VERSIONS: روسيا اليوم NOTICIAS FREEVIDEO ИНОТВ RTД
breakingnews
Go to main page   Community   Blogs   Peter Lavelle   Whose news is it anyway?  
mostpopular
photo_of_the_day
bestvideos

Whose news is it anyway?

Published: 10 March, 2010, 16:55
Edited: 23 July, 2010, 17:21

There is a growing wave of commentary about the rise of new and competitive players in the global English-language media sphere. Traditional outlets in the US, UK and Canada are scrambling for market share like never before; they are scared, and with good reason.

The Russians, Chinese, French, the Emir of Qatar and even the Iranians are giving the native English speakers in the news industry a run for their money. Great - competition is good and healthy! Yet many in the US and the UK are calling the new kids on the block upstarts for challenging the status quo, being anti-American and being anti-Western in general.

Russia has been singled out more than others and RT television, my employer, has been harshly criticised for reporting that has been less than kind about America's domestic realities and foreign policy. This is unwarranted: RT and other new English-language outlets are merely providing the Anglosphere with new and different voices.

Since the end of World War II and particularly after the Cold War, the US has seen itself as the beacon of good in the world. This is the narrative Americans are taught early on, and it is reinforced incessantly.

Sadly, the vast majority of Americans get their news from US media only, especially domestic television. These outlets limit and control public debate and devote precious little time to foreign news. In fact, it is exceptional when an American media outlet does not mirror an editorial line established from above.

The charge that Russian media is anti-American is quite overblown. Russian English-language media, including RT, do indeed report stories rarely found in the US mainstream - and often from a viewpoint rarely found there as well. No one should be surprised by this. Why should the definition of free speech be determined by a Western capital?

The US badmouths the entire world when it suits its own purposes. In the American mainstream Israel has long been protected, Iraq was once the world's enemy, and now Iran is. Russia refuses to kowtow to western geopolitical and economic interests, so it is covered in the worst possible light. Meanwhile, American-sponsored autocrats and dictators are given a free pass.

For decades Washington and America's media establishment have dumbed down political debate at home - and expected the rest of the world to follow. When this does not happen, it is called anti-Americanism.

This is the standard hypocrisy of a country that habitually lectures others about media freedoms. While this isn't new, the fact that it is now drawing multi-viewpoint commentary in English is.

It is a pity when critique is only understood as criticism. America and the West generally must learn that their sense of humanity-saving exceptionalism is only a myth, and a very dangerous one. No peoples or countries have a monopoly on the truth.

This article was first published at www.mn.ru

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Back to top
0 (0 votes)
Klaus Vomhof, July 23, 2010, 15:48
0
Your current programme about the Burqa : NOBODY mentions that wearing the full face cover is traditionally done by adherents of Wahhabi Sect that is prevalent in Saudi Arabia but has been adopted by adherents of the Wahhabi Sect in Bangladesh for instance.
JayCee, March 31, 2010, 14:06
0
To: mbach I happen to have similar issues with Alex Jones, David Icke, etc. My attitude is not to buy all, but to select. Even if the source becomes discredited or he discredits himself, it does not automatically discredit the information. Same as with food: I do not eat everything that is put in front of me. When I finish I normally leave there most of potatos and sauce, as well as the plate, fork and knife ;-)