Disinfo: Western journalism is dominated by Russophobia and prefers fantasy and story-telling to objective reporting

Summary

After the Skripal case, even the most respected Western media have increasingly discarded objective reporting and have substituted the latter with Russophobic fantasy stories and spy-fiction. The most recent examples of Russophobic spy-fiction is a Le Monde article, and a previous New York Times article, on an alleged top-secret Russian intelligence unit that engaged in “destabilising activities” throughout Europe.

Western journalism, and many aspects of Western culture, are increasingly Russophobic, Sinophobic and phobic towards any actor that is critical of dominant Western globalist thinking. Russia can be accused without any argument or evidence to support the accusations, and it is up to Russia to prove its innocence. The Western media system has deteriorated, it is no longer based on objective information but on scandals, accusations, commercial considerations and geopolitical motivations.

Disproof

No evidence is given. Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the spread of Russophobia in Western media, which also allegedly censors views that are critical of dominant Western narratives. A second recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative aims at discrediting investigative journalists that research Kremlin-sponsored, hostile, influence activities in the West, by claiming they are Russophobic and that their investigations are based on false information and dubious sources.

The Western media cannot be described as “Russophobic” nor as dominated by a ruling “globalist paradigm”. Media in pluralist democracies represent a wide range of political opinions and do not have a single editorial policy for any country or topic. Several journalistic investigations on topics such as the Skripal case have been based on serious research work and can in no way be described as “Russophobic”.

Read similar cases claiming that the German media and NATO portray Russia as an enemy and that Buzzfeed hires Russophobic journalists, spreads false information and incites hatred

Read here for further background on the theme of the Russophobia myth.

Go to search

publication/media

it.sputniknews.com (Archived)
  • Reported in: Issue 176
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 05/12/2019
  • Outlet language(s) Italian
  • Keywords: Sergei Skripal, West, Mainstream media, Anti-Russian, Media, Russophobia
see more

Disinfo: The coup prompted Crimea to restore its Russia identity

The Ukrainian capital of Kyiv lost control of Crimea and Donbas after the coup in 2014, which prompted the people of Crimea to demand the restoration of Russian identity and return in the arms of Russia while the people of the Donbas region pushed to declare independence from Kyiv by establishing two popular republics in the region.

Dec 04, 2019
Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the Euromaidan, the illegal annexation of Crimea, and the war in Ukraine.

There was no coup d'état in Ukraine. The spontaneous onset of the Euromaidan protests was an organic reaction by numerous parts of the Ukrainian population to former President Yanukovych’s sudden departure from the promised Association Agreement with the European Union in November 2013.

Disinfo: NATO promised not to expand to the East

After the collapse of the Warsaw bloc, NATO made promises that they would not expand to the East. But this did not happen. And with all the expansion of NATO that took place, they brought the bloc closer to Russia’s borders.

Dec 04, 2019
Disproof

This is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the West encircling Russia via NATO. NATO Allies take decisions by consensus and these are recorded. There is no record of any such decision having been taken by NATO. Personal assurances from individual leaders cannot replace Alliance consensus and do not constitute formal NATO agreement. This promise was never made, as confirmed by Mikhail Gorbachev, then-president of the Soviet Union. Central and Eastern European countries began seeking NATO membership in the early 1990s. NATO actively sought to create a cooperative environment that was conducive to enlargement while simultaneously building special relations with Russia. NATO does not "expand" in the imperialistic sense described by pro-Kremlin media. Rather, it considers the applications of candidate countries who want to join the alliance based on their own national will. As such, NATO enlargement is not directed against Russia. NATO's "Open Door Policy" is based on Article 10 of the Alliance's founding document, the North Atlantic Treaty (1949). The Treaty states that NATO membership is open to any "European state in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area". Every sovereign nation has the right to choose its own security arrangements. This is a fundamental principle of European security and one to which Russia has also subscribed. For similar cases, see here and here.

Disinfo: NATO enlargement poses a threat to Russia

USSR and Warsaw Pact no longer exist but NATO not only exists but is developing as well. NATO enlargement and development of its infrastructure near Russian borders is one of the potential threats to Russia’s national security. Russia has done everything to cooperate with NATO in order to deal with real problems such as international terrorism, local military conflicts, uncontrolled spread of weapons of mass destruction. But Russia-NATO cooperation was actually cut.

Dec 04, 2019
Disproof

The statement contains multiple recurring pro-Kremlin narratives on NATO. The first narrative is NATO as a relic of the Cold War. This narrative aims at undermining NATO's role as a defensive military alliance. Concerning the claim, that NATO is the relic of the Cold War, at the London Summit in 1990, Allied heads of state and government agreed "to keep standing together, to extend the long peace". This was their sovereign choice and was fully in line with their right for collective defence. Since then, thirteen more countries have chosen to join NATO. Twice since the end of the Cold War, NATO has adopted new Strategic Concepts (in 1999 and 2010), adapting to new realities. Thus, rather than being disbanded as a relic, NATO adapted, and continues to change, to live up to the needs and expectations of Allies, and to promote their shared vision of a Europe whole, free and at peace. See the identical case about NATO here. The second narrative claims that NATO poses a threat to Russia. NATO has many time underlined that it is a purely defensive alliance, whose purpose is to protect its member states. In direct response to Russia's use of military force against its neighbours, NATO has deployed four multinational battle-groups to the Baltic States and Poland. These forces are rotational, defensive and proportionate. They cannot compare to the three divisions Russia has established in its Western Military and Southern Military Districts. Before Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea, there were no plans to deploy Allied troops to the eastern part of the Alliance. See other cases on NATO posing threat to Russia here, here and here. The last narrative implies that NATO refused cooperation with Russia. NATO has reached out to Russia consistently, transparently and publicly over the past 29 years. NATO and Russia worked together on issues ranging from counter-narcotics and counter-terrorism to submarine rescue and civil emergency planning. However, in March 2014, in response to Russia's aggressive actions against Ukraine, NATO suspended practical cooperation with Russia. The NATO - Russia Council is still active.