To protect the "democratic space"
The Americans took aim and started firing. In fact, they still can't get in. The first targets were Russia Today and LifeNews TV channels. Both are accused of "propaganda", and therefore the verdict: "Execute, you can not pardon." "Democracy" is designed to stop the information invasion of "authoritarian regimes". Christopher Walker, vice president of the Democracy Foundation, announced this.
Christopher Walker, vice president of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), called on the United States and the European Union to modernize media resources and step up work. Western media must compete successfully with the media of Russia, China and Iran - in short, from "authoritarian states". The newspaper wrote about it the other day. "News", citing a report in the Journal of Democracy published by NED.
In a report entitled “Hijacking“ soft power, ”Mr. Walker shared his own thoughts with the public. According to him, if you do not win the information war against the competitors, then the West is threatened with “a dark prospect of an even greater erosion of the democratic space in the coming years.”
According to Walker, the main threats to US influence in the world are Russia, China and Iran. There are also specifics: the Chinese channel CCTV and the Russian Russia Today and LifeNews have been declared the focus of information evil.
The Russian media are using a toolkit that mirrors the soft power of democracy. Here is a list of these "tools": "state-organized non-governmental organizations, election monitoring zombies, foreign aid and investment, and, of course, traditional and new media." It's about impacting a global audience. And don't confuse Chinese state television or the Russian TV channel Russia Today with the British BBC or the German Deutsche Welle, because the latter work according to a different system of values. Media editorial offices in authoritarian countries are accountable to political leaders. Russia Today, for example, consistently follows the Kremlin's line, Walker said.
In his opinion, for a long time the West did not worry about international media, but now it has become clear that the media mentioned above are capable of influencing the audience.
As Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT, said in an interview with Izvestia, the popularity of the channel abroad is mainly due to its coverage of those events that remain not fully disclosed by Western media (protests in Baltimore or the Occupy Wall Street movement) ).
The response of the LifeNews TV channel to the Democracy Support Fund appeared on the Internet. On the site "RSN" An interview was conducted by Anna Mitnovitskaya, host of the High Voltage TV show, with Anatoly Suleymanov, First Deputy Editorial Director of LifeNews and NewsMedia.
A. Suleimanov said a few words about the "threat" that "propaganda" supposedly poses for Western democracies. Quote from the interview:
Suleymanov said that the channel's broadcasts on the Internet after Russia are popular in Ukraine and the United States ("in third or fourth place").
However, the channel's website is in Russian, and Suleimanov says that "we are more interested in the internal audience." “That’s why I said,” he noted, “that it was a pleasant surprise, because we never really counted on the US audience, although there are a lot of Russians there, and they are watching us.”
As for the Western impact on the audience, Suleimanov considers it "powerful".
The First Deputy Editorial Director of LifeNews also said that "there is always a point" in defending a point of view. “If you don’t have a point of view, then someone who has one will take your place,” he explained.
Do the United States and the West in general have the ability to resist Russia in the information war, that is, to defend their “point of view”? Some Russian experts believe that yes, there is. And their opinion should be listened to.
Political scientist Sergei Markov told the newspaper "News"that the West is able to increase its presence in the territory of the post-Soviet space.
“Western countries are able to increase their presence in the territory of the countries of the post-Soviet space. They already have huge resources. I believe that Kommersant, Vedomosti, Profile and a number of others are under their influence,” the analyst listed. “They have huge resources. Formally, they belong to other persons, but in fact they are under the control of the West. In addition, there are the resources of the Russian Service of the Air Force, Voice of America, etc., etc. They are most interested in the middle class of million-plus cities and youth, as well as elite groups. In addition, if you take Channel One, Rossiya and NTV, these channels have a pro-state policy, but there are people in the editorial offices who read Vedomosti, Kommersant and Internet resources critical of Russia on a constant basis. basis, and their views are close to those of the opposition. A vivid example is Vladimir Pozner, a man who says that he does not like Russia, that he only earns money here. He occupies one of the leading positions on the channel. And believe me, there are quite a lot of people on these TV channels who are ready to support the opposition, and enough on other channels. At a critical moment, when the management system on the part of the administration is not so serious, they will defect. This is the moment our American colleagues are preparing for.”
Let's summarize. Christopher Walker exposed the "propaganda" activities of the Russians and Chinese, which create "threats" to US global influence. And since this is the case, Washington, and at the same time Brussels accountable to it, should modernize media resources, defending its point of view and competing with the media from “authoritarian states”.
If the West does not win the informational war, it is threatened by the “gloomy prospect of an even greater erosion of the democratic space”.
We think that the “dark perspective” threatens the Western media because of their own stupidity. Films such as the recent BBC biography about Putin’s “riches” are slapped by such amateurs and contain such “evidence” that you wonder. Truly, the BBC must urgently be "modernized." However, this broadcast company ridiculed even Evelyn Waugh. With the modernization is clearly late ...
Christopher Walker, vice president of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), called on the United States and the European Union to modernize media resources and step up work. Western media must compete successfully with the media of Russia, China and Iran - in short, from "authoritarian states". The newspaper wrote about it the other day. "News", citing a report in the Journal of Democracy published by NED.
In a report entitled “Hijacking“ soft power, ”Mr. Walker shared his own thoughts with the public. According to him, if you do not win the information war against the competitors, then the West is threatened with “a dark prospect of an even greater erosion of the democratic space in the coming years.”
According to Walker, the main threats to US influence in the world are Russia, China and Iran. There are also specifics: the Chinese channel CCTV and the Russian Russia Today and LifeNews have been declared the focus of information evil.
The Russian media are using a toolkit that mirrors the soft power of democracy. Here is a list of these "tools": "state-organized non-governmental organizations, election monitoring zombies, foreign aid and investment, and, of course, traditional and new media." It's about impacting a global audience. And don't confuse Chinese state television or the Russian TV channel Russia Today with the British BBC or the German Deutsche Welle, because the latter work according to a different system of values. Media editorial offices in authoritarian countries are accountable to political leaders. Russia Today, for example, consistently follows the Kremlin's line, Walker said.
In his opinion, for a long time the West did not worry about international media, but now it has become clear that the media mentioned above are capable of influencing the audience.
“While it is more comfortable to think that people in a democracy have a natural resistance to propaganda, this is not the case. One has only to pay attention to how the distorted and false arguments about the Russian invasion of Ukraine have provided heated discussions in the US and Europe. The author calls on democracies to "renew and refresh their allegiance to democratic institutions and take steps to stop authoritarian regimes from influencing important regional and global backbone organizations."
As Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT, said in an interview with Izvestia, the popularity of the channel abroad is mainly due to its coverage of those events that remain not fully disclosed by Western media (protests in Baltimore or the Occupy Wall Street movement) ).
The response of the LifeNews TV channel to the Democracy Support Fund appeared on the Internet. On the site "RSN" An interview was conducted by Anna Mitnovitskaya, host of the High Voltage TV show, with Anatoly Suleymanov, First Deputy Editorial Director of LifeNews and NewsMedia.
A. Suleimanov said a few words about the "threat" that "propaganda" supposedly poses for Western democracies. Quote from the interview:
“Very often colleagues from European TV channels come, American colleagues are also interested, and I always know what the questions will be about, they are the same, and then the flow is essentially the same. They ask: do you consider yourself a propagandist? I say: do you consider yourself propagandists? They answer that they have no propaganda.
You do not have propaganda, for you this word has a negative connotation, this is all clear, but do you influence people? Yes, they say. The note or story you will release will be as follows: you will say that LifeNews is pro-Kremlin propaganda. I know that you will do that, you will not write that LifeNews is an independent TV channel that is trying to defend some point of view, whether you like it or not. But why do you immediately write to the Kremlin propagandists? We have our own point of view, we defend it. Will it be so? Let it be so. Well, then you are biased. I know that you will submit this interview, note, story in this way. And how, then, are you different from the good old word propagandists?
You do not have propaganda, for you this word has a negative connotation, this is all clear, but do you influence people? Yes, they say. The note or story you will release will be as follows: you will say that LifeNews is pro-Kremlin propaganda. I know that you will do that, you will not write that LifeNews is an independent TV channel that is trying to defend some point of view, whether you like it or not. But why do you immediately write to the Kremlin propagandists? We have our own point of view, we defend it. Will it be so? Let it be so. Well, then you are biased. I know that you will submit this interview, note, story in this way. And how, then, are you different from the good old word propagandists?
Suleymanov said that the channel's broadcasts on the Internet after Russia are popular in Ukraine and the United States ("in third or fourth place").
However, the channel's website is in Russian, and Suleimanov says that "we are more interested in the internal audience." “That’s why I said,” he noted, “that it was a pleasant surprise, because we never really counted on the US audience, although there are a lot of Russians there, and they are watching us.”
As for the Western impact on the audience, Suleimanov considers it "powerful".
“... They act by the right of the strong. Enough powerful money, powerful media, powerful influence. And when there is an opportunity to constantly push through your point of view, then you cease to reckon with lines, edges, points of view. Maybe you pretend to listen, but you always have an opinion. A person with his own opinion is the most important propagandist in the world, this is just the USA.”
The First Deputy Editorial Director of LifeNews also said that "there is always a point" in defending a point of view. “If you don’t have a point of view, then someone who has one will take your place,” he explained.
Do the United States and the West in general have the ability to resist Russia in the information war, that is, to defend their “point of view”? Some Russian experts believe that yes, there is. And their opinion should be listened to.
Political scientist Sergei Markov told the newspaper "News"that the West is able to increase its presence in the territory of the post-Soviet space.
“Western countries are able to increase their presence in the territory of the countries of the post-Soviet space. They already have huge resources. I believe that Kommersant, Vedomosti, Profile and a number of others are under their influence,” the analyst listed. “They have huge resources. Formally, they belong to other persons, but in fact they are under the control of the West. In addition, there are the resources of the Russian Service of the Air Force, Voice of America, etc., etc. They are most interested in the middle class of million-plus cities and youth, as well as elite groups. In addition, if you take Channel One, Rossiya and NTV, these channels have a pro-state policy, but there are people in the editorial offices who read Vedomosti, Kommersant and Internet resources critical of Russia on a constant basis. basis, and their views are close to those of the opposition. A vivid example is Vladimir Pozner, a man who says that he does not like Russia, that he only earns money here. He occupies one of the leading positions on the channel. And believe me, there are quite a lot of people on these TV channels who are ready to support the opposition, and enough on other channels. At a critical moment, when the management system on the part of the administration is not so serious, they will defect. This is the moment our American colleagues are preparing for.”
Let's summarize. Christopher Walker exposed the "propaganda" activities of the Russians and Chinese, which create "threats" to US global influence. And since this is the case, Washington, and at the same time Brussels accountable to it, should modernize media resources, defending its point of view and competing with the media from “authoritarian states”.
If the West does not win the informational war, it is threatened by the “gloomy prospect of an even greater erosion of the democratic space”.
We think that the “dark perspective” threatens the Western media because of their own stupidity. Films such as the recent BBC biography about Putin’s “riches” are slapped by such amateurs and contain such “evidence” that you wonder. Truly, the BBC must urgently be "modernized." However, this broadcast company ridiculed even Evelyn Waugh. With the modernization is clearly late ...
Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
- especially for topwar.ru
Information