Media

[TsarSamuil]

Stephen Cohen: A lone media warrior in the cause of Russian-American rapprochement.

By Dr Leonid Goldin - RT.com
June 03, 2015 17:29

Regarded in US academic and media circles as “Putin’s apologist” and criticized by Democrats and Republicans alike, Prof. Stephen Cohen plays a crucial role in the modern political discourse, where a “You’re either with us or against us” mindset reigns.

I was recently invited for a ride-along to Mikhail Freydlin’s bookstore in Queens by a friend of mine, a prominent Russian diplomat whose career ended at a high-level position in the UN. We shared the car with a married couple of ex-diplomats now teaching at US universities, both from Ukraine. My friend’s wife was from Kiev, too, so it was quite obvious that the sore spot, i.e. Russian-Ukrainian-Western relations – would be best avoided.

However, the ride was long, and as we filled our time with some abstract academia talk, everything went well. But then someone mentioned a recent conference in Washington held by the US-Russia organization where Stephen Cohen was a central figure, and I made a remark that probably no one in America knows and understands Russia better than him. No one argued with me, but the conversation stopped. And I’m sensing it will not be resumed.

Grasping Russia with one’s mind

In Soviet times, one didn’t have to be a scholar acquainted with the American academia to know Stephen Cohen’s name. Just like Marshall Goldman and a number of other experts on the USSR he was referred to by the Communist party ideologists as an agent of the State Department, or the CIA, or Zionism, whose sole purpose was, in their view, to undermine the foundations of socialist statehood. Cohen has never been ultra – neither on the left nor on the right – but his historical interests, i.e. Russia and the socialist system, put him on the list on the regime’s ideological enemies by default – while in the US he was time and again suspected of having a soft spot for Marxism. No one was allowed to stay unaligned: if you didn’t put yourself on one or the other side of the barricades, others did it for you.

During the Cold War, the United States probably had as many experts on the Soviet Union, Kremlin and the “enigmatic Russian soul” as the USSR had propaganda agents. When the Soviet Union dissolved it seemed there was no more need for either kind. The party ideologists woke up to the new world, sobered up and went on to serve the new masters of life, and many of the American experts on the Russian and Soviet history got onto new career tracks. As Zbigniew Brzezinski, the US National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, also an expert on the USSR, put it: “Russia is no longer of significance.”

No need to remind about those events and people, which made Russia and its relations with the US very significant again, and brought the two countries to the brink of a new cold war. The unused developments of the old times came in handy for the modern rhetoric. The world however has become much more pragmatic. Ideology is only relevant for fanatics, whereas the modern Russian policy, like that of the US, is determined by very specific interests. Things that are still suitable for a lecture or in media are now irrelevant for real politics. When making big decisions, the current authorities don’t seek academicians’ advice or refer to scholarly research.

There are however some expectations, like those who determine the Russian-US policies, and follow Stephen Cohen’s speeches and articles. Cohen was born in America; his grandfather was a Russian immigrant. Stephen majored in Russian and Soviet history and politics at university. While studying in England, he went on a trip to the Soviet Union for his practical training. Cohen received his PhD at Columbia University, and then became a professor at Princeton University, and at New York University. Other than doing his studies and academic works, he maintains contacts with Russia’s leadership and intellectual elites. Cohen developed close ties with Mikhail Gorbachev, Nikolay Bukharin’s widow, Anna Larina, and Joseph Stalin’s daughter, Svetlana. He advised George H. W. Bush. He is usually referred to as a leftie, or a liberal, but he essentially doesn’t belong to any party. Had there been a dissent party, he could’ve easily been its leader.

Cohen predicted Perestroika even before Gorbachev, based on hopes for Bukharin’s socialism model. Cohen’s book about Bukharin made a strong impression on the Soviet intellectuals, who cherished an illusion of “socialism with a human face.” Thanks to Cohen, Bukharin’s name was reinstated. He was politically rehabilitated in the Soviet Union and in the international socialist movement. Cohen personally helped Bukharin’s wife and son, and many other Gulag victims. He dedicated one of his books to the return of those who had been affected by Stalin’s political purges.

Stephen Cohen devoted several monographs to current Russian-American relations: “Sovieticus: American Perceptions and Soviet Realities,” “Rethinking the Soviet Experience,” “Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia,” “Was the Soviet System Reformable?”, “The Question of Questions: Was the Soviet Union Worth Saving?” and “Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold War”. The titles of Cohen’s articles in periodicals also indicate his position: “Obama instead of gratitude to Putin trips it,” “America’s New Cold War With Russia,” “Obama’s Russia ‘Reset’: Another Lost Opportunity?” and “America’s Failed (Bi-Partisan) Russian Policy.”

Professor Cohen is a regular guest at WABC, the most popular American radio station. WABC hosts are mainly ultra-right media celebrities. You can hear Mark Levin’s hysterical talk here; Rush Limbaugh had been stirring up panic here for a long time; but John Bachelor, America’s most reasonable commentator, also works here. Stephen Cohen is a co-host of Bachelor’s shows and what he says sounds shocking to the American listeners. He reminds them about America’s promise not to enlarge NATO membership up to Russia’s borders; he asks how the United States would react if Russia would place its missiles in Canada and Mexico; he reminds them of the Cuban missile crisis, which brought the nuclear powers to the edge of nuclear war. He speaks about Russia’s attempts to develop strategic cooperation with the West, which were rejected by the American government. But not many people support Cohen’s ideas – he is practically a lonely media warrior.

Stephen Cohen is extraordinary both in his political orientation and in his personal life. He is married to the legendary Katrina van den Heuvel, the editor of The Nation magazine, which doesn’t hesitate to criticize America’s foreign and domestic policy and the financial elite. Katrina is “drop-dead gorgeous,” an unbelievably beautiful aristocratic and graceful woman. She comes from a family of government officials, diplomats, businessmen, lawyers, writers and actors. But her Princeton years and Cohen’s influence made her a strong opponent of the establishment. She has become one the most prominent experts on the Soviet Union and Russia. She acted as Cohen’s coeditor of “Voices of Glasnost: Interviews with Gorbachev’s Reformers.” A few more details to the couple’s portrait: Katrina is much younger than Cohen and she is rich, unlike Stephen. Her money and her business talent saved The Nation from bankruptcy; she also sponsors many Russian projects. If it is true that man’s accomplishments are determined by what kind of woman is standing next to him, then Cohen’s marriage is a convincing proof of his merits and abilities.

The Nation magazine often publishes Cohen’s articles. Here’s an excerpt from one of them: “A new Cold War divide is already descending in Europe… If NATO forces move toward western Ukraine or even to its border with Poland… Moscow is likely to send its forces into eastern Ukraine. The result would be a danger of war comparable to the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. Even if the outcome is the non-military “isolation of Russia,” today’s Western mantra, the consequences will be dire. Moscow will not bow but will turn, politically and economically, to the East… above all to fuller alliance with China. The United States will risk losing an essential partner in vital areas of its own national security, from Iran, Syria and Afghanistan to threats of a new arms race, nuclear proliferation and more terrorism. …Prospects for a resumption of Russia’s democratization will be terminated for at least a generation."

I’ve known Stephen Cohen for a long time in that I’ve read his publications and lectures, but I only talked to him once, about 20 years ago during my visit to the US. He wasn’t a celebrity back then, and his attention surprised me. Recently I contacted him by e-mail and asked a question not really expecting to get an answer – today he is popular like a rock star. But he remembered me and answered my question in a very friendly manner and precisely to the point. (Though his answer wasn’t exactly what I wanted to hear.) This was an extraordinary experience for me, because the scientific celebrities who were previously happy to have long conversations with me in Moscow, lost interest in me, when my situation changed.

A stranger among friends

Needless to say that Cohen’s stance and political activism brought about both fame and quite a few opponents and even enemies. His views are clearly at odds with those of the establishment. Mitt Romney sees Russia as the main strategic opponent of the US. Vice President Joe Biden, former chair of the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, says that “we don’t think in Cold War terms anymore,” but, just like Secretary of State John Kerry, puts the blame for the worsening relations on Russia. Obama is concerned about the Republicans accusing him of being weak and lacking political will, and he resorts to combative rhetoric more often. If we talk about public opinion in the US, more than 60 percent of the population is negative toward Russia. And in Russia over 80 percent view the US in an unfavorable light. The Duma and Russia media worked themselves into an anti-American frenzy. Meanwhile CIA agent Jack Ryan – a character created by Tom Clancy, the author of Ronald Reagan’s favorite bestseller book “The Hunt for Red October” – is back on American screens, saving the US from Russian conspirators and terrorists. It’s hard to look for compromises and shifts in the countries’ respective stances in this situation.

Cohen recently became a professor emeritus, free of the teaching routine, so now he has the opportunity to do what he does best – fight for a lost cause.

In American academia and media, Cohen is regarded with anger and contempt as Putin’s apologist, minion or friend. He is criticized by both the left and the right, from the conservative Wall Street Journal and Free Beacon to the liberal New York Times, New Republic, Daily Beast and Newsweek. In his tribute on the occasion of Cohen’s birthday, poet Yevgeny Yevtushenko calls him a unique friend and envies his naivety. I won’t argue with the poet, but in the course of his long life Yevtushenko said and wrote a lot of things that sound naïve today. Garry Kasparov, on the contrary, doesn’t consider Cohen naïve and perceives him as Putin’s conscious ally. I think that accusation in naivety is the best compliment a humanist can get. God was naïve when He hoped that people would follow reason, conscience and duty.

I have some objections and criticism of my own when it comes to Cohen’s work. When Perestroika began, I was also writing about an alternative development path for socialism, potentially including even Bukharin’s model. But NEP, Khrushchev’s reforms, Kosygin’s moderate attempts and Gorbachev’s experience showed that socialism and one-party dictatorship are inseparable. Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin understood this and regarded liberal ideas as a deadly threat to a socialist regime.

It seems to me that, assessing the current situation, Cohen could strengthen his argument by highlighting the fact that the Russian elite – higher officials, oligarchs, pop culture celebrities – are in no way interested in a conflict with the West, with which they have tied their fates long ago. Their capital and real estate are in the West, their children study there; the West is their safe haven if anything goes wrong in Russia or Putin gets angry. Every single one of them understands that the Western authorities have all the means at their disposal to poison their lives, just the same as the Russian prosecutor’s office. Putin is their hostage, just like they are his. The elite harbor no patriotic feelings and won’t stand shoulder to shoulder with a penniless compatriot who does.

I think Cohen doesn’t quite factor into the equation the long-term objectives of American foreign policy. It’s not so much about prejudice and Cold War inertia as it is about fear of the future. It’s clear that the hopes of liberal democracy triumphing in Russia are lost, and if the political and economic situation deteriorates rapidly, other people will come to power in Russia, and Putin will seem like a democrat and a peacemaker in comparison. The West should be ready for such a turn of events.

Nevertheless, the role that Cohen plays in the modern political discourse is vitally important, because the existing rhetoric – along the lines of “You’re either with us or you’re against us” – is not helping at all. Cohen is not only a brilliant scholar and speaker, he’s also a prime example showing that an intellectual can actively influence decision-making and situation development, and that it’s possible remain independent at the time when ideas serve those who can pay more.

Regardless of how you see Cohen’s role and views, he is living proof that academic freedom exists in the US and that a serious social and ideological debate is really possible there. The opposition should be very grateful to Stephen and Katrina, without whom no one would know about them or print them.

But most importantly, the opportunity to express and hear out all the points of view allows society to understand the multilayered picture of the current world better. Limiting this opportunity represents a graver threat to democracy and freedom of thought than any criticism. We should not only use the favorite mantra of fighters against tyranny – “I don’t share your views, but I’m willing to die for your right to express them” – when addressing others, but also keep it in mind ourselves.

[TsarSamuil]

[TsarSamuil]

'Let viewers form own opinions' - German channel probed for airing RT show.

RT.com
June 09, 2015 00:44

The current “economic war” with Russia could eventually lead to a military confrontation, unless people are given the opportunity to form their own opinions, said the editor and co-owner of a German channel currently being probed for airing a show by RT.

The Salve.TV channel broadcasts RT Deutsch’s “The Missing Part” news talk-show as “a beautiful contrast color” that lets every viewer“form his or her own opinion.” This was the view of Klaus-Dieter Boehm, the editor-in-chief and co-owner of the TV-channel in a recent interview with the Junge Welt newspaper.

Boehm also added that the German media have already portrayed the program as “propaganda.”

According to the editor-in-chief, people who have been stopped in the street and asked about RT have “entirely positive” reactions, while adding that it was hard to find a negative one. His channel has also received a number of positive letters from people he believes want to see an alternative point of view.

The head of Salve.TV mentioned a survey that showed that about a half of the German population do not trust its mainstream media, particularly in reporting on issues such as the crisis in Ukraine.

Boehm concluded the interview by looking at data, which reflects the economic situation in Thuringia – a state in the center of the country, where the sanctions against Russia have hit Germany the hardest. Unemployment has risen in the region because around 40 percent of companies had trade links with Russia and they have suffered the “greatest losses,” according to the channel’s owner.

“There is currently an economic war, but those who are stoking the flames apparently want to draw us into a real war. This has to be counteracted through journalism,” Boehm said.

Thuringia’s media watchdog is currently looking into the Salve.TV channel following a complaint by several lawmakers that it was "biased towards Russia's position" and lacked “critical journalistic delivery.”

The TV-channel with a potential audience of 200,000 viewers, rebroadcasts RT’s half-an-hour-long program free of charge, following an agreement, reached with Ivan Rodionov, RT Deutsch chief editor.


Screenshot from salve-tv.netScreenshot from salve-tv.net

-------------

‘Viewers’ reaction was stunning’ – head of TV channel probed over RT Deutsch show.

RT.com
June 13, 2015 23:23

An RT Deutsch show has received stunning support among viewers in Germany, according to the chief editor and co-owner of a local channel that is currently being investigated for airing the program.

"We are shocked by the fact that [the] RT show broadcast on our channel has received such support. We have received letters that support it,” Klaus-Dieter Boehm, the editor-in-chief and co-owner of the Salve.TV told RT.

“Nothing like this has ever happened before. We are very pleased with such a reaction."

Salve.TV’s broadcast of RT Deutsch’s “The Missing Part” (Der Fehlende Part) news talk-show “caused an uproar all over Germany,” according to Boehm.

This suggests that no one is “interested for the viewers to have access to alternative information,” he said, stressing that the viewer should be able to independently form an opinion.

One of the viewers commented on Salve.TV’s website: “The vicious anti-Russian propaganda, which was carried out all this time, cannot be called diversity in the media. In general they all write about the same things. And I am very glad that one of the channels boldly and openly declared its readiness to share a different perspective.”

RT Deutsch has been criticized by German lawmakers who claimed that its program was one-sided and "biased towards Russia's position." Following the complaints, the media watchdog in the federal state of Thuringia (TLM) decided to look into Salve.TV who aired the “The Missing Part.”

Boehm added that Salve.TV, which is not happy with the “unipolar opinion” in the mainstream media, “felt it was necessary to introduce another tone for the benefit of democracy and the formation of a democratic will.”

He questioned whether there is a correct or incorrect opinion and whether other German media such as ARD and FAZ are “always absolutely right and we are always absolutely wrong.”

[TsarSamuil]

EU drafts plan to counter Russian media ‘disinformation’, targeting RT.

RT.com
June 24, 2015 20:57

The EU has drafted a plan to counter what it sees as “Russian disinformation activities” calling for the promotion of EU policies in the post-Soviet space and the implementation of measures against Russian media, including RT.

The nine-page paper drafted by the EU Foreign Service and obtained by EUobserver was prepared ahead of the June 25-26 summit and is set to be voted on by EU leaders on Thursday.

The plan is aimed at tackling Russia’s “use and misuse of communication tools” and the “promotion of EU policies” in former Soviet states as well as support for “independent media” and “increased public awareness of disinformation activities by external actors,” the report says.

It specifically mentions RT, which according to the report broadcasts “fabrications and hate speech from their bureaus in EU cities.”

“The EU … will work to improve co-operation between national regulators, including through meetings of the European Regulators Group”, it adds.

The European Commission also plans to “table a new legislative proposal to improve the regulatory environment and take account of current challenges,” according to the draft.

The plan says that the EU Foreign Service will create a special cell to spearhead the activities called East StratComTeam by September. It will distribute information in Russian and in local languages in the EU’s eastern neighborhood, in countries such as Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine.

The Russian Foreign Ministry lashed out at the EU over the report, saying that the proposed plan is violating the right to freedom of expression and creating conditions of total discrimination against Russian media.

The draft plan presented on Tuesday is “clearly aimed at pushing out Russia’s presence in the international media field,” the ministry said in a statement on Wednesday. “Following the introduction of restrictive measures against Russian journalists the EU is trying to create conditions for the total discrimination of Russian media.”

While the Western media is speaking in one voice, the EU is trying to push out one of the few alternative sources of information, said RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan.

“The EU is actively trying to shut out RT, to stifle a rare alternative voice in international news media,” she said.

“It’s not enough that there are hundreds of Western newspapers, TV channels, websites and radio stations, all beaming the same take on what is going on in the world. The UK has created a 1,500-strong army unit to, among other things, fight Russia in the social media space. NATO has a special taskforce dedicated to countering Russia’s influence. Deutsche Welle just launched a 24-hour English-language news channel that’s supposed to compete directly with RT – despite the global presence of Euronews, BBC World News and CNN International.”

“If despite all these efforts the EU is still concerned with “losing the information war” to Russia, perhaps the time has come for it to realize that people around the world simply no longer believe their same tired, one-sided narratives of current events,” said Simonyan.

The EU project was previously discussed in March, however no details were revealed at the time. The EU announced its plans following US Secretary of State John Kerry’s plea to lawmakers for more money to tackle the so-called Russian propaganda in February.

Speaking before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on February 26, he urged for the setting up of “democracy promotion” programs around the world.

“Russia Today (sic) can be heard in English, do we have an equivalent that can be heard in Russian? It’s a pretty expensive proposition. They are spending huge amounts of money,” Kerry said apparently forgetting that Voice of America has been broadcasting in Russian since 1947.

Though the US government media receives $721 million a year, in the budget proposal submitted by Kerry, the Department of State asked for “$639 million to help our friends in Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova as they seek to strengthen their democracies, withstand pressure from Russia, and to integrate more closely into Europe.”

By contrast RT’s budget for 2015 is about $225 million. The BBC World Service, which complained about RT “winning the information war” in January, is funded to the tune of $375 million a year.

[TsarSamuil]

West losing social media war with extremists – Joint Force commander.

RT.com
July 01, 2015 12:10

Fanatics are beating the West in the social media war to win hearts and minds through “lies,” according to the head of Britain’s Joint Forces Command, which includes Special Forces, defense intelligence and cyber warfare units.

General Richard Barrons warned Russia and extremist groups including Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) are outpacing the West on social media.

“We are dealing with opponents in ISIL and Russia who do this for a living. ISIL uses Twitter and Facebook in 23 languages. We barely do it in our own,” Barrons told the Telegraph.

“If you are fortunate enough to be the commander who is going to run the fight for Mosul, probably the most important thing you want to do as you launch your operation is to get into the minds of the 1 million citizens of Mosul through their computers and their mobile phone.”

As far as tactics are concerned, Barrons said the West must “either tell them the truth – it’s going to be a tough day ... or tell them a lie, you’ve got to move somewhere else.

“We’ve been doing that for centuries.”

In January it was announced the British military would form a new force specializing in “non-lethal” forms of psychological warfare using social media such as Twitter and Facebook to tackle the “asymmetric battlefields” of the 21st century.

The brigade will number 2,000 and will be made up of regular troops from all three services, as well as reservists and civilians.

It will attempt to draw the best talent from the regulars and reserves and will also allow civilians with specialist skills to operate alongside their military counterparts.

Senior officers have said the army has to adapt to the changing nature of warfare, as conflicts from Iraq to Ukraine have demonstrated, and that the information war is as important as tanks and artillery.

As well as being able to shape “behavior through the use of dynamic narratives” the brigade will also specialize in reconstruction and development and humanitarian assistance in the battle to win hearts and minds.

[TsarSamuil]

Poland’s media watchdog may revoke local radio license after station aired Russian shows.

RT.com
July 07, 2015 20:22

Poland’s media watchdog has launched a procedure to revoke the license of Radio Hobby which airs Russia’s Sputnik news agency’s radio shows. The radio station’s founder believes the move is politically motivated.

Poland’s National Broadcasting Council (KRRiT) said in statement on Monday that it had passed a resolution to “initiate the procedure for withdrawing licenses granted to Radio Hobby.”

The radio station, based in the town of Legionowo, has been airing Sputnik shows for one hour a day (from 9:00pm to 10:00pm local time) under an agreement signed three years ago with the Voice of Russia radio network, which preceded the Sputnik news agency until November 2014.

The Polish watchdog said that Radio Hobby has broken a broadcasting law by “handing over some of its authorized airtime to a third party, thus forfeiting its right to influence the content and presentation of the broadcast material.”

Radio Hobby’s founder Pawel Kubalsky believes the Polish watchdog’s move is politically motivated.

“I think it could be a political move,” Kubalsky told RT. He added that the show contained political information that is “not accepted by the Polish government.”

“Everyone has to have the opportunity to be able to receive another point of view,” he said.

He however said that he believes democracy in Poland is strong and the radio can defend the right to have its broadcasting license.

Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT and Rossiya Segodnya agency, which includes Sputnik, slammed the move, but said she was not surprised.

“Poland did not surprise [me] unfortunately. It’s a pity that those who shut one alternative show after another still believe they live in a democracy,” she said.

However, Sputnik said that their office has not “received any notification regarding the termination of the contract for broadcasting.” In its statement it expressed hope that the Polish watchdog will “act in strict compliance with international law.”

It added that Sputnik’s editorial policy “is based on the fundamental principle of freedom of speech. Sputnik offers diverse perspectives on international issues, including telling the untold.”

The conflict with the Polish broadcasting governing body comes shortly after Latvia postponed the review of Sputnik’s registration papers for the third time in past three months.

Sputnik news agency and radio is an international multimedia news service launched in November 2014 by Rossiya Segodnya agency.

Unfolding media war?

This is not the first time local European authorities implement such measures against Russian media aired abroad.

Recently, Salve.TV in Germany was probed by a local media watchdog after the channel broadcast an RT Deutsch show 'The Missing Part' ('Der Fehlende Part'). The investigation was initiated by German lawmakers who said that the show was biased towards Russia.

In June, the EU Foreign Service drafted an action plan to counter what it sees as “Russian disinformation activities” calling for the promotion of EU policies in the post-Soviet space.

The EU plan specifically mentions RT, which it says broadcasts “fabrications and hate speech from their bureaus in EU cities.”

In response to the move, the Russian Foreign Ministry lashed out saying that the proposed plan is violating the right to freedom of expression and creating conditions of total discrimination against Russian media.

The precedent in Poland is quite dangerous and seems to be part of the unfolding media war, believes investigative journalist Tony Gosling.

“And yet media don’t seem to understand and the government [too] how important it is to have free media to keep the people behind you. And that’s what happens when you start banning foreign broadcasts –the local population starts to realize that the government is trying to control what we see and hear,” he told RT.

[TsarSamuil]

BBC, VoA included? Hactivists leak Ukraine’s ‘ban guide’ on Russian, intl reporters.

RT.com
July 09, 2015 15:25


Screenshot from cyber-berkut.org

The hacktivist group CyberBerkut says it has obtained for-internal-use-only documents of the Information Policy Ministry, which detail how to pinpoint journalists “involved in anti-Ukrainian information activities.”

“The rigorous research in the document is striking. It’s amusing, but now the presence of a laptop, memory cards, photo cameras and other gadgets in luggage can be grounds for denying entry into Ukraine to anyone. And note that it’s not only for Russian journalists, but foreign journalists in general,” CyberBerkut’s statement says.

The guidelines apply not only to journalists entering the country, but also give grounds for extradition if the crew is already at the scene, the hacktivists said.

At the same time, it appears some journalists are not welcome at all, as an accreditation black list has allegedly been found. The list also published by CyberBerkut is said to have been compiled by the Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) and consists of 102 media organizations, mostly the usual Russian suspects. However, such names as the Voice of America and BBC Russian also included.


Screenshot from cyber-berkut.org

Deputy Information Policy Minister Tatyana Popova makes a point that this list is not for media exposure and should never be published, the leak alleges.

In February, the SBU compiled a list of more than 100 Russian media outlets that are banned from receiving accreditation in Ukraine, RIA Novosti reported. The list included two news agencies – MIA Rossiya Segodnya and TASS – and all Russian federal TV channels.

[TsarSamuil]

UK freezes bank account of Russian news agency, gives no reason.

RT.com
July 13, 2015 10:30


The sign of the Rossiya Segodnya news agency on its premises. (RIA Novosti / Ramil Sitdikov)

Barclay's bank froze a Rossiya Segodnya news agency account without explaining its reasons. The agency’s head Dmitry Kiselyov has called it “censorship.”

“To close the account of one of the world’s leading news agencies is censorship, the direct obstruction of journalists’ work,” Dmitry Kiselyov said. “What kind of press freedom and democracy can Britain claim to have if it prevents one of the world's largest news agencies from working in the country?”

No formal notification of the move or justification for it was immediately provided. A source in the banking sector told the agency the Exchequer has put Dmitry Kiselyov on an anti-Russian sanctions list, which could have led to the news agency’s account being frozen.

“This is illegal,” Rossiya Segodnya’s Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan tweeted. “The sanctions imply that Kiselyov cannot travel to Europe and have personal bank accounts there. No sanctions were imposed on Rossiya Segodnya news agency.”

Kiselyov is one of the people subjected to financial and travel sanctions in the EU. These restrictions have been imposed on a number of Russian officials in connection with Moscow’s stance over Ukraine crisis.

The sanctions list, which includes the head of Rossiya Segodnya news agency, was published on March 21. It characterizes Kiselyov as “central figure of the government propaganda supporting the deployment of Russian forces in Ukraine.”

Russia’s ambassador in the UK, Alexander Yakovenko, tweeted that the move is an example of using censorship against media that provides an alternative point of view.

/photo/1

This is not the first time authorities in Europe have taken measures to disrupt Russian media from operating there.

Earlier this month, Poland’s media watchdog launched a procedure to revoke the license of Radio Hobby, which airs Russia’s Sputnik news agency’s radio shows. The watchdog said that the radio has broken a broadcasting law by “handing over some of its authorized airtime to a third party, thus forfeiting its right to influence the content and presentation of the broadcast material.” The radio station’s founder believes the move is politically-motivated.

A local channel in Germany, Salve.TV, was probed by a local media watchdog after the channel broadcast an RT Deutsch show 'The Missing Part' ('Der Fehlende Part'). The investigation was initiated by German lawmakers who said that the show was biased towards Russia.

Last month, the EU drafted a plan to counter what it sees as “Russian disinformation activities” calling for “promotion of EU policies” in the post-Soviet space and the implementation of measures against Russian media.

The nine-page paper drafted by the EU Foreign Service specifically mentions RT, which according to the report broadcasts “fabrications and hate speech from their bureaus in EU cities.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry lashed out at the EU over the report, saying that the proposed plan is violating the right to freedom of expression and creating conditions of total discrimination against Russian media.

RT’s Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan stressed that while there are hundreds of Western media speaking in one voice, the EU is trying to push out RT - one of the few alternative sources of information in the international news media.

[TsarSamuil]

‘Winning the Cold War with propaganda’: New Dutch-Polish ‘content factory’ to challenge Russia.

RT.com
22 Jul, 2015 02:07

Poland and the Netherlands are joining forces to counter so-called “Russian propaganda” with a new Russian-language “content factory,” after US Senator John McCain insisted that propaganda is key to “winning the Cold War” without a single shot.

The Dutch-Polish news agency will offer TV, radio, and online content in the Russian-language across in the countries of Russia and eastern Europe. It is planned that the agency will start working next year, with the Netherlands and Poland hoping that other EU States will join them.

The project will “give the tools and the capacities for Russian language [media] and Russian social media to work on the basis of objective information … with the exchange of different viewpoints”, said Bert Koenders, the Dutch foreign minister. Koenders added that that there was a “broad support” for the endeavor from EU foreign ministers.

The new news agency will be “something which doesn’t use the language of propaganda or aggression, but which has real, reliable information,” said Polish Foreign Minister, Grzegorz Schetyna. He added that a donor conference for the initiative will kick off in Warsaw in September with the Hague hopefully hosting another fundraising later this year.

The idea to create a Russian-language news agency stems from a Dutch-funded study on counter-propaganda by the European Endowment for Democracy (EED). The EED, a “brainchild of the Polish government,” as the Carnegie institute calls it, was established in October 2012 to support pro-democracy activists and organizations in Eastern Europe. In December 2014, EDD decided to expand their reach into Russia.

In May the organization recommended creating a “news hub” to exchange news material among leading Russian language media and launch a “content factory,” as well as a research center to study audience behavior.

A source within the project at EED told the EU observer that the new agency will be a “content factory” working as “a kind of European BBC”. The publication also reports that foreign service agencies from other EU states are also “taking action” since March to “challenge Russia’s … disinformation campaigns.”

So far five experts, from the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, and the UK, have been employed to lead a new communications cell called East StratCom Team.

In an interview with Carnegie Europe, Jerzy Pomianowski, the EDDs executive director said that the organization is working with a group of 90 experts and media representatives to analyze their target audience and “what kind of content is needed.”

“With the support of a grant from the Dutch government, we have launched a feasibility study on Russian-language media initiatives. This is about providing Russian-language alternatives to Russian state broadcasting for societies in the Eastern Partnership countries and beyond,” Pomianowski said in March.

Meanwhile at stateside, US Senator John McCain has once again called on Washington and the US Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to spread its outreach to counter Russian messaging. In June, McCain co-sponsored a bill requesting $728.2 million for the BBG to carry out international communications campaigns. That is in an addition to BBG’s $15.4 million request in April to expand its Russian-language programming and social media content projects.

“I love our folks in Prague and Radio Free Europe and all that, but we have got to catch up. We’ve got to catch up and understand that this is also a message of loyalties and truth. And we’re going to need to do a lot more,” McCain said in a speech to the Hudson Institute.

The Senator stressed that Russia’s news outreach could be countered by propaganda means alone, something that was done during the Cold War.

“One of the key elements of winning the Cold War without firing a shot...is the propaganda – the message, the social networking,” he said. “My friends, there is an inundation today in the Baltic, in Moldova, in Romania, and Poland even of Russian constant, incessant sophisticated messages that we have to counter.”

Russia's Foreign Ministry earlier criticized EU drafted information warfare initiatives to target so-called Russian propaganda. According to the ministry such activity is “clearly aimed at pushing out Russia’s presence in the international media field.”

Last month it was reported that EU has drafted a plan to counter what it sees as “Russian disinformation activities” calling for the promotion of EU policies in the post-Soviet space and the implementation of measures against Russian media, including RT.

[TsarSamuil]

Jon Stewart had secret meetings with Obama.

RT America
Jul 29, 2015



A new report from Politico details how President Obama called Jon Stewart to secret meetings in the Oval Office at pivotal times. One time in 2011 was during a budget debate; another time in 2014 on the day of Obama's press conference on the Ukraine/Russia issue. Stewart's "The Daily Show" coincidentally ran jokes about Putin that very same night.

[TsarSamuil]

‘Media freedom is an utmost value’: Watchdog allows German TV to continue airing RT show.

RT.com
31 Jul, 2015 00:50

A German media watchdog has no objections to a local channel airing a show from RT Deutsch, as it said an investigation it had conducted into the channel concluded that the program did not violate the law.

After examining the factual background of the case, the TLM, the media watchdog of the German federal state of Thuringia, saw no reason to impose any restrictions on a local Thuringia TV channel, Salve.TV, in airing “The missing Part (Der Fehlende Part) news talk-show” from RT Deutsch.

“Salve.TV has a legal right under the German law to air the show regularly and without any comment. Someone might not like the content of the show, but the channel is free to air such shows,” the TLM’s head, Jochen Fasco, told local Freies Wort newspaper.

“Variety of information sources and media freedom is an utmost value in Germany,” he added commenting on the TLM’s decision.

Fasco also stated that, according to the law, local channels are not limited to broadcasting only local programs and news, and have the right to air international or foreign shows as well.

Salve.TV assured the TLM that the channel received no money for airing the RT show.

The critics accused Salve.TV of broadcasting a “biased” and “one-sided” show that served as an “instrument of propaganda,” while the channel argued that it was seeking to present an alternative point of view, which was different from the German mainstream media’s position.

Defending the channel’s policy, Klaus-Dieter Boehm, the editor-in-chief and co-owner of Salve.TV, said that everyone should have a right to form his or her own opinion independently.

Salve.TV was the subject of harsh criticism during an earlier controversy, when the channel decided to allow Thuringia Prime Minister Bodo Ramelow from the Left Party to anchor his own show, “Ramelow & Co,” and to personally comment on his own public speeches.

The decision caused an uproar among some German politicians and lawyers who considered the program an attempt to present political propaganda as objective news, which is prohibited, but the TLM concluded that the show did not breach the law in that case as well.

[TsarSamuil]

US counters ‘Russian messaging’ in the Baltics with $500k ‘innovative’ journalism program.

RT.com
10 Aug, 2015 05:13

In order to counter what it delicately called “Russian messaging,” the US State Department has announced a $500,000 grant to a non-profit that offers an “innovative” journalist training program for “credible” news reporting in the Baltic states.

Washington has announced, via its embassy in Lithuania, that public and private non-profit organizations have until the end of August to apply for the grant entitled “Investigative Journalism Training to Counter Russian Messaging in the Baltics.”

The program offers financial aid for the training of early-career Russian-language journalists in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia so they can become providers of a “fact based and credible” take on world events.

“As Russian propaganda and misinformation multiplies, the media in all three countries need the skills and tools to counter it with fact-based, credible news reporting,” the embassy’s announcement reads.

The US State Department aims to improve “training and tools to increase journalists’ ability to counter Russian media messaging and misinformation.”

The “ideal” program, as the US government sees it, should inspire its apprentices to pursue “realistic investigative reporting project ideas” with “cash reporting awards.” The recipient of the grant would be responsible for administering the program “in consultation” with the US embassies in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

Part of the training could be conducted in the US where candidates would visit American news networks and journalism faculties so they could be better equipped for the “digital age.” The recipient must ensure the connection with and integration of the fresh graduates into “ongoing networking” both among the three countries and with the US.

One of the main goals of the US State Department is to make sure that the results and “strengths of the program” eventually spread beyond the 12-month period covered by the grant.

The US is not the only nation that sees the Russian side of the story as a threat to the narrative fostered in the mainstream media or gets irritated by coverage of stories that are often neglected or misconstrued.

Just last month Poland and the Netherlands announced that they are joining forces to counter so-called “Russian propaganda” with a new Russian-language “content factory,” that will offer TV, radio, and online content in the Russian-language across the countries of Eastern Europe, including Russia.

In the past, Russia's Foreign Ministry has criticized information warfare initiatives to target so-called Russian propaganda. According to the ministry such activity is “clearly aimed at pushing out Russia’s presence in the international media field.”

[TsarSamuil]

Spanish bank blocks payment to RT over EU sanctions against non-related media chief.

RT.com
31 Aug, 2015 19:19

The British branch of the Spanish bank BBVA has blocked a transaction to RT, citing European sanctions against Russian media executive Dmitry Kiselev. Kiselev, who heads media holding company Rossiya Segodnya, is not affiliated with RT.

The transaction in question was due payment to RT by Axiom Media, the company that sells advertising on RT broadcasts in Britain. Although RT itself is not under sanctions, BBVA has not carried out a transaction to RT's account, saying it "could potentially be made available to an entity or body associated with Mr Dmitryi (sic) Konstantinovich Kiselyov."

Kiselev heads a Russian media holding company called Rossiya Segodnya, created after an overhaul of longtime Russian news agency RIA Novosti. Although "Rossiya Segodnya" translates as "Russia Today" in English (the name was used by RT before 2009 rebranding), the two news outlets are separate entities. Kiselev holds neither a paid nor unpaid position within RT, nor is he a stakeholder.

Yet, having blocked the money in connection with the situation with an entirely separate organization, the bank representatives said that the funds "available to an entity or a body associated with him [Kiselyov], or for his benefit, would potentially breach" European sanctions rules. Kiselev was slapped with individual sanctions by the EU along with other Russian individuals, whom Brussels believe to be responsible for the secession of Crimea from Ukraine last year.

"We are extremely outraged with the unlawful blocking of a payment to RT in Great Britain," RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan said in a statement, adding that there are no legal grounds not to "transfer the money legally earned by RT."

In July, Kiselev's presence on EU's sanctions list hurt his own organization. Barclay's bank then froze a Rossiya Segodnya's account, with no formal notification or immediate justification for the move having been provided. A source in the British banking industry told the company that the freeze was related to the person heading it; Kiselev himself has called it "censorship."

[TsarSamuil]

Daily Beast tamed: Real figures proving RT popularity.

RT
Sep 19, 2015



An American news website "The Daily Beast" has written that RT is ''lying about its popularity'' - using 3 year-old data as evidence. Well the real figures don't lie.

READ MORE: www.rt.com/op-edge/315778-exposing-daily-beast-propaganda/

[TsarSamuil]

Ofcom collars RT over Ukraine documentary based on eyewitness testimonies.

RT.com
21 Sep, 2015 12:46

UK telecom watchdog Ofcom has ruled that three episodes of RT programming were in breach of its code of conduct. One was never aired in the UK and another one drew no complaints at all.

The rulings published in the watchdog’s latest bulletin concern two episodes of a now-defunct commentary show The TruthSeeker and a documentary based on eyewitness accounts given to RT by people who suffered during hostilities in eastern Ukraine.

The documentary called Ukraine’s Refugees didn’t generate a single complaint in the UK, but was investigated by Ofcom on its own initiative. The watchdog said it violated its code’s impartiality clause because it didn’t sufficiently represent the position of the Ukrainian government. The documentary unambiguously stated in the film that Kiev “denied all charges of crimes against civilians,” allegations of which were voiced by witnesses interviewed for the film.

“We are shocked and disappointed by Ofcom's decision. The film about refugees was based entirely on first-hand accounts of the war victims,” said RT’s editor in chief Margarita Simonyan.

The other judgments pertained to two episodes of The TruthSeeker, a commentary program taken off air in July 2014. One episode was dedicated to the Ukrainian civil war and resulting humanitarian crisis. It was never aired in the UK. Again, Ofcom found it breached the impartiality clause, because the statements from Kiev authorities denying accusations of crimes against civilians were not a big enough counterbalance, according to the watchdog.

“We are being criticized because the show used statements made by Ukrainian politicians — i.e. their own words — because those statements make them look bad. That we, essentially, had picked the wrong quotes. This is a rather peculiar approach to journalism,” commented Simonyan.

Another episode of The TruthSeeker probed by Ofcom referred to an independent but unofficial investigation into a BBC report about an incendiary weapons attack in Syria. The investigation said the BBC dropped a reference to “napalm” from an interview with a Syrian doctor, leaving only her speculation that a “chemical weapon” had been used. In Ofcom’s view, RT had exaggerated the significance of the inquiry and thus misled the audience.

Ofcom also closed their investigation into an episode of RT’s interview show SophieCo on immigrant detention centers in the UK and a news broadcast reporting about victims of the Islamic State terrorist group. It found they hadn't breached the watchdog’s code. The rulings mean that all Ofcom investigations into RT programming have now been resolved.

---------------

Who's watching the watchdog?: Ofcom & the manufacture of consent.

RT Editorial
21 Sep, 2015 16:15

It will come as no surprise to anyone that a watchdog set up to hound mainstream UK broadcast media finds RT’s output difficult to deal with. Doubtless today’s Ofcom rulings will see other media outlets relishing RT being brought to heel.

But anyone who takes the trouble to look at the detail will see such outlets are on very flimsy ground.

Not only does Ofcom concede that RT has a mission to bring valuable diversity of perspective, the watchdog also makes clear that its musings on ‘Ukraine’s Refugees’ - one of the shows found to be in breach of the Code - are not the result of a complaint from any our many viewers. In fact, Ofcom took it upon itself to complain after “routine monitoring” of RT.

Personally, I am delighted that the program gave a voice to those caught in the violence that would otherwise have gone unheard and unmentioned by mainstream media, which has been steadfastly supporting the post-coup government in Kiev.

I’d also note that Ofcom’s attention is not always misdirected. Does anyone remember what they came out with before the incumbent, Sharon White, took the reins? A four-year inquiry by Ofcom, the results of which recently became public, uncovered nearly 50 breaches of statutory regulation by mainstream channels the BBC, CNN and CNBC. Thanks to Ofcom we know that these outlets had been screening politically-lobbied content without informing viewers.

As usual, there is a background to today’s stories that you may find goes unreported elsewhere.

Dodgy editorial procedures from the BBC, CNN and CNBC aren’t as good a story as RT being ‘guilty’. Mainstream transgressions are forgotten as soon as they are revealed. The Independent, which so brazenly referred to the BBC’s Code-breaching content as “propaganda” in a headline in mid-August, had already blissfully moved on when reporting on the Corporation’s plan to expand its foreign broadcasting barely a fortnight later.

Does anyone seriously think that big UK broadcasters adequately report on those opposing mainstream political opinion? That’s why so many BBC journalists were taken aback when UKIP and Jeremy Corbyn appeared on the scene.

The BBC wouldn’t even allow charities to ask for money to save those in Gaza because of pressure from those against the Palestinian side in the conflict that rages on in the Middle East. Alex Salmond, former leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), told us on Saturday’s edition of RT’s Going Underground that he was appalled by the anti-independence bias of the BBC in the run-up to the Scottish Independence Referendum. He branded the BBC “a disgrace to public broadcasting.”


Needless to say, the mainstream Scotsman newspaper duly ran a report that he shouldn’t be criticizing the BBC on RT – as if RT, the internet’s favorite television news station, should be boycotted as part of a UK mainstream McCarthyite witch hunt against the channel.

Meanwhile Corbyn, who had just won Labour’s leadership in a landslide, was summarily branded by the UK press as the Kremlin’s “useful idiot” for criticizing Western interventionist policy on RT – in an interview in which he mentioned Russia not once.

And while we’re about it, why are the so-called liberal radio, print and internet media so keen to promote the highly-contentious adjudications of Ofcom against RT? They don’t call for the BBC to be shut down because it runs fraudulent competitions as part of Comic Relief, Sport Relief and Children in Need? Again, Ofcom did good work on this, investigating shady behavior. The regulator revealed “the BBC deceived its audience by faking winners of competitions and deliberately conducting competitions unfairly.”

License-Fee payers were duly ordered to stump up hundreds of thousands of pounds for BBC failures. Thanks to Ofcom, the whole thing ended up costing mainstream channels more than £11 million (now US$17 million) in 2008.

But when it comes to political controversies where the UK government is following US State Department policy, things are a little different. There are almost too many mainstream UK TV reports to choose from when it comes to proving the double standards of Ofcom over the politically-contentious issue of Ukraine.

Have a look at these links for proof that there is no room for balance in news reports if you work at the BBC, ITN or Sky.

You can also see just how “impartial” their coverage of Ukraine is here and here.



The fact is that Ukraine was destabilized by the West – we know this because Victoria Nuland, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department said so:



But that side of the story was absent from scores of mainstream broadcasts which it seems Ofcom decided not to watch or ‘monitor’.

Ukraine, though, is not the only tragedy we should be focusing on.

The Syrian refugee crisis was caused by destabilization of the Middle East by Western powers. Do you see reporters telling you that side of the story when they file reports on refugees? Could it be that without this context, mainstream journalists are, yet again, softening up public opinion for war? Today, establishment media is no longer reporting on WHY there are refugees – merely that there ARE refugees.

There is a terrible irony here as they skirt standards of impartiality. Broadcasters are, in effect, using the tragedy of dead children washing up on beaches to prepare the public to support a war that will lead to more dead children washing up on beaches.

If Britain and the US deploy their troops to depose President Assad of Syria it will be a part of a broader interventionist strategy. That’s why reporting needs to be accurate and more balanced on Syria and Ukraine – so that Americans and Brits can decide for themselves on the evidence whether military action is warranted. RT will show both sides of the argument, but - more importantly - give you the other side of the story, the one you’d be hard-pressed to get from the British or American MSM. Then you can make up your own mind.

One of the world’s greatest journalists, John Pilger, expressed his fear on RT’s Going Underground that the embrace of elites and media on the issue of Ukraine is pushing the world towards nuclear war.

It is a concern shared by the ‘Bulletin of Atomic Scientists’ which moved their Doomsday clock closer to midnight as Obama officials engineered the coup d’état in Ukraine.

What’s needed now is an urgent conference involving journalists, unions and NGOs to fight censorship in Britain. It must not involve compromised NGOs such as Index on Censorship, the Committee to Protect Journalists etc., who have proved time and time again to be one-sided about censorship. It should implore Ofcom to uphold the principle that news, in whatever form, must be reported with due accuracy and presented with due fairness to all positions, not just the ones belonging to the foreign policy establishment.

On a personal level, I almost empathize with Ofcom’s position. It is understandable that, fed on a constant diet of mainstream UK media, they might find it hard to digest RT. I hope, in time, they will join the hundreds of millions around the world who tune in to watch RT on TV, YouTube and online in appreciating journalism that gives a place to those who are, too often, robbed of a voice.

Afshin Rattansi, Going Underground, RT