Main Page Contact Register Log In


"Most people who might listen to VoA and trust its claims about corruption scandals are the people who are already pro-western in their orientation. It is actually the same in the West."
I think you are wrong on multiple levels.

When asked which newspapers she reads Sarah Palin famously said "all of them". People who persue the news for entertainment might only consume news from one newssource but stakeholders in a society who actually act based on the information and who want to inform themselves read broadly.

While you do have anti-government websites in Russian the amount of research that they can do is limited because most of the aren't well founded. Soros gives them likely a few million. It's hard to found well researched regime critical Russian language content.
There a difference between news outlets who can research new stories and outlet's that just repeat what was published elsewhere.

Then non-Western countries are more vulnerable to the free press. Julian Assange that free press is legal in the West because the system is robust, so that you can't change the power structures with it. The same is not true in third world nations.
Wikileaks/TheGuardian turned that one Keynian election through reporting on corruption.
The Chinese do frequently have scandals where officials get sacked.

In times of crisis loyality matters. The Egyptian military didn't back Mubarak because it didn't believe in his government. Coup d'états frequently happen when the government loses support of their military.

Dictartorships don't have everybody in the government believing that the dictatorship is good. A person who in power in Iran and wants to change the status quo has a lot of alternatives of orienting himself. They can orient themselves towards Saudi Arabia. They can orient themselves towards China. They can orient themselves towards Russia. They can orient themselves towards the US.

A person who believes in the Chiense way will take different actions than a person who wants to orient themselves towards the West.

Ukraine likely wouldn't have had elected a pro-Western government when the US wouldn't have spend $5 billion dollar since it's secession from the US on proping up Western voices in it.

The amount of money spent it took to get Uganda to go after homoexualities likely wasn't that high. On the other side after the Guardian decided last year to have a campaign against female genital mutilation Gambia and Nigera banned the practice this year.
You need a lot less to have political effects in those countries than you need in the US.






People who persue the news for entertainment might only consume news from one newssource but stakeholders in a society who actually act based on the information and who want to inform themselves read broadly.

I don’t see much point in telling the stakeholders in a society about the corruption in their countries. Officials in Russia or Iran do not need the VoA for that – all they have to do is to remember how they got to their own positions.
It's hard to found well researched regime critical Russian language content.

This is just from a few days ago.
Ukraine likely wouldn't have had elected a pro-Western government when the US wouldn't have spend $5 billion dollar since it's secession from the US on proping up Western voices in it.

I doubt it. Most of the money appears to have been spent on programs that have nothing to do with propping up Western voices. Also, the timing of the events in Ukraine suggests that this money had little influence. Most of it was spent before 2010 when Ukraine elected a pro-Russian Victor Yanukovych. I think Nuland was totally clueless about the situation in Ukraine and she just tried to get credit for the events she did not even understand.
69%
melian
stars0
Replies (1)