The
Guardian did not make a mistake in vilifying Assange without a shred
of evidence. It did what it is designed to do, says Jonathan Cook.
by
Jonathan Cook
Part
6 - Deeper Malaise
What
this misses is that The Guardian’s attacks on Assange are
not exceptional or motivated solely by personal animosity. They are
entirely predictable and systematic. Rather than being the reason for
The Guardian violating basic journalistic standards and
ethics, the paper’s hatred of Assange is a symptom of a deeper
malaise in The Guardian and the wider corporate media.
Even
aside from its decade-long campaign against Assange, The Guardian
is far from “solid and reliable”, as Greenwald claims. It has
been at the forefront of the relentless, and unhinged, attacks on
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn for prioritizing the rights of
Palestinians over Israel’s right to continue its belligerent
occupation. Over the past three years, The Guardian has
injected credibility into the Israel lobby’s desperate efforts to
tar Corbyn as an anti-semite.
Similarly,
The Guardian worked tirelessly to promote Clinton and
undermine Sanders in the 2016 Democratic nomination process –
another reason the paper has been so assiduous in promoting the idea
that Assange, aided by Russia, was determined to promote Trump over
Clinton for the presidency.
The
Guardian’s coverage of Latin America, especially of populist
leftwing governments that have rebelled against traditional and
oppressive U.S. hegemony in the region, has long grated with analysts
and experts. Its especial venom has been reserved for leftwing
figures like Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, democratically elected but
official enemies of the U.S., rather than the region’s rightwing
authoritarians beloved of Washington.
The
Guardian has been vocal in the so-called “fake news”
hysteria, decrying the influence of social media, the only place
where leftwing dissidents have managed to find a small foothold to
promote their politics and counter the corporate media narrative.
The
Guardian has painted social media chiefly as a platform overrun
by Russian trolls, arguing that this should justify ever-tighter
restrictions that have so far curbed critical voices of the dissident
left more than the right.
Source,
links:
Comments
Post a Comment