John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY JOE LAURIA IN CONSORTIUM NEWS

 

“The Guardian has claimed Paul Manafort visited Julian Assange at the Ecuador embassy. John Pilger visited Assange and tells CN’s Joe Lauria Assange strongly denied any such meeting”

 

The Guardian, under its present direction, serves pretty much as a crypto-Tory propaganda outlet.

It tries covering its trail with loads of stuff about the disadvantaged and minorities, but these are puff pieces of no real substance. Indeed, many of them strike the reader as forced and not terribly sincere.

When it comes to the big issues of the day – Assange, Russia, Corbyn, America’s military, Israel’s behavior, Saudi Arabia’s murderer Prince, Ukraine, and others – The Guardian view is virtually indistinguishable from some Tory Party house organ under the direction of Theresa May.

It is an amazing phenomenon that anyone still gives The Guardian any credibility. Its extreme bias and willingness to run what can only be called disinformation disqualify it entirely from being taken seriously, at least by serious people, and certainly on serious issues.

Its bias shows in many ways, notably in the way it handles comments from readers. It is very controlling, starting with big limits on what story topics are even allowed comments to removing (non-abusive) comments to banning people from commenting.

It still lives off its old reputation from decades ago when it was a (somewhat dull) publication genuinely concerned with working-class and progressive matters.

Today, on the Internet, the main page resembles a pop magazine with its mix of personalities, movies, fads, pop books, television, promotions, pop singers, and travel with a spot of local interest. This all goes to trying to draw a younger audience.

That is all enmeshed with numberless light articles about the unfortunate, women achieving things, and people with unusual sexual identity problems. This kind of material provides the paper’s only claim to being progressive or liberal today.

Under this outer skin, as it were, comes the red meat of The Guardian.

I could give dozens of examples, but here, below, is my favorite, analyzed as what I call a celebration of Hate Russia Day. It is propaganda and disinformation and just plain hate on a grotesque scale. An old 1950s Soviet publication might even have been ashamed to pile it on so thickly.

But The Guardian is not ashamed, not in the least, and it does comparable things, week-in and week-out, about Assange as Russian tool, Russia as an imminent threat to “the West,” Corbyn as anti-Semite, the good work of America’s military, Iran as the root of evil, celebrating Saudi Arabia’s murderer Prince as progressive, Ukraine as a victim of aggression, and others.

Along the way, it manages to heap praise and give continued publicity to the likes of Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton, a couple of the most dishonest and murderous figures of our time.

https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/05/21/john-chuckman-comment-absurd-lengths-to-which-our-press-goes-to-attack-russia-britains-guardian-holds-hate-russia-day-today-some-of-its-stuff-is-so-ham-fisted-it-reads-like-1959-pravda-atta/

 

John Chuckman

EXPANSION OF COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY JANE MARTINSON IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“Press standards: the vital bond of trust that journalists have to win back”

 

It simply ain’t going to happen.

Even if many individual journalists wanted to change their industry, they could not.

Newspapers and broadcasting have always been viewed as means of influence, and I think today that is truer than ever.

I say that because there are so relatively few newspapers and broadcasters left owing to decades of consolidation and mergers and take-overs, all permitted by governments.

We have newspaper and broadcasting empires built on the desirability of exercising the power to influence.

The relatively small number of owners left are very much committed to the concept, influencing government itself and influencing the public in favor of the government, as any brief survey of the major corporate press starkly reveals.

That on-going effort should be obvious to all critical readers and listeners.

Other changed technology and economic conditions also affect the press greatly. The press has lost a lot of advertising revenue to the Internet. It simply cannot afford much in the way of foreign correspondents, investigative reporting, and other costly activities. And, for sure, you won’t find much of them in any survey.

Pages are filled today with extremely light and low-cost or even costless stuff. What anyone could even term journalism, whether good or bad, is often a small proportion of content.

And national governments are busy in all kinds of dark or covert activity – perhaps at a level as never before. They will not tolerate much true or accurate reportage in those dark matters. They very much do have tools to discourage and punish it. Anyway, most of the corporate owners today – extremely well-off members of the establishment – have zero interest in embarrassing their governments. They are “all in it together,” as it were.

Imagine, just as one example, the New York Times undertaking an intense set of reports on what has actually happened in Syria? They would embarrass their own government, they would embarrass key allies like the Saudi Princes, they would be accused of undermining the policies of the United States, they might be charged in court, they would immediately lose all cooperation from government officials and no longer receive helpful leaks, and they would lose serious advertising dollars from companies loyal to or associated with the government.

They would also embarrass Israel, a country with whom they are intimately tied, having admitted not long ago that every story connected to Israel is passed by that state’s official censor before being published.

The further into ‘deep state” stuff, “dark ops” and the like, any government goes, it is guaranteed that its own press will be deliberately negligent or dishonest in reporting about it. Today, the United States is not only up to its armpits in such dirty stuff, it very much browbeats and intimidates allies to follow the pattern. And that is exactly what we see in the press in Britain, in Canada, in France, in Germany, and in other member states of “the West.” The West does much the same things with the press the old Soviets did, it just does them in subtler and less obvious ways.

Such are the realities of contemporary journalism, and journalists themselves are, after all, just salaried employees who can be sent packing in an instant plus with the threat of bad references to any potential new employer. Even the very best of journalists has no real leverage, and the silly journalism schools keep graduating troops of new hopefuls each year. Any idealism about journalism and truth and trust is just fantasy.

As someone once wisely said, the only way to enjoy freedom of the press is to own one.

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN TRUTH NEWS

Guardian, NYT Paint Power-Grabbing Saudi Dictator As Roguish, Visionary ‘Reformer’

The Guardian, under Editor-in-Chief Katharine Viner, has become a key British voice for Israeli interests, a full working member of the Israel lobby in Britain.

You cannot but come to this conclusion if you read it for even a week.

For example, it conducted a long and multi-pronged attack against Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party on the basis of completely unsubstantiated charges of anti-Semitism.

The real reason working against him is of course his reasonably balanced views on Israel and Palestine, a reason to hurt his chances of coming to power at all costs. With a deluge of comments and complaints about their McCarthyism against Corbyn, they backed off a bit, but still take regular little opportunities.

Every so often, we see plainly ridiculous articles like a Jewish person in Britain explaining why he or she is seeking to get the German citizenship to which they are entitled. I recall three of these over some months.

The Guardian regularly promotes, or tries to resurrect, Tony Blair, the best servant Israel ever had at 10 Downing with his help in destroying Iraq and receiving such rewards as the Israeli Peace Prize plus many sinecures for his dirty work.

Blair’s concept of “New Labour” – threatened by Corbyn’s leadership – actually at least in part amounted to a quiet pact with the Israel lobby in return for their vigorous support, both in campaign funds and press enthusiasm.

It all represents quite a turnaround from what the paper once was, a stolid and somewhat dull voice for working people and the Labour Party in Britain. Every issue of today’s Guardian includes material that can only be described as pamphlet-style advocacy for sympathy and support of Israel. Some dilute attempt is made to seem balanced, but it is in a ratio of maybe 1:10.

As for the New York Times, well, it wasn’t that long ago that the paper actually admitted that every story that it receives concerning Israel or Israeli interests actually is sent to the official Israel Censor’s Office for approval before running in The Times. So much for impartiality.

Of course, readers always understood, without the additional information, what a completely biased publication The Times is. Its flagship columnist, Thomas Friedman, is an embarrassingly biased advocate for Israel, as well as for the Pentagon too.

And the truth is simply that the new Saudi Crown Prince is Israel’s man in Saudi Arabia.

Readers may enjoy:
https://chuckmanwords.wordpress.com/2017/11/10/john-chuckman-essay-what-is-really-going-on-in-saudi-arabia/

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“Fake news is ‘killing people’s minds’ claims Apple boss Tim Cook”

The entire idea of fake news is itself fake.

I cannot even understand the controversy, except for the fact that it is promoted and featured around the clock by the corporate press and its recent allies, America’s multi-multi-billion dollar hi-tech online industry.

Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook all sleep in the same bed with the corporate press and with America’s intrusive security establishment.

As long as there has been something called news, there has been fake news.

The boy in the fairy tale calling out “wolf!” was an early example. He was acting as town crier – an early form of press – putting out a lie to serve his own interests.

Of course, these fellows are acting just like the boy in the fairy tale in shouting “wolf!”

There has been nothing but misrepresentation and lies or blissful ignoring by the corporate press from time immemorial about any matter of vital concern to government.

What’s new? Only that some of the independent and alternative press are really starting to be listened to by large numbers, and that is happening at the same time that the traditional corporate press is in serious economic decline.

Much of what is in the independent and alternative press is not true or accurate, but given the history of the corporate press, what’s new about that?

You have never been able to be fairly accurately informed by having a paper, any paper, served you on a platter.

You must always dig and doubt because the motivations for misrepresentation are boundless.

You don’t write a term paper citing just one source for a pivotal fact. You cross check.

It is no different with news. And the last people anyone should trust to deliver truth on a platter are the folks at outfits like Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook, and I say that in view of their own records of behavior in many things from how they treat information to how they treat customers