There is some truth to the assertion that the mainstream media is spreading Russian hysteria. In an interview with Journalist Glenn Greenwald on Democracy Now!, he used the Washington Post as an example of contributing to that hysteria.
Greenwald referred to an article published by the Post on November 24, 2016, saying the newspaper gave credence to a group called PropOrNot. Glenn Greenwald called them “an anonymous group of cowards,” who have a “secret list” of “Kremlin propagandists.” The list has leftist and right-wing Libertarian independent news sources who they blame for distributing fake news. The Washington Post article is thorough in describing tactics used to spread Russian propaganda through social media and among useful idiots.
Creating Russian Hysteria Through Bad Journalism
In both his interview and his story Greenwald targets a second report by the same newspaper. This time about the same Russian hackers accused of interfering in the Presidential election and of hacking a Vermont power grid. This report was also a big failure and fell flat on its credibility.
The distribution of Russian propaganda is reported by the media as sophisticated, which is likely true due to the scale of organization involved. But tracking the redaction and changes to the stories reveal something less dubious than a propaganda machine operating under a Putin-led agenda.
The confusion and the gaps left by a story that should not have made it past the editors by a reputable newspaper becomes more sophisticated by that confusion. In other words, fixing a story that’s gone out to millions only contributes to the climate of hysteria about Russian propaganda. As editors scramble to make their repairs, it only feeds into conspiracies.
Greenwald’s Interest Is A Journalistic One
Glenn Greenwald got a boost in name recognition through The Guardian from his coverage of Verizon metadata and the National Security Agency (NSA). His next major play in his career was with his interview with Edward Snowden over his trove of NSA documents. Aside from his adversarial reporting, Greenwald’s daily battle lately seems to be more about journalistic integrity than staging partisan attacks.
In his original piece, Glenn Greenwald goes after the Post for allowing such a sloppy story to get by the editors but, he also made a similar effort to sensationalize his story by adding McCarthyite in the headline.
On the surface, one could conclude – and many have – that Glenn Greenwald’s attacks on American media outlets put him in the Kremlin too. Russian state media sources Russia Today and Sputnik are resilient in their attacks against Western media, always claiming they’re lying as opposed to their honest reporting. But, those who have been following him for a while do so for his ability to frame accountability the fourth estate owes the people.
Acknowledging The Existence Of The Threat He Criticizes
NYT is explicitly pointing out key fact about "new" report: it contains only assertions, literally *no evidence* https://t.co/NwSq1kME0E pic.twitter.com/MtMmYjRsvn
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 6, 2017
In the second half of the interview — provided below, he confirms what we all know which is that by Donald Trump discrediting the media and intelligence organizations, and convincing people to get the “truth” from him, it is dangerous and it is what Glenn Greenwald refers to it as authoritarian.
He also cautiously responds to Amy Goodman’s question about where he thinks America is going, if Trump were to do away with computerized intelligence and rely on having spies in the streets. The immediate response would be that of serious concern for America’s future because Greenwald knows well enough about the threats of totalitarianism to “whip out” his criticism whenever he needs to colorize his attacks on statesmen. This was especially the case when he went after Trump’s cabinet picks on the same program last year. So, where was that Greenwald in all of this?
The Washington Post could have made a public statement on their news piece(s), but they did very little. It means that the publisher wasn’t concerned with the impact of the piece or the Post really did drop-the-ball and decided to move on.
The climate of Russian hysteria is always changing, however. Because these stories control the political climate and how social media consumes them. But there is a difference between people who refuse to focus on the facts, the useful idiots who pass fake news stories around without checking them first and those who acknowledge the editing changes to a story as they happen and still value journalistic integrity. At the worst, it is how we can gauge the velocity as America spirals downward and at best, it’s keeping people like Greenwald employed.
Here is the interview.
Featured image by screenshot via YouTube
