Analysis of Media
Being able to analyse all forms of media in the modern world is a skill of the utmost importance, particularly given the amount of time we all spend soaking in information consciously or subconsciously across devices. Here is the main point from this article: there is no such thing as objective and unbiased reporting. Every single piece of media you consume, from Government press releases to an interview with the stars of the next Marvel movie, is part of a grander scheme of political forces acting antagonistically against each other in the world for control. Sceptical? The US Government still actively screens Hollywood movies for anything that could affect their standing on the world stage[1]. Even reading into modern Superhero movies shows the narrative that we are but ignorant pawns and the only thing that can save us is the good will of omnipotent billionaires like Tony Stark.
Often times these “bastions of free speech” don’t even let the minor details such as the truth get in their way. Before the Iraqi War Robert Murdoch’s arsenal of newspapers made sure to beat their chests and rattle the cages of the public with the voraciousness of their calls thundering for invasion and war claiming that Saddam was mere seconds away from personally launching his backlog of Weapons of Mass Destruction right into your wee Granny’s kitchen. We know for certain now that what many anti-war activists at the time were saying was true. This was an almost perfect repeat of the strategy in 1964 when US media drove outrage about a fictional Gulf of Tonkin[2] incident which served as justification for the deployment of US Government forces and the commencement of open warfare against North Vietnam. The calls for war was based on lies and the desire of the media to push their pro-war narrative right down your throat to tickle your uvula.
Unfortunately the public didn’t see that the news was being subjectively fed to them from up high in the echelons of the elites. Lately I have seen fellow comrades latching onto BBC cries of human rights abuses and the cruelty of evil leftwing dictators receiving the majority of votes in UN approved elections, oh the humanity. The same BBC whose lack of credibility has enabled an entire wikipedia page dedicated just to their controversies[3]. The BBC in their enlightened state in 1988 chose the best option of unbiased and fair reporting, to prohibit the broadcast of direct statements by representatives or supporters of eleven Irish political and military organisations.
An analysis of the history of these various media organisations is a good starting point to be able to apply that skill to the modern day. Perhaps we should go through an example to see if we can spot the intents of some of these reliable sources and see what side of the fence they play on.
Firstly, let's take a nice controversial geo-political topic that has been in the media lately. The treatment of Uighurs in the Chinese province of Xinjiang. Now, it’s probably pretty apparent already that the United States and the People’s Republic of China are at loggerheads with each other on the global stage as China is fast approaching to take the #1 spot of the US as the world’s foremost superpower, and in classic American fashion, they won’t let it slip without a fight. What might not be obvious is why the US and the 'West' in particular would be so heavily involved in the well being of muslims in China despite their lack of interest in them elsewhere. The Xinjiang autonomous region is where most of the land routes for China's Belt and Road Initiative pass through, making it a linchpin of Chinese global trade. The BRI is simply China's major trade push to develop mutually beneficial trade with every country they can. China obviously doesn't want their linchpin broken either. A key thorn in that, was increased extremist activity in the region[4][5][6].
So here is a case study article from the British newspaper The Guardian.
The first statement from the article is that 1.5 million people[7] could be interned there. So we follow the rabbit hole and look at this article’s source. The source here is Adrian Zenz an independent German researcher who’s estimate is based on “on satellite images, public spending on detention facilities and witness accounts of overcrowded facilities and missing family members”. Yet no opinions or research can be truly “independent” and Dr Zenz most certainly isn’t leaping into this as a hobby, his research is funded by somebody. That somebody turns out to be the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation in Washington D.C. as a Senior Research fellow[8]. An American organisation founded explicitly to lobby against governments such as China by leading American conservative figures. Seems far from independent.
The second part, the main meat of the article, revolves around leaked documents supposedly from the Chinese government. The documents referenced were verified by ICIJ, The New York Times and other predominantly Western media sources. The Chinese government has called these documents “fake news”[9] and “fabricated” so it cannot be definitely determined the accuracy of the leaks. For now the content is unimportant in determining the angle of these particular piece of media. The ICIJ while being self-described as independent is a US not-for-profit, with its positioning at the heartland of imperialism enables the prevailing bourgeois morals of the US to filter into any work produced and be possibly swayed by the omnipresent US ruling class interests. Then it is a surprise to nobody what line The New York Times pedals. The same newspaper who foamed at the mouth at the very thought of the profits made from a US war with Iraq.
Another interesting thing to point out in regards analysing media is their specific use of language. The clearest example located in the title is the term “Prison Camps”. “Prison Camp” is a term often used in an attempt to link an “evil” regime with Nazi Germany and implicitly their concentration camps. While bearing no difference the morally “good” US and its allies have “Prisons” but the villains of the world all have “Prison Camps”.
The rest of the article lists many other events and claims, some particularly dubious such as an article from Radio Free Asia a US government owned[10], CIA built[11] propaganda network. For brevity I will leave this particular article analysis here and the rest can be an exercise for the keen reader.
I’m sure the irony of this article and use of news sources to back up claims is not lost on the keen observer but hopefully this article has provided an insight into the skills needed to independently investigate information and what narrative it is building and shaping.
The next time you read an article make sure you know who is trying to point you in some direction and whose interests do they care about?
Note: This article is not proclaiming that every source of information on the treatment of Uighur’s is fabricated but attempts to demonstrate how to analysis propaganda sources dynamically in the modern world. Ógra Shinn Féin does not have an official opinion, passed at our Comhdháil, regarding Xinjiang.
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HODxnUrFX6k
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_controversies
[4] https://21stcenturywire.com/2018/09/26/from-idlib-to-xinjiang-uyghur-fighters-trained-for-terror/
[8] https://foreignpolicy.com/author/adrian-zenz/
[9] http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-11/29/c_138590769.htm