As for media, RTTV should have more than one in house analyst. It’s also clear that it would benefit from an in house trouble shooting generalist, who knows the American scene and won’t hold back from expressing what’s wrong.

Regarding media at large, I was pondering the idea of someone creating a Hard News Network (HNN).

It is a classic case of expansion reducing quality. Like the NHL.

We should care about such erosion of quality content, because it makes even legitimate news topics more suspect. If they are willing to report such weak speculation as news – what else are they pushing on us that we haven’t caught onto yet? In their rush to fill every hour with something sounding important, their reporting judgment is brought into question.

Along with others, I loathe some of the half truths and outrightly incorrect statements said at that site. I’m also on record for regretting how some established venues have shown a bias for that entity over others who don’t engage in such manner.

As per these recent exchanges, as long as LR behaves in an acceptable enough way, there’s good reason to argue the facts with it. The stated “it” is said in lieu of how several folks believe that LR is a more than one person operation.

Carrying on in this way serves to highlight the dubious selection process of those established venues showing a preference for LR over some others.

I want to once again note how without any legitimacy whatsoever a human rights attorney (Ethan Burger) accused my work of having a “strong anti-Semitic flavor”. This was stated at Siberian Light. He said this while acknowledging not being familiar with my work. Is this the kind of intellect which should be propped? SL allowed me to post a rebuttal. In turn, the feedback sent to me was 100% in my favor. That support came from two persons who have sharply disagreed with me on other points.

Note how this human rights attorney continues to be propped by Russia Profile. See its weekly experts panel at http://www.russiaprofile.org

Also note how this human rights attorney has willingly appeared at La Russophobe. He wrongly accuses my work of having a “strong anti-Semitic flavor”, while not questioning the content at LR. Some of it which a good number of people consider as bigoted.

there is no debate with LR. It’s an assembly of psychopaths with no inclination to debate. As I said, should they ever show up on my blog, I’ll delete their commentary immediately.

It’s people like that who contribute to war, genocide, and all the other horrors on this planet with their sick hatred.

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=199#more-199

Bush was to the CIA what Trotsky was to the Red Army. Both were politicos who were brought into those orgs. as outsiders for the purpose of giving their leaders a better grasp of what those establishments were doing.

RM

Having seen this at other venues, censorship is a horrid thing. It’s one thing to have a pesky troll repeat bullshit. Quite another for someone to come on in a civil enough way and state their views.

From what has so far been posted, it’s good to have LR’s comments posted here. Siberian Light and Johnson’s Russia List have given LR more credibility than some other outlets which are arguably more deserved of respectful recognition.

I like the spirit of fair debate. One which is preferably respectful. I absolutely loathe the scenario where the host/moderator shows clear bias for one party in an exchange. If the ref is clearly cheating for one side, the wronged party has a legitimate basis to withdraw altogether with a detailed reason as they leave the scene.

Some pointed comments to someone who I’d expressed respect for.