Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

uhnope

(6,419 posts)
Sat Aug 6, 2016, 11:37 AM Aug 2016

How mainstream media fell for Putin's stealth invasion (the euphemism "Russian-backed separatists")

If anyone had attempted to report on "German-backed forces" in Nazi-occupied France or "pro-Soviet forces" during the Prague Spring, they would have been dismissed as either hopelessly misinformed or deeply disingenuous.

While local collaborators and convenient euphemisms were plentiful in both instances, there was never any doubt as to who was really in control.

This common sense approach seems to have been lost in Ukraine, where the international media has played a key role in creating the ambiguity that has allowed Russia’s hybrid war to succeed.

Why has the media been so cautious about Russia’s role in the conflict? It is not due to a lack of evidence. Proof of Russian involvement has been overwhelming since the early days of the fighting in eastern Ukraine.


Read more: http://europe.newsweek.com/how-media-fell-putins-stealth-invasion-487022?rm=eu
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How mainstream media fell for Putin's stealth invasion (the euphemism "Russian-backed separatists") (Original Post) uhnope Aug 2016 OP
Good read, thanks Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #1
methinks Go West Young Man has returned n/t uhnope Aug 2016 #2
I think so too Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #3
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How mainstream media fell...