YouTube, Ukrainians Protest Against Conscription Orders; 'Go fight your own war,'
OpEdNews, Does Russia (And Humanity) Have A Future? Paul Craig Roberts, July 25, 2014. The Russian government has finally realized that it has no Western "partners," and is complaining bitterly about the propagandistic lies and disinformation issued without any evidence whatsoever against the Russian government by Washington, its European vassals, and presstitute media. Perhaps the Russian government thought that only Iraq, Libya, Syria, China, and Edward Snowden would be subjected to Washington's lies and demonization. It was obvious enough that Russia would be next. The Russian government and Europe need to look beyond Washington's propaganda, because the reality is much worse. NATO commander General Breedlove and Senate bill 2277 clearly indicate that Washington is organizing itself and Europe for war against Russia. Europe is reluctant to agree with Washington to put Ukraine in NATO. Europeans understand that if Washington or its stooges in Kiev cause a war with Russia, Europe will be the first casualty. Washington finds its vassals' noncompliance tiresome. Remember Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland's "f*ck the EU." And that is just what Washington is about to do.
Why We Can’t Trust The News, Gari. UMCC
Public Relations and Advertising Agency reporting on the conflict in the Ukraine
Each one of us has a healthy, cynical distrust of the news media; it’s perfectly normal. “Don’t believe everything you read in the papers or see on the news”. How many times have we heard that or said it ourselves? But, exactly how much should we believe? The truth is: If people really understood the extent we shouldn’t believe what we read and see in the news, they are likely to go through a bout of depression and a sense of loss and betrayal. I know, because that’s exactly what happened to me.
In 2008, Professor Andy Williams of Cardiff University lead research into the sources of news items. He wanted to know exactly where the information for each news item comes from and how a news item is first identified. Those participating in the research back-tracked through three months worth of news items distributed in the UK. The implication of their results are shocking.
They could prove that 80% of all news stories covered had, to some extent, been introduced or contributed to by external organisations such as PR companies, NGOs, government departments or QUANGOS. Eight in every ten news stories are manipulated in someway by an external party who have a vested interest in presenting that item in a certain way. In fact, just 12% - only slightly more than one in ten news items – are wholly investigated, verified and reported by professional journalists, independent and with no vested interest in the item they are working on.
The remaining 8% – just slightly less than one in ten – had no verifiable source. What that means to the average news consumer is this: You have a slightly better chance than 1 in 10 chance of coming across an honest, unbiased news item. You are far more likely to come across a news item that has had the truth manipulated or doctored in some way by those who are keen for you to form an opinion and belief that they want you to have.
None of which should surprise us. Journalists have to file three times more stories than they did in the 1980s, due to staff and budget reductions. Even if news broadcasting was as it used to be 30 years ago, current financial and staffing restraints would make it difficult to investigate real news, but broadcasting has changed beyond all recognition: 24 rolling news and social media mean that the news beast needs to constantly fed and done so quickly lest someone with a smartphone and twitter feed gets the story out there first. Shortcuts are sought. ‘Fast-food’ news feeds the beast. Mistakes are made.
Crucially, journalism has become a passive occupation. Journalists do not have the resources or time to find stories, let alone investigate them. They have become administrators of press releases; little more than clerks who edit news stories sent by email from PR companies into ‘house-style’ articles. They then file them in their newspaper or news programme. It’s often easy to spot which organisation is behind some articles. Shock survey articles are done by charities or websites that desire a burst of publicity. Mumsnet.com is particularly active in this field; often using surveys carried out by less then 2,000 people. Pouring out shocking statistic surveys is a strategy that has served Mumsnet well; turning it into one of the most powerful political lobby groups on family matters in the UK.
Rami Abdul Rahman observing Syria from his home in the UK
Rami Abdul Rahman observing Syria from his home in the UK
Where the use if the Press Release is most unethical, is in war-reporting. Pompously named, The Syrian Observatory of Human Rights Watch is a very small PR outfit based in the London home of Rami Abdul Rahman, a Syrian man opposed to President Assad; described innocuously by the BBC as a ‘businessman’ with no reference to his political past. The BBC and many other mainstream news media in the west, use his organisations biased press releases as an authoritative news sources Rahman runs an openly biased news sources that feeds anti-Syrian government Press Releases to mainstream media such as the BBC.
Within one week of the outbreak of troubles in the Ukraine, the PR media company Ukraine Media Crisis Centre was set up to feed hard-stretched news reporters with anti-Russian news items; as admitted in this positive-spin article on the organisations that could fill newspaper columns and TV minutes in a cheap, efficient manner. Not a news agency,the Ukraine Media Crisis is nothing but a Public Relations company, with one of its founder members, Nataliya Popovych, having a notable career in advertising. In other words, ‘news’ stories are supplied by Public Relations companies that have a vested interest in telling the story their way; and journalists broadcast and publish these stories because they have few resources to do otherwise.
I have travelled to many countries, and two common factors that all nations share are: A general trust in their national news broadcaster and a mild ridicule of people from ther nations for the level of trust shown in their own national broadcaster. Although this is a commonality amongst all nations, it is never more obvious than in the west. We will scoff at Russians, The Chinese, North Koreans and others for the faith they have in their media, without it dawning on us that we are guilty of the same. What it comes down to is this: When we say “Don’t believe everything we see and hear on the news, we really mean is: Don’t believe about 80% of it!