THE FAILURE OF THE WESTERN MAINSTREAM MEDIA MODEL OF...PROTECTOR.(17.01.2014)
It is true that I have never been on a writing course, let alone, a "journalism" course. I would not even pretend that I would even want to be whatever a "journalist" is. I am Jo-Public, just like everyone else.
"...Mr Cameron ended his address paying tribute to the British political press who he said had a "vital role to play in our country".
"Tenacious, uncontrollable, sceptical, often uncomfortable for us politicians, British political reporting is deservedly respected around the world for the way it probes, inquires and scrutinises.
"These things are lynchpins of our democracy."
....One of those watching Mr Cameron's own attempt at comedy was ITV political correspondent Paul Brand, who said the speech was "hilarious".
"Whatever you make of his politics, he can crack a joke," he tweeted.
N.B In the interests of honesty, I have put the BBC quotes into the correct order.
I never knew of the many untold truths I would have to tell, or the very considerable obstacles and sheer breadth of layer upon layer of state violence, that would try to...murder me too, for trying to share with people the world over, the truths that the western mainstream media do not.
Yet the truths I know, need to be shared, however I can, in whatever words I can find, because all we have ever wanted to do, like others, is...protect life.
The Guardian and Telegraph -gatekeepers- of two official versions of lies, tell us that the Independent Newspaper are struggling.
It is however inevitable to -the people- the world over, that as the western mainstream media model of...protector is revealed as the business lie, it has always been, that it will shrink, as less and less people continue to subscribe.
This current shrinkage is not one, that in the current world of people awakening, is a change that is going to end up benefiting a few monopolistic outlets, like Murdoch.
It is well understood by people who pick up the London Evening Standard for free, that it has basically shriveled into nothing more than a paid for advertisement, for whoever shamelessly, happens to be paying.
In fact the current shrinkage in people participation in mainstream media is the -harbinger- of real change towards the people creating sustainable media by the people, because what the people are saying is true.
The people will tell the truth -because- the people do care about...the people.
The people really do want to protect...life.
In -all my years- in Parliament Square it was -always- and increasingly the case, that the people from all around the world we met, did not for various reasons, believe their government or media.
What everyone did all very much -care- about, was what was being done to other people, by the business state.
People the world over, do want to know any and every way, the people can overcome, the very many barriers preventing change in the right direction.
People desperately -want- to protect...life.
A western mainstream media journalism "course" is not going to "teach" us, how to effectively bring about change.
Trial and error, along the road of real experience and understanding will.
The global business state understand only too well, that new media managed by the people, who may not write like journalists, or intellectuals, will be one of the biggest ways, the people can effect change, to protect life.
In what is a matter of life and death, putting out the truth, however you can, to the best of your ability, is more important, than whether or not you have a piece of paper from some bod running a course saying your words, (whatever they may be) may sound..nice.
If I do not always use the right words that may fit with your own life experience or what you might usually read, I know you will understand, that nevertheless, all I am trying to do is protect...life.
Robert Fisk: The ‘flowers’ of the Arab Spring are so distracting that Ariel Sharon’s death has barely raised a whimper
For years, Iraqis have been telling me that they prefer ‘security’ to ‘anarchy’
Has ever the Arab awakening – the Arab “Spring” if we were to believe the nonsense spouted at the time – looked more desperate, more bloody, more hopeless, more despairing than it does today? I am not referring to the anguish so distracting the Arab world that it scarcely raised a whimper this weekend when the man most of them regarded as a war criminal – Ariel Sharon – was mourned by the West and its frightened journos as “iconic”, “legendary”, “audacious”, a “bulldozer” and “a proudly Zionist general”.
Incredibly, the presenter of Al Jazeera English even offered her “sincere condolences” to an Israeli friend of this dreadful man. When the Israeli Kahan Commission report was quoted by reporters, they inaccurately said it held Sharon only “indirectly” responsible for the 1982 Sabra and Chatila massacres of up to 1,700 Palestinian civilians murdered by Israel’s proxy Lebanese militia. In fact, the official text also states that Sharon was “personally” responsible.
But why should Arabs care about the final demise of a man who, like much of the Arab world, spent the last years of his existence in a coma? For the awful truth – and it has to be stated at last – is that the Arab revolutions have brought about unspeakable slaughter, an unprecedented flood of refugees and economic disaster. As a newspaper seller put it simply to me in Cairo a few weeks ago, “the revolution was great, what followed was terrible”. Indeed, across the Middle East, millions of Arabs, I suspect, now believe that the overthrow of their dictators was a tragedy, that if dictatorship meant political and physical imprisonment, then freedom brought only bloodshed, lawlessness, insecurity and a craving for the old autocrats.
A lot of Arabs, let us speak frankly, desire a return to good old homely police states with plenty of corruption and torture to ease the springs, rather than the brave new world that the West supposedly wanted them to enjoy – and which they deserved to enjoy for themselves. For years, Iraqis have been telling me that they preferred a state of “security” to a state of “anarchy”. My Baghdad driver used to complain to me that if he was riding a bus during Saddam’s rule, he knew what he could and couldn’t say – but that now he could say nothing since he didn’t know the views of the passenger sitting next to him. I tried to argue him out of this view, on the grounds that he would live in perpetual slavery if he did not open his mouth. I failed to convince him.
This weekend, I asked that long-standing, brave nihilist Walid Jumblatt, the leader of Lebanon’s minuscule Druze community and one of Bashar al-Assad’s most constant critics, if he agreed with me. He condemned “the willingness of some people to have police states like before”. And Jumblatt, never one to miss a floral parallel to the iniquities of the region, referred to a “spring” which “had blossomed a variety of unique ‘flowers’ like Isis, Jabhat al-Nusra and so many other exotic varieties. Thanks to climate change, we have remarkable new cactuses, like Maliki and Sisi, plus a new brand of exquisite truffles, with a delicious flavour, newly catalogued as Ghannushi and Morsi.”
Jumblatt’s contempt for all their houses – for the Islamists fighting Bashar in Syria, for the pseudo-dictators Nouri al-Maliki and Abdul Fattah al-Sisi of Iraq and Egypt, for the “elected” Islamist leaders Mohamed Morsi of Egypt and Rashid al-Ghannushi of Tunisia – was in keeping with his scorn for the Syrian President, “expert in ‘botany’...obliged to safeguard these unique blossoms with some needed ingredients, home-made chemicals blended with phosphorous”.
True to form, Jumblatt ended with a crashing coda for me. “I promise you, Robert, that my next move is to put a wreath of flowers on the tombstone of Lawrence [of Arabia], pay respect to the memory of Peter O’Toole, praise highly Mr Sykes and Mr Picot.” I do not need to explain these characters or this cynicism to you, O reader. “As for Lord Balfour,” Jumblatt concluded, “well, I think he should be very happy with this Arab Spring.”
Probably. Because while Israel buries its Zionist hero, the Arabs who overthrew their own leaders are either fighting each other – to the dismay of their erstwhile American, British and French supporters – or are praying for the return of the “democratic strongman” so fervently sought after by the likes of Daniel Pipes and his fellow neo-conservatives in the US. In the Middle East, the armies are winning, the little men are in hiding or – as in Syria or Egypt – being shot down in the streets or – most shamefully of all – demanding an end to all the liberties they won.
And those famous “Arab masses” who sought dignity and freedom? I do not believe they have run away. The victories of 2011 are there to haunt the autocrats, new and old. But the Palestinians are forgotten. And Jumblatt is right. Lord Balfour should be happy with the “Arab Spring”. Now he’ll have time to chat about it all with Sharon. If they’re in the same place.
Abe’s shame – and that of Britain
The Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, has yet again outraged the Chinese by trooping to the memorial shrine of Japan’s war criminals. I’ve been there – it even contains an old Japanese steam train that travelled on the Burma railway.
A cousin of mine – the son of my Dad’s sister Freda, Royal Marine Jim Feather – died building it. Shame on Abe. But Independent reader Arthur Stockwin, stirred by my report of a wartime American journalist’s attempt to tell the difference between Japanese and Chinese racial stock, has sent me an extraordinary quotation from a Chatham House publication, World Today, published in August 1945. Shame is not the word for it.
Signed “TL” and entitled “The Japanese Character”, it says that the Japanese “are of mixed racial origin, a combination of an early Caucasoid stock from north and east Asia, a Mongolian and a Malayan strain … it is the presence of that Malayan blood which is the cause of that intensely exuberant and unbalanced emotionalism so characteristic of the people.”
If that’s not enough, Chatham House informed its academic readers that “the preponderance of … the Malayan and Mongolian [elements] is evidenced in the two distinct types still to be observed in Japan – the aristocratic type representative of the former, the long thin face, the slightly aquiline and narrow nose…” As for “the pudding-face peasant with sunken nose, wide nostrils, high cheek-bones, thick lip and protruding teeth,” these are a Japanese “relic of the Mongolian influx”.
I wonder what Abe thinks about that. Come to think of it, it’s pretty much the same kind of racist stuff the English once used about the Irish.
The Western mainstream media narrative which is now disingenuously trying to offload their own western backed slice and dice brigades (follow the money trail) now they have -all- (whether "journalist" or slicer & dicer) been exposed, lack any credibility whatsoever.
Genuine people do not deviate from the one simple path of trying to protect life...for the odd fast buck, from whoever, here or there.
Shame on the traitorous Mr Fisk for the treating the people like idiots, over the most important issue...of life.
What remains important, is for the people to get the truth out, that challenges the nicely "packaged" lies of those like Fisk.
Fisk obviously "markets", however he can, through his "brand" called "journalism", what remains the brutal mass murder, of innocent civilians, by illegal western backed..."interventions".
What the people actually want, instead of an either, or, "compromise" over...life, is for Western "intervention" in any current shape or form, which -includes- western installed tin pot dictators and their police states, to end.
"One way this apparatus excludes ordinary people – the people whose interests they falsely purport to champion – is by the erection of production categories like “journalist” or “academic” or “expert/analyst/commentator”.
If one fails to satisfy the formal corporate capitalist prerequisites for such categories one’s opinions and views don’t count. Certainly, anti-imperialist dissenting views are either systematically excluded or relegated to the status of ineffectual comment.
In fact, people outside those categories of intellectual production may have incomparably more insight, knowledge and experience of a given country or issue than the formally accredited “journalists”, “academics” or “experts/analysts/commentators”."