The New York Times headline (2/1/21) asks a good question that the accompanying story completely fails to answer.
“Who Is Aleksei Navalny?” was the headline over the “Inside the Times” column (New York Times print edition, 2/1/21)–which is a good question, given that the Russian activist has been mentioned more than 300 times in the paper, and has become the undisputed poster child for opposition to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Lauren Jackson, an editor at a Times podcasting project, wrote:
Most of the New York Times‘ audio team knew the Russian opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny for his near-death experience—a cinematic story that included a suspected state-sanctioned poisoning, a diverted plane and an airlift to a German hospital. From following the news, we also knew about his dissidence, including criticism of the Kremlin. But we didn’t know who he was beyond these headlines.
So in January, when Mr. Navalny voluntarily returned to Russia, where he was promptly imprisoned, an editor on our team asked: Who is Aleksei Navalny?
Another Times podcaster said, “We were interested in diving into this character to understand how he got to be a powerful figure internationally.” But when they called the paper’s Moscow correspondent, Anton Troianovski, they were told that “the defining moment in Navalny’s life had yet to happen, and that it would happen on Saturday.” Would people turn out for protests against Navalny’s arrest? “The protests on Saturday were going to tell us a lot about how Navalny’s legacy endured,” said one team member, while another asked: “The protests that he called for, would they happen or wouldn’t they? And what would be the repercussions?”
The fact that there were protests against the arrest of Aleksei Navalny (New York Times, 1/29/21) tells us nothing about who Navalny is.
“After recording most of the episode on Friday, we were left with a cliffhanger, not knowing how the episode would end,” Jackson related. Spoiler: They saw large crowds, despite freezing temperatures.
Of course, the fact that there were people who turned out in support of Navalny doesn’t really tell you anything at all about who he actually is. For that, the Times audio team would have been better off going to the Times archives, where they would have found a profile of Navalny from 2011. After telling readers that he has “Nordic good looks, a caustic sense of humor and no political organization,” Troianovski’s predecessor Ellen Barry (12/9/11) related some rather more relevant background:
He has appeared as a speaker alongside neo-Nazis and skinheads, and once starred in a video that compares dark-skinned Caucasus militants to cockroaches. While cockroaches can be killed with a slipper, he says that in the case of humans, “I recommend a pistol.”
It’s not much of a cliffhanger, but the Times turns out to have known who Navalny is for almost 10 years.
ACTION ALERT: You can send a message to the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com (Twitter:@NYTimes). Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your communication in the comments thread.
Merkels personally Guest in Germany, the Rassist Navalny is to Russia what Guaido is to Venezuela – a creature of Intelligence.
nothing more to tell, seen what guaido did, doing, will do….disasters!!!!
Navalny isn’t better, and if international policy go following these secret services creatures, all people before or after will understand what type of outcomes we will see.
we are interested in other things, what the means of LasVegas killings? and the tens of similar happenings in Usa in late 20 years, 9/11 included . . . . .
Naureckas is an imbecile. In 2013, he backed up Mint Press’s account of the sarin gas attack in Ghouta in 2013, which was repudiated by the author whose name was used in the byline without her permission.
https://fair.org/home/which-syrian-chemical-attack-account-is-more-credib
You mean the article that was repeatedly updated and corrected? Since you are so off-topic, I figured I’d throw this out there for you.
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/10/07/opcw-syria-whistleblower-and-ex-opcw-chief-attacked-by-us-uk-french-at-un/
So, Louis, which alleged Syrian chemical weapons attack IS more credible?
You mean the article that was repeatedly updated and corrected?
—-
Corrected? Are you kidding? The final version claimed that rebels handled the weapons “accidentally” in a tunnel and set off the explosions that killed thousands. Not even Ted Postol or the rest of the Assadist clowns came up with a scenario out of the 3 Stooges like this. You people are nuts and a symbol of how degraded FAIR has become since I used to donate to it in the late 80s.
They “forget”
So we can’t recall
Regarding one Mr. Louis N. Proyect, this is a useful lens through which to view his commentary.
https://bennorton.com/louis-proyect-liar/
And his lies have been chronicled here: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/06/11/proy-j11.html
And here: https://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2015/07/louis-proyect-remains-unrepentant.html
Norton? You have to be kidding. Out of nowhere, he took a 180 degree turn of opposing Assad to one of his biggest fans. Not only that, he deleted all his old posts so they wouldn’t get in the way of the Kremlin payoffs he needed to pay his rent.
https://medium.com/@_alhamra/benjamin-norton-sheds-positions-and-causes-like-a-snake-sheds-skin-1c23d0b76612
I am convinced that this method of creating “superhumans” by sheer storytelling has been with us since the beginnings of civilization, and that if we had time to dig deep into it, we would find many supposedly great historic figures, martyrs and saints to be utter fraud, marketing and deception. Just look for any regime change in foreign countries and you will quickly find a heroic dissident that was groomed by Western agents, paid by Western interest groups, and build up in the Western media. It is very effective subversion.
This is a cliffhanger alright, in what does it say about who Putin really is, which is to his own people. Any superpower leader would have to act different on the world stage, if they were sweet to their own people, in this weirld, Their world, he’d have to act tuff.
Salon is no different than what the Washington Examiner, Brietbart, and other right-wing horseshit. Salon is a perfect counter-example to those. Whether it’s true or not, FAIR should really be concerned with the real imminent threat – Vladimir Putin. If FAIR cares about human rights and fighting authoritarianism and despots (what all progressives should be doing in the first place) you’d fight against the likes of Putin, not this enemy of my enemy is my friend crap. That’s a real juvenile view you’re espousing.
If “progressives” were actually serious about “fighting” Putin (though by what right is never clear) they’d be supporting his actual opposition rather than propping up a Nazi loving scarecrow. Check it out, there is an actual left wing opposition out there that is not only not Nazis but has real support