If one wanted to step back and criticize Western media outlets for being too quick to push Russian actions into a certain box, one might have a point. Still, we must also be mindful of how even sincere attempts at trying to offer an alternative viewpoint might also be counter-productive. Take the interview of former US Congressman Dennis Kucinich with Russian state outlet RIA Novosti as an example. This interview was worrying for two reasons. First, the tone of RIA Novosti's coverage has noticeably been shifting as of late. I generally found them to be a pretty objective news source (ironically) to keep up with events in Russia, though their coverage is seemingly shifting to fit a previously announced re-organization of state media.
Second, Kucinich's interview represents a common problem among those who seek to present a critical viewpoint regarding US foreign policy: rather than finding flaws in both sides of the argument, they cannot help but play right into the hands of the other side's propaganda. In the interview, Kucinich characterizes the new Ukrainian government as a "junta" that have allowed neo-Nazis to come to power, that NATO is an "anachronistic" organization that has pushed itself right to the Russian border, and that Western countries had a guiding role in the protests that forced Viktor Yanukovych out of power. Gee, where have we heard these arguments before? Certainly, I wouldn't accuse Kucinich of being a flag-waving supporter of what the Russians have done in Crimea. Nonetheless, what new perspective could he possibly think he is offering when he goes to Russian state media and pretty much re-states Kremlin talking points regarding Ukraine? Americans using Russian media as a means to present a non-mainstream viewpoint is not necessarily a new trend. When people like Kucinich use these outlets as a means to effectively ally their soapbox with that of Moscow, however, they are actually reinforcing rigid thought processes that exist on both sides of the relationship.
No comments:
Post a Comment