Hot topics click link for more
Several journalist and press freedom advocates reacted skeptically to news reports in US media that the US Department of Justice (DoJ) has asked US employees of Russian propaganda outlets RT and Sputnik to register as foreign agents. Others - including legal authorities - brush off the fears as “no slippery slope.” What is clear is growing impatience with fake news purveyors wherever they may be.
Earlier this week Yahoo News investigative ace Michael Isikoff with Hunter Walker reported (September 11) the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) recently interviewed former Sputnik news agency employees, receiving an ear-full about “internal structure, editorial processes and funding,” plus a thumb-drive full of internal emails and memos.
The day after the Yahoo News story hit the web, RT and Sputnik offices in suburban Washington DC received a “request” from the DoJ to provide information specified under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which monitors anyone in the US acting “at the order, request, or under the direction or control” of a foreign government. A financial disclosure is also required. Foreign news organizations with statutory independence from governments - BBC, Deutsche Welle, AFP, Radio Canada, et.al. - are specifically exempt from FARA registration but RT and Sputnik are, well, special.
There could be pay-back. "Russia already heavily censors its information space, including by branding some of its most prominent human rights defenders as foreign agents, in an attempt to delegitimize and vilify them,” said Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) spokesperson Courtney Radsch to AFP (September 12).
“Narrowing the media exception under FARA could not only have implications for all sorts of other foreign news outlets operating in the US but also for Voice of America or independent journalists operating overseas if Russia chooses to retaliate by investigating them in a similar manner,” said Freedom of the Press Foundation Executive Director Trevor Timm, quoted by Daily Beast (September 12). “No matter one’s feelings on Russia or Sputnik, I think it’s concerning anytime the FBI gets involved in defining who is and isn’t a journalist,” he said, separately, to Columbia Journalism Review (September 12).
Perhaps best not to get ones knickers in a knot, said journalist and Brookings Institution visiting fellow James Kirchick. “There is no concern about slippery slopes. Never mind their content, which is not news gathering in the traditional sense but disinformation aimed at influencing American politics, their opaque management structures starkly differentiate them from reputable outlets like the BBC, France 24, and Deutsche Welle, which operate independent of government control.” FARA does not prohibit anything, just lots of disclosure. State news outlet China Daily has been filling out the forms for years.
Illustrious London-based public relations firm Bell Pottinger will soon be no more. It placed itself in administration, also known as bankruptcy, this week when a buyer for the business could not be found after employees, clients and shareholders headed for the exits. The company brand is toxic.
The field of public relations has developed with the times. To sending press releases and managing organizational communications has been added brand reputation consulting. And brands needing the service come in all sizes and shapes.
Earlier in the year details emerged of work by Bell Pottinger’s South Africa office for the rich and powerful Gupta family, managing the reputation for its Oakbay Capital holding company. Some of that effort went into various campaigns described as “inciting racism.” Chief executive James Henderson apologized in July. He resigned September 3rd just before an independent report commissioned by the company about the episode reported the social media campaign “was created in breach of relevant ethical principles.”
The UK public relations trade association PRCA expelled Bell Pottinger the next day for “bringing the industry into disrepute.” Investors WPP and Providence Capital Partners “returned” their 27% stake in the company “without compensation.” The Middle East and East Asian subsidiaries were quickly spun-off.
Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been approved to form an intelligence unit specifically to debunk “in serious cases” fake news, reported Danish daily Politiken (September 9). The unit has begun watching for interference in the coming parliamentary elections, promotion of the Russian Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline and harassment of Danish troops deployed to Estonia. When egregious acts are uncovered, real news outlets will be informed.
Disinformation campaigns spread online, primarily, have the attention of authorities almost everywhere. With each new revelation of fake news and propaganda seeping into common discourse, the perceived need is a more robust counter-measure. In democracies where speech and media freedoms are enshrined, some worry that cures are worse than the disease.
"There has always been enough false news and misinformation in our media, but it has, of course, has grown explosively with the evolution of social media,” said Foreign Minister Anders Samuelsen. “When a foreign power strategically uses fake news, lies and disinformation to promote its interests and undermine our Western interests and democratic processes, we as a government will not stand idly by.” (See more about fake news here)
Danish and Swedish defence ministers announced broad cooperation on the “deteriorating security situation,” quoted by Aftonbladt (August 30). “When we can not clearly distinguish fake news and disinformation from what is true and true, we become increasingly unsafe,” said the joint statement of Claus Hjort Frederiksen (Denmark) and Peter Hulqvist (Sweden). “We have both been exposed to different forms and therefore we want to better defend our societies in this area. Here we will increase our cooperation.”
Social network giant Facebook admitted a tidy sum had changed hands with a Russian troll-farm during the last US election cycle for ads promoting divisive political issues with geo-political targeting, reported the Washington Post (September 7). More precise information has been withheld, Facebook citing privacy laws. To advertisers, apparently any and everywhere, Facebook touts its powerful data-rich micro-targeting abilities.
|
