For over a year, outlets from FAIR (8/24/16) to TruthDig (1/7/17) to The Nation (8/7/17) to The Intercept (2/12/18) have been warning about the pitfalls of nonstop Russia Is Everywhere and Out to Get Us coverage. The Russians are “stoking discord” and “sowing unrest” and infiltrating online and real-life spaces with memes and rallies and disinformation, corporate media tell us. Did you share Russian disinfo? Twitter and Facebook will let you know. Did you buy into Russian “fake news”? CNN wants to find out. Russia is everywhere, and it’s important the media not only report this fact, but do so over and over and over again, until one is looking for the Russian menace in every interaction.
This narrative, fueled by center-left outlets like MSNBC, Center for American Progress and Mother Jones, has reached its inevitable, sleazy nadir: the smearing of a black activist by an NPR affiliate for the crime of going on a Russian government–funded radio station a handful of times.
Reporter Johnny Kauffman at WABE (4/18/18), an NPR affiliate in Atlanta, did a profile on black activists Anoa Changa and Eugene Puryear. But instead of using this opportunity to highlight the causes they’re fighting for, or the injustices that brought them to become activists, WABE used its considerable resources and influence to talk about, you guessed, Russian influence:
Atlanta’s NPR affiliate smears activist Anoa Changa as part of “Russia’s state-run propaganda machine.”
The incriminating headline sets up the premise: Atlanta (black) activists are pawns in a cynical Russian “effort to create chaos”:
By agreeing to appear on two Sputnik programs, Changa gained something hard to find: a bigger platform to broadcast her political views. But Changa’s association with Sputnik may put her credibility at risk, while furthering Russia’s effort to create chaos in the US.
One could be forgiven for thinking “may put her credibility at risk” sounds more like a threat than a neutral observation: Nice reputation you have here, African-Americans who may be thinking about using Russian-backed media. Be a shame if something happened to it.
Eugene Puryear
How Changa or Puryear discussing racism and war furthers an effort to “create chaos” is never made clear, unless stating facts about the world that are unflattering to US centers of power is now per se destructive. Does Kauffman mention that Changa has also appeared on the British government–funded BBC and other “mainstream” outlets? No, this would muddy the narrative.
Changa’s crime is simply appearing on Eugene Puryear’s radio show, By Any Means Necessary. Puryear, in turn, is guilty of collecting a salary from a station funded by Russia—a distinction Kauffman makes in passing, but moral delineation isn’t really the point; the point is to create the image of restless black leftists carrying out Moscow’s agenda.
The piece then quotes international relations professor Robert Orttung for the obligatory scare lines about how sinister Russian propaganda is. “Those platforms are set up for the sole purpose of promoting the Kremlin line,” Orttug tells WABE. “The idea is to create as much chaos as possible because the Russians see it as a zero-sum game, where anything that weakens us is going to strengthen them.”
Who “us” is in this equation, or how “we” are weakened by black activists critiquing US imperialism and racism, is not explained. The white professor has told the white NPR reporter that this nebulous “us” is being undermined, and that’s that.
Orttung is referred to an “associate research professor of international affairs at the George Washington University,” but what Kauffman ignores, ironically, is that Orttung is himself an agent of government propaganda. Orttung is on the International Forum for Democratic Studies Council at the National Endowment for Democracy, an organization set up in 1983 by the US government—specifically Ronald Reagan—as a “soft power” tool in the Cold War. NED’s budget is almost entirely provided by the US government ($170 million in 2016 alone) and those who work for the NED are, by Kauffman’s own standard, agents of influence for a government entity. (Orttung’s perch at GWU, the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies, is also funded in part by the US State Department—as well as by the government of Kazakhstan.)
Is this mentioned? Is this disclosed, so one can maybe put in broader context how talking heads like Orttung are “US-backed pundits” using US-backed public radio “to spread a message”? Of course not, because money distributed by the US government is, for reasons that are never fully explained, never corrupting or influencing. Only rubles turn media into “propaganda”; dollar bills are presumably laced with an anti-corruption chemical that prevents venality and careerist conformism.
Changa, for her part, says she was misled about the nature of the story, and has expressed her frustration over how she was portrayed in a Twitter thread that’s worth reading:
So let me tell you why the @wabenews piece on me and my “Russian” connections ie @bamnecessary is racist, and later I will put out my constant explanations and distinctions that were ignored when I was asked for clarification. they had their own narrative that was not disclosed.
— Adolfina Villanueva aka Black Justice (@TheWayWithAnoa) April 18, 2018
Kauffman does quote Puryear taking issue with the narrative—otherwise embraced by the piece—that talking about racism is part of a plot to undermine the United States: “So raising Black Lives Matter issues is divisive in America?” he says. “I mean, I think what’s divisive is racism and police brutality.” But the public radio reporter trumps that argument by employing the known Soviet propaganda tactic of “whataboutism”: by insisting its the Russians who are the real racists!
Many media reports describe links between white supremacist groups and Russian propaganda outlets like Sputnik.
NPR’s national news desk did a similar sleight-of-hand in March, when it noted concerns from black users on Twitter about potentially racist coverage of the Austin bombings (which killed two African-Americans), and instead of doing any media analysis to see if there was, in fact, bias in the coverage because the victims were black, it focused instead on alleged “Russian bots” amplifying these concerns (FAIR.org, 4/5/18).
Congressional candidate Richard Dien Winfield
The piece ends with Kauffman narcing on Changa to one of her political allies, in an obvious attempt to create a chilling effect for others. WABE puts a microphone in front of congressional candidate Richard Winfield’s face and asks him what he thinks about Changa being associated with the stain of “Russian influence”:
Winfield said he didn’t know Changa was a regular on Sputnik, but if he did, he wouldn’t have agreed to appear on her personal podcast.
“It raises the possibility of people impugning not just me,” said Winfield, “but the political positions I’m advancing and distracting from the power of these positions.”
There is no other way to read this other than a veiled warning to those on the left thinking about exploiting Russian-backed media to advance their cause: Touch Sputnik or RT and your reputation will be harmed, if not by the natural course of events, then by Russia-obsessed media on the lookout for Kremlin stooges, no matter how obscure or powerless they may be.
At no point do NPR or WABE lay out which government funding is corrupting and which isn’t. Yours truly collects checks from Al Jazeera for freelance work now and then, a network funded by a government that has ties to extremists in Syria and punishes homosexuality with imprisonment. NPR gets 14 percent of its budget from a government that incarcerates more people than any other nation, is currently bombing seven countries and is guilty of multiple human rights abuses over the past two decades. Is that OK? Does that make Adam Johnson and Johnny Kauffman stooges of Qatar and the US, respectively? If assumptions about “Country X–backed media” are used to smear those who take a check—or even come close to those who take a check—from Russia, there should be a consistent standard for everyone.
But no such standard will be forthcoming. Because no one is interested in a robust and honest conversation about foreign or government influence on the media. What US media are interested in doing, instead, is singling out Official Enemies and using them as a bludgeon to marginalize the already-marginalized, to sully those who make substantive critiques of US society and empire without apology. Instead of engaging with Changa and Puryear’s years of activism, WABE would rather run racist middlebrow schlock, reducing black activists to Russian pawns for the white tote-bag set.
Messages to WABE may be sent here (or via Twitter: @WABEnews). Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective.
Guilt by assassination
I always look forward to your articles Mr. Johnson. This is among your best.
Speaking of the NED, does anyone remember the WAPO editorial in which Carl Gershman decried Russian meddling in US elections while simultaneously calling for the ouster of Vladimir Putin? THAT was a good one.
This is why I boycott NPR.
Yeah, and because of it Adam Johnson cited NPR propaganda as a proof?
“Trump Embraces One Of Russia’s Favorite Propaganda Tactics — Whataboutism”
Superb expose. More Black voices should avail themselves of RT and Sputnik. And, Anoa and Puryear are always welcome at http://www.hpub.org We will not be silenced.
What a crock of BS! I don’t mean the Russian interference. I mean you trying to pretend there was no Russian interference–probably because then you’d have to admit that while you were spending all election season 2016 gleefully posting every slimy anti-Hillary and anti-Democrat meme you could find, you were doing a foreign power’s bidding. Heaven forbid that bashing Hillary might have a downside!
Yeah, Hillary is Wall-street favorite and a war criminal, she was made a candidate by showing Sanders aside, but if she still is not a prez, Russians are to blame!
Of course, I had no dog i n USA prez “race” – I trust neither of the 3.
The story is about a McCartyite smear not what people believe or don’t believe what the Russians did. Who is your handler at the DNC?
SO in order to defend USA citizens from slander by USA government propaganda, Adam Johnson is repeating the same propaganda – citing NPR propaganda piece “Trump Embraces One Of Russia’s Favorite Propaganda Tactics — Whataboutism”?
Nice try, really.
Not to mention U.S. funded media operating in Russia. Should Russians appearing on one of these news outlets worry about their reputations being damaged? Does the U.S. consider this to be ‘meddling’ in Russian politics?
“Russia’s lower house of parliament approved the law – allowing Moscow to force foreign media to brand news they provide to Russians as the work of “foreign agents” and to disclose their funding sources – on Wednesday…. The Russian Justice Ministry on Thursday published a list of nine U.S.-backed news outlets that it said could be affected by the changes, which it said in a statement on its website were likely to become law “in the near future.”
It said it had written to the U.S. government-sponsored Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), along with seven separate Russian or local-language news outlets run by RFE/RL.
One of the seven outlets provides news on Crimea, which Russia annexed from Ukraine in 2014, one on Siberia, and one on the predominantly Muslim North Caucasus region. Another covers provincial Russia, one is an online TV station, another covers the mostly Muslim region of Tatarstan, and the other is a news portal that fact-checks the statements of Russian officials.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-media-restrictions/russia-names-nine-u-s-backed-news-outlets-likely-to-be-labeled-foreign-agents-idUSKBN1DG25N?il=0
Every now and then, experts with professional training; the respect of their peers and often stellar careers, are invited on FOX. Although they’re most likely to have any thoughtful response shouted down, they appear with impunity. The same impunity enjoyed by Sean Hannity – who normally poses as a journalist, but since being named client #3 has taken to referring to himself as “the host of a talk show.”
Now that the FCC has morphed into an auction house serving a handful of bidders, the very concept of “domestic propaganda” so threatens today’s yellow journalism outlets that it’s guaranteed to remain a rarely spoken oxymoron to loyal viewers.
This is why I stopped giving to National Propaganda Radio years ago. In a hypocritical world, NPR takes the cake.
Has anyone ever heard a fawning NPR ‘journalist’ ask a senior public official a hardball question? And then challenge the pol’s non-answer?
This is why I stopped giving to National Propaganda Radio years ago. In a hypocritical world, NPR takes the cake.
Has anyone ever heard a fawning NPR ‘journalist’ ask a senior public official a hardball question? And then challenge the pol’s non-answer?
Let’s demand that progressive leaders throughout the United States support Anoa Changa, Eugene Puryear and the First Amendment. These leaders — national, local, everyone — should request appearances on RT and Sputnik. Normalize the practice. Monkey-wrench the McCarthyites.
How many progressives must do this how many times before the BS charge of complicity with evil Russia becomes meaningless?
I can’t claim credit for this tactic: I saw it in the movies. “I am Spartacus!”
There was a time when NPR was a source of educational, totally free of bias information. But it should now be exposed to the public the fact that it’s since been taken over by Koch Brothers money’d investment and now has a absolute purposeful slant to it’s belief in personal political leanings however slight it may be as it does cradle the title of NPR. Not to be lost is the fact the Koch’s are heavy donors to Republican causes being heavily influenced to Corporate interest.
“Only rubles turn media into “propaganda”; dollar bills are presumably laced with an anti-corruption chemical that prevents venality and careerist conformism.”
I literally laughed out loud.
“What US media are interested in doing, instead, is singling out Official Enemies and using them as a bludgeon to marginalize the already-marginalized, to sully those who make substantive critiques of US society and empire without apology.”
Well, duh. FAIR has been demonstrating this for 30 years now. So why even bother with this next bit?:
“Messages to WABE may be sent here (or via Twitter: @WABEnews). Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective.”
Good bye FAIR. It’s time to tell people to turn off the mainstream media and start thinking for themselves. Until you do I’m done with you.
“Only rubles turn media into “propaganda”; dollar bills are presumably laced with an anti-corruption chemical that prevents venality and careerist conformism.”
I literally laughed out loud.
“What US media are interested in doing, instead, is singling out Official Enemies and using them as a bludgeon to marginalize the already-marginalized, to sully those who make substantive critiques of US society and empire without apology.”
Well, duh. FAIR has been demonstrating this for 30 years now. So why even bother with this next bit?:
“Messages to WABE may be sent here (or via Twitter: @WABEnews). Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective.”
Good bye FAIR. It’s time to tell people to turn off the mainstream media and start thinking for themselves. Until you do I’m done with you.
Web form contact NPR at:
https://help.npr.org/customer/portal/emails/new
My message to it and WABE:
Re: Public Radio’s McCarthyite Smear of Black Activists Shows Danger of Russia Panic
https://fair.org/home/public-radios-mccarthyite-smear-of-black-activists-shows-danger-of-russia-panic/
Shame on you.
(real name and locale)
Incredibly hypocritical piece.
1. Adam claims that no one is interested in “robust and honest conversation about foreign or government influence in the media.” Interpreting any story about the relationship between a Black activist and Sputnik as racist, Adam completely ignores how Russian propaganda successfully targeted the left and right. At no point whatsoever did the Kauffman suggest that Black activism in itself is the problem, yet Adam’s immediate impulse is to assume offense. This completely misses the bigger picture of Russian actors’ strategy of building credibility with Americans to enable rapid spreading of misinformation. I.e., you come for stories about the Black activist, you stay the conspiracy theories and “there’s no evidence of Russian interference” and “American power brokers are Russophobes!” stories. Do we really think it’s a coincidence that those on the far left are just as skeptical about Russia’s role in the 2016 election as many of the people on the right?
2. How unintelligent to assert that the US media is just interested in marginalizing the already marginalized without providing any tangible mechanism for how this occurs in American society, much less in this story alone. This is not a step away from the author’s original piece; it is a dramatic case of Adam adding his own garbage into the story and getting garbage out in this opinion piece. If you want any serious credibility outside of the far left, you’re going to have to work a lot harder to describe how such marginalization is taking place and be much more precise in your language than the grandiose claims made here.
3. Calling The Intercept, The Nation, and Media Matters “center of left” is utterly self-humiliating. Let’s get real, those outlets, especially the latter two, are about as progressive as any largely followed outlet is. This is You coming from a liberal…
4. The only valid point you have is that Kauffman does little to expound upon how Sputnik hosting Black activists could be sowing division. However, others have. See point 1 for a summary of such.
Walt, by its very nature the argument about Russians using Black activists to “create chaos” and “sow division” is inherently suggesting that Black activism is a problem, because positing chaos and division as Russian creations is a direct denial of the Black activists’ central claim: that the chaos and division they’re protesting are inherent in the US project itself, without any Russian needing to conjure it into existence. If US media outlets like NPR want to be more credible on those issues than Russian outlets like Sputnik, they should be more concerned with offering a meaningful platform to voices like Changa or Puryear the way Sputnik has, and less concerned with creating the false appearance of order or sowing the false appearance of unity.
Besides which, white Americans using claims about foreign interference as an excuse to dismiss nonwhite political grievances is hardly a new phenomenon, from the civil rights activists of the ’50s and ’60s whose demands were dismissed as Soviet propaganda, all the way back the Declaration of Independence itself denouncing King George for “incit[ing] domestic insurrections” among black slaves, and for assisting “merciless Indian savages” against the merciless, savage, and genocidal expansion of white American settlers. In the context of this longstanding and deeply offensive US tradition, Adam assuming offense is far more reasonable than either Kauffman perpetuating the offense, or you ignoring it.
Reminds me of how in the 1950s and ’60s mainstream politicians and crackers in my hometown told us that the only reason for the civil rights movement was “outside agitators stirring up our niggers.” Black Americans would be perfectly happy for police to gun them down in cold blood, if it weren’t for the Russians stirring up dissention and protest.
Reminds me of how in the 1950s and ’60s mainstream politicians and crackers in my hometown told us that the only reason for the civil rights movement was “outside agitators stirring up our niggers.” Black Americans would be perfectly happy for police to gun them down in cold blood, if it weren’t for the Russians stirring up dissention and protest.