Job Discussion Forums

[Gamajorba]

[Sashadroogie]

[alex1970]

[Sashadroogie]

Then why recycle it? Unless you buy into it?

[Foma87]

A bunch of Russian media outlets covered the story a few months back, so it's not just the Guardian. I actually think the article is rather good, as it deals with a real social problem from many different angles. But I agree that a majority of stuff on Russia from the Western media is trash. It's not the constant criticism that bothers me (there is much to criticise about the current regime), it's that most of it is uninformed and lacks even the most elementary understanding about how Russia works.

[Sashadroogie]

I dunno. What strikes me as most significant is the possible rationale behind this piece. What motivated the BBC to do it, and why now?

And where are all the penetrating articles attacking the US for its Mexican workforce, or critical assessments of race relations in US police departments? They are covered, certainly. But only in the fawning manner of a lap-dog.

Quite a different beast, when dealing with anything Russian.

[Foma87]

Immigration and police bias is covered widely in America, though it is often exaggerated for political ends. But this is a good thing when you look at the alternative, which is a passive and completely impotent media, as exists in Russia. There are, of course, exceptions, and I don't mean to bash Russian journalists, as there are many very good and courageous ones -- I'm just talking about the media culture generally here.

I think the Guardian article generally falls in line with contemporary liberal notions that immigrants ought to be afforded more freedom and better wages. So it's not just Russia. But I won't argue that there isn't a media bias against Russia, though.

[alex1970]

[alex1970]

[Foma87]

Alex, perhaps 'impotent' was not the right word, but I think you'd have a very difficult time making convincing arguments that (1) there is no 'alternative' media in America and (2) that Russia has a healthy, robust media culture comparable to most Western countries.

I won't enter into any debate here as I think your comments are absurdly wrong, but suffice it to say that there are many areas of Russian political life that are simply off limits to the mainstream media in Russia and those brave enough to cover such forbidden topics (Chechnya, govt. corruption, etc.) are shot, beaten, thrown in jail or, in the case of foreigners, banned from entering the country. I find it hard to compare this situation with what exists, as far from perfect as it may be, in America. Not that I think it's always constructive to compare Russia with Western countries.

Be that as it may, In my opinion, there are thin lines between making informed assertions about Russia, 'apologism,' and just down right making false or disingenuous comments. I'd guess, from your comments, you are just a typical fellow traveller with apologist views towards Russia, which isn't so bad I suppose.

[alex1970]

[Foma87]

I don't mean to be patronizing, but pointing out something I consider to be negative about Russian society should not elicit accusations of Rusaphobia, either. You sound like the same Kremlin sycophants who berate what few alternative media outlets that do exist in Russia like Dozhd' which report facts unflattering as they may be. There are plenty of positives to take from Russia, but how it treats journalists is not one of them.

That said, I feel the same way you do about Snowden and America's policy in the Middle East, torture, etc. But why should that excuse Russia's behavior towards opposition journalists?

[alex1970]

[GF]

[alex1970]

[quote="GF"]