💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~oxymoronist › tinylog.gmi captured on 2023-07-22 at 16:36:21. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2023-05-24)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A space for sporadic updates on the media situation.
avatar: ⨂
author: @oxymoronist@rawtext.club
license: CC BY-NC-ND
Alfred de Zayas writes: "...even highly educated persons ... continue to put their trust in media outlets that do not deserve our trust. ... Indeed, it takes temerity to realize that our own politicians and media lie to us, that they are purveyors of dis-information and practitioners of Orwellian doublethink." Jacques Ellul made the point in 1962 that propaganda can only work on an educated audience. Aimed at those who cannot read, who are not interested in politics at all, it is pointless. Today most can read and are at least dimly aware of politics. Propaganda typically cannot be made up entirely of lies, it has to have a core of truth. Most effectively it would present nothing but facts. Propaganda has more to do with persuasion and arguably with a certain aesthetics. Take a look at Scott Ritter's series on Agent Zelensky, for instance. No doubt there are many factually correct statements in these videos, but presented with a clear bias and aimed at persuading the viewer. In my view, it is the aesthetics of these videos that turn them into propaganda, more than the stated facts or opinions. The more nuanced de Zayas article can be read here:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/07/19/the-dynamics-of-war-insanity-natos-ukraine-roulette/
The Censorship-Industrial Complex is the new monicker for those sprawling startups in the business of reality-perception curating. Matt Taibbi (et al) just published a top 50 list, out of which only a handful have been dissected here in the media guide (part 4).
In anti-disinformation literature, the public is often depicted as insufficiently panicked.
On the list we find not only fact-checking organisations, but also foundations and other types of organisations. Some notable entries include Wikipedia, "a defender of free speech in certain circumstances" but no always, Jigsaw ("Perhaps the slickest and most technically sophisticated of the censorship and speech control initiatives"), Bellingcat, and Integrity Initiative. Connections, modus operandi, funding, characteristic world views, and "gibberish verbiage" typical of each organisation are detailed.
In the wake of Twitter Files, Andrew Lowenthal writes about the misuse of anti-disinformation to suppress free speech. An increasing number of organisations are devoted to this and they seem to have no difficulties getting funded. Lowenthal acknowledges that disinformation does exist and needs to be addressed.
However, the biggest source of disinformation are governments, corporations and increasingly anti-disinformation experts themselves.
https://scheerpost.com/2023/04/26/an-insiders-guide-to-anti-disinformation/
Also, a list of search engines has been added to this capsule. As EU is preparing new legislation that will affect large tech companies, it may be time to degoogle, although if you read this, you may have already done so.
The founder of Cryptome has asked to be a co-defendant in the case against Julian Assange, for publishing the same documents as Wikileaks. Godspeed! Cryptome and a number of other sites have now been added to the media guide with annotated links to independent media sites.
gemini://rawtext.club/~oxymoronist/media2.gmi
The attempted launch of the Disinformation Governance Board, aka Ministry of Truth, met with a backlash, but the attempts to gain tighter control over public discourse are obviously ongoing. Although this predominantly concerns social media, the efforts are not limited to the largest ones. An Intercept article reports on some leaked DHS documents, commenting: "How disinformation is defined by the government has not been clearly articulated, and the inherently subjective nature of what constitutes disinformation provides a broad opening for DHS officials to make politically motivated determinations about what constitutes dangerous speech." They provide some additional insight into the Hunter Biden laptop story, but fail to mention the embarrassing split up with Glenn Greenwald, who had wanted to report on it on the Intercept.
DHS plans to police disinformation
In a commentary on the recent attack on Salman Rushdie, the Angry Arab makes some interesting remarks, for example that Western liberals often insist that muslims should tolerate insults in the name of free speech, but that Israel, the state rather than its people, should be shielded from criticism. He also shares this intriguing observation: "the Arab-Islamic civilization was most tolerant when it was strong and powerful and [...] its decline coincided with an atmosphere of strictness and intolerance." Is there a causal connexion? The American power sphere including Europe is obviously going down, at what speed remains to be seen. Does that have implications for our tolerance?
German journalist Alina Lipp has been reporting what she sees on the ground in Donbass. As a consequence she has had money drawn from her bank account, her paypal account frozen, and now she also seems to face the risk of imprisonment if she returns home to Germany. No doubt whose side she stands on, and also no doubt that the German state stands on the opposite side; but still, isn't this a bit of an over-reaction? She has also appeared on a kill list, as has Eva Bartlett, another brilliant journalist.
Aline Lipp interview on Rokfin
If the British Online Safety Bill wasn't bad enough, now there is also a new law proposal that would threaten journalists reporting on matters related to national security with life in prison. It would also apply to direct action. Looks like the UK is expecting to grow its prison population.
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/07/07/uk-bill-threatens-journalists-with-life-in-prison/
Paypal has terminated the accounts of at least two important independent news sites, Mint Press and Consortium News (there could be others I'm not aware of). This is serious, since these organisations are funded by their readers. It also shows how vulnerable dissenters are in a digital economy.