Re: They sound a tad naive. Hardly an in-depth analysis
Posted by Ian M on October 18, 2021, 10:27 pm, in reply to "They sound a tad naive. Hardly an in-depth analysis"
Wow, that was hard to watch, both of them just piling into her with msm talking points and 'whistleblower' testimony from buzzfeed of all places. Then 'no, let's not do that' from Grim at the end when Iversen proposes talking about it in a planned segment on the Uighurs. What an arsehole. Doesn't seem like Iversen has the strength to stand up for her analysis under fire though. Someone like Max Blumenthal would have made mincemeat of the two of them. She didn't even mention Adrian Zenz ffs, or point out the simple fact that 'whistleblowers' might have an axe to grind and an incentive to, shall we say, emebllish the truth. Though to be fair she would have had to yell to get a word in edgeways... |
Watched this vid she put out just after joining the rising team:
It's full of embarrassingly shallow thinking about how you should support corporate media if it's doing the 'right thing' and wants to employ people like her. They're the 'good guys' and it could be a 'revolution' if the rest of corporate media sees that's what audiences want and follow the example. Her proof was that she'd been there for a week and they hadn't told her what she could or couldn't talk about, just some higher up saying 'don't get us in trouble'. Er, sorry, real journalism is always going to get you in 'trouble', just you wait... Rising have given her a little slack on the leash because they realise Krystal's radicalism was good for ratings, but looks like the discipline is aleady beginning to bite.
Top comment with 306 likes:
'Well, that made things pretty clear, Ryan and Emily have been thoroughly brainwashed and thank heaven Kim is there, well-researched and not taking any bunk. Honestly, she’s the only reason I tune in to this US imperialist cheerleading and war supporting show. When she goes, I go.'
Tell your story; Ask a question; Interpret generously