious the palace lackeys and establishment courtiers have been towards Julian Assange. You'd think he was Emmanuel Goldstein, the way they rage.