The Washington Post, in one of the most repugnant articles I’ve ever read, cites to an secretive, anonymous group, calling itself "Is It Propaganda Or Not?" which makes the McCartyesque claim it has identified “more than 200 websites as routine peddlers of Russian propaganda.”
Now I usually don’t care much about an establishment newspaper’s bullshit, but both the WaPo article and “Is it Propaganda Or Not?” have gained serious traction here. It is truly disturbing.
Simply put, “Is it Propaganda Or Not?” wants to return to the McCarty era with government witch hunts aimed at dissent. I understand this is a bold claim, but “Is It Propaganda Or Not?” clearly states in its own words that “we are calling for formal investigations by the US government, because we …..strongly suspect that some of the individuals involved have violated the Espionage Act, the Foreign Agent Registration Act, and other related laws.”
Sorry folks, but people on DKOS should not be cheerleading for government investigations based solely on anonymous accusations that those web sites are stooges for Russian propaganda. This is the classic definition of McCarthyism, the anonymous smearing of news sources as being the dupes of foreign governments and calling for US government investigations based upon those smears.
Worse, “Is It Propaganda Or Not?”’s supposed criteria for determining if news site is a Russian propaganda outfit is--- Does the site question or dissent for US government or establishment policy? As stated by Is it Propaganda or Not?, the following criteria indicate Russian propaganda dupes that should be investigated by our government:
Check to see whether the social-media account/commenter/outlet has a history of generally echoing the Russian propaganda "line" by using themes, arguments, talking points, images, and other content similar to those used by obvious Russian propaganda outlets. These themes include:
- How wonderful, powerful, innocent, and righteous Russia and Russia's friends are: Putin, Donald Trump, Bashar al-Assad, Syria, Iran, China, radical political parties in the US and Europe, etc. Investigate this by searching for mentions of, for example, "russia", on their site by Googling for "site:whateversite.com russia", and seeing what comes up.
- How terrible, weak, aggressive, and corrupt the the opponents of Russia and their friends are: The US, Obama, Hillary Clinton, the EU, Angela Merkel, NATO, Ukraine, Jewish people, US allies, the "mainstream media", and democrats, the center-right or center-left, and moderates of all stripes. Investigate this by searching for mentions of, for example, "NATO", on their site by Googling for "site:whateversite.com NATO" and seeing what comes up.
- An obvious bias towards Russia and Russian-backed policy in foreign affairs, including:
- How fantastic Brexit and Ukrainian/Georgian separatism is, but how terrible Chechen separatists are,
- How advanced Russian technology is, and how dangerous Western technology is,
- How great it is when Western secrets get exposed, but how terrible it is when Russian ones do,
- How militarily powerful Russia and their friends are, and how weak and craven Russia's enemies and their friends are, etc.
- How dangerous standing up to Russia would be: It would inevitably result in "World War 3", nuclear devastation, etc, and regardless of who shot first or is bombing civilians where now, would be the West's fault. Russian propaganda never suggests it would just result in a Cold War 2 and Russia's eventual peaceful defeat, like the last time.
- Pre-emptive discouragement of critical analysis: Assertions about them "having the truth", or the need to "wake up the sheeple", or how the "mainstream media" can't be trusted.
- Hyperbolic alarmism, anti-Western conspiracist insinuations, "Eurasianism", racism, gold-standard nuttery and attacks on the US dollar, 9/11-trutherism, anti-Semitism, anti-"globalism", anti-vax/anti-GMO paranoia, and generally ridiculous over-the-top assertions, which cites Russian propaganda outlets as "evidence".
These criteria are specifically designed to cast as wide a net as possible, and catch for government investigation news sites that either question 1) US government policy, 2) a neoconservative foreign policy, or 3) a neoliberal economic policy. To show how absurd this thinking is, it means that DKOS should be investigated for being against the Iraq War.
In sum, this anonymous site and the WaPo want to gut the First Amendment as it applies to the internet.
The cheerleading for gutting the First Amendment needs to stop.