How media language encourages the left to support wars, coups and intervention.
Author Archive | Alan MacLeod
For a self-proclaimed citizen journalism outfit, an alarming number of Bellingcat’s staff and contributors come from highly suspect backgrounds, including high-level positions in military and intelligence agencies.
The Brazilian Supreme Court this month dismissed all charges against former President Luis Inacio “Lula” da Silva. A towering figure in national politics, Lula was the country’s president for eight years between 2003 and 2011.
NATO’s latest video is yet another example of how superficially progressive language is used to put a gloss on fundamentally regressive institutions.
How corporate media sell regime change, Intervention and war to progressive audiences.
Both pro- and anti-war voices have stated that the U.S. is on the cusp of entering a second Cold War, and a new Gallup poll suggests that the groundwork for such a conflict has already been laid.
In an era when international cooperation in the face of pandemics and climate change is essential, the world appears to be racing towards a new Cold War, and unfortunately, few except the military top brass are talking about it.
The report outlines a plan for the United States to pursue a China without Xi Jinping, with a weakened Communist Party, and operating in a region dominated by the US and its allies.
Rather than attack the government for its poor handling of the COVID crisis, corporate media have opted for a return to a favorite pastime of theirs: union bashing.
Ecuador is just weeks away from becoming the latest Latin American nation to move away from the IMF and United States and elect a strongly progressive, anti-imperialist government.
In the 1980s, the U.S. imposed a 100% tariff on virtually all Japanese electronics and forced Tokyo to sign a one-sided trade deal that reserved much of its domestic semiconductor sector for American companies.
“The Trump administration waged a full scale campaign to undermine Colombia’s peace accords. We must not waste our time hoping the Biden administration might reverse course, we must demand it.” — James Jordan, Alliance for Global Justice
“Freedom is blossoming.” That is how, without a shred of irony, CNN International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson describes Saudi Arabia in his recent article.
It is not clear why the embassy decided to go back and delete its posting history, especially as undermining Venezuela’s elections continues to be the official line of the U.S. government.
Despite the fact that the election was overseen by 1,500 international observers, U.S. pols and media pundits alike labeled it a sham before it even took place.
Just as they failed to hold power to account in the run-up to the disastrous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, corporate media is refusing to ask the hard questions about Biden’s hawkish cabinet picks.
President Donald Trump’s categorical refusal to accept what seems like an inevitable and increasingly crushing election loss has many in media rightly worried about the political repercussions of such a move, with some sounding the alarm over a potential coup d’etat in the U.S. (e.g., Salon, 11/11/20; Washington Post, 11/12/20; Guardian, 11/13/20; New Republic, 11/13/20).
“I expect the prevailing direction of U.S. foreign policy over these last decades to continue: more lawless bombing and killing multiple countries under the cover of “limited engagement,” – Biden Biographer Branko Marcetic
“Clearly the U.S. and its allies do not want transparency and open debate about the OPCW Douma investigation, and one can only conclude that this is the case because they know full well that their claims cannot be substantiated. Smears and censorship are the only tactics they have left.” – Propaganda Expert Piers Robinson
Funded by a billionaire oligarch and increasingly seen as a mouthpiece for the neoliberal establishment, The Intercept suffered its biggest blow yet with the very public departure of Greenwald.