A basic rule of journalism is that there are almost always two sides to a story and that journalists should try to reflect that reality, a principle that is especially important when lives are at stake amid war fevers. Yet, American journalism has failed miserably in this regard during the Ukraine crisis.
[American journalists]' job is not to herd the American people into some “group think” corral. A good journalist would want to present the positions of both sides with some evenhandedness.
It strikes me as strange that Parry does not address the issue of media ownership and the effect of corporate control on the quality of journalism today. As many of us have noted in the past, Wall Street and the weapons makers are salivating at the prospect of supplying the forces engaged in an expanding regional conflict. I'd be willing to bet that they have agents trying to sell to both sides.
Still, this article provides a pretty good description of the situation in Ukraine and the journalistic issues arising from this conflict. The author wastes some space providing more detail about the various private militias than is necessary to make his point but he does wind up making it.
Since Brian is taking a hiatus from the big chair maybe they could send him over and really have his chopper shot down by "pro-Russian separatists." That should give Linsey and John what they want. C'mon Brian here's your chance to rehabilitate yourself and do your part for the New American Century. 10 mil should get your masters more than just pretty lies from a pretty face.
The assertions in this article are so obviously true. The next question is what do we do about it. The first option is to lampoon the simplistic warmongers like Graham and McCain. I'd like to do it with humor although I cannot smile right now. Think back, though, to the Vietnam war. What ended it? This historian says that Edwin Starr did with his "Good God, what is war good for. Absolutely nothing" and Country Joe McDonald with his "Gonna send you back to Texas make you work on the ranch" and his "Be the first one on the block...", well you know, the first to bring your child back in a body bag.
None of it was any funnier than Pete Seeger's "Bring em home, Bring em home, or the Baez, Collins, Mitchell songs, which always had a point of view with a huge edge. Where now is our "edge?", we who know that Graham, McCain, etc. are incompetent politicians bereft of idealism and among the jingoists most likely to take us into World War III.
Their solution to everything is more boots, more weapons and let slip the doglets of war.
We don't need people like that in important positions. We need to mock them-- not hard to do in view of their irresponsibility, unreasonableness and rashness.
But lengthy essays with convoluted reasoning won't do it. Nor can we afford any irrelevancies. We must go for the jugular, i.e., be focused in laughing our national fools out of existence.
"War is a racket" - General Samuel Butler
I think this sentiment explains everything the US has done since 1947 including today what is affecting Ukraine.
I agree with your post but the name is Smedley Butler. Samuel Butler was the Victorian novelist who wrote Erewhon.
- When was the last time we saw an opponent of military intervention on one of the major cable news channels? Or any other corporate news media, for that matter? (Note especially CNN, MSNBC and Fox News, collectively known as the Pentagon Parrots.) Rand Paul, the darling of tinfoil-hat libertarians, doesn't count.
- Isn't it Journalism 101 that important public issues have at least two sides and at least two sides should be presented in airing such discussions and reports? Then why do we get only one side? Why are important facts -- such as that Crimea residents voted overwhelmingly in a fair referendum to join Russia, or that Ukraine's pro-Russia leader had been illegally ousted by U.S.-paid neo-Nazi thugs, which has been confirmed by human rights groups -- left out?
- Why is important news about economic and political developments in the U.S. and many other nations not reported while the Pentagon Parrots carry on a relentless drumbeat of pro-war propaganda?
- Why don't the Pentagon Parrots show more undoctored video of America's war victims in Ukraine and the Mideast and talk to more of those people? (Need we ask why?)
- Why do the corporate broadcast media pay huge salaries to people who simply read a teleprompter?
- Why do we idealists bother to ask questions like this when we Americans are helpless to rein in the warmongers running our government and virtually our entire society?
You are talking about the time BACK WHEN Journalism were really journalism
and not paid puppets of corporations and the military.
The real fact finders (the whistle blowers) and the government
prosecutes them and puts them in jail or worst..