Points well taken up to a certain point.

There’s no obligation for JRL to post me. It’s also clear that JRL isn’t reasonably fair in its selection process.

Sean, Russian mass media isn’t obligated to run some of the horseshit stated by Politkovskaya (when living), Felgenhauer, Albats, Latynina and Gessen. Only some would call that “censorship”.

JRL regularly posted from the now downed Intelligent.ru. Those postings didn’t include any of my Intelligent.ru material which was otherwise well received. Same experiences with Russia Blog and your site.

The reasons are political. The JRL editor is against intelligently presented Russocentric views in the Eng. language. He also appears inacapable of an earnest intellectual discourse.

A shameless promotion: In addition to this interview, I’m quite proud of my Intelligent.ru, Russia Blog, Tiraspol Times, and Sean’s Russia Blog articles and consider a good number of them to be far more worthy than some of the material regularly promoted by JRL. I know that I’m not the only one feeling this way.

As a whole, I accept Mike criticisms of JRL, but don’t exactly share them. It would be a mistake among any serious person interested in Russia to use JRL as the only source. I happen to use it a lot and find it valuable because it contains a lot of articles (even some in translation) about Russia. But it is by no means a one stop shop. As far as JRL’s influence, I have no idea.

I don’t know why Johnson doesn’t include Mike’s work or other essential articles he claims are missing. It certainly could be personal, political, or something else entirely. Sorry Mike, I also don’t think Johnson has any obligation to include you and the publications you promote no more than I or Andy or even LR has an obligation to include anyone we don’t want to.

On traffic, and maybe I should put this comment on the evaluating Russian blogs thread, but to my knowledge, a hit gets recorded on site meter even if a site comes up on a google search. I get hits based on a number of strange searches that deal with Russia. For example, I recently got a hit from someone doing a search for “grandfather stories during soviet repressions.” If a blogger, like LR, simply republishes articles from other news sites, the number of hits are bound to increase just based on google searches. But whatever. Hits are merely a one way to gauge readership. I happen to think that the real measure of being read at least on Site meter is “average visit length” and comments.

LR is a shameless promoter and more power to her. We all are to some extent because we want to be read and by having a blog we feel we should be read. As Ger said here or on another thread (I can’t remember), blogging is about egoism.

Something which was directly addressed to David Johnson of Johnson’s Russia List.

In addition to some other points, he has so far done the turtle on this.

LR criticises everyone/thing that doesnt suit her flawed arguments. She operates on the opposite principle which scientists do -she selectively uses opinions(rather than facts) that suit her already-formed theories, rather than forming her theories from actual facts. She wouldnt be published in scientific journals. I should know I’m a chemist. Apart from anything else scientific papers have to be refereed by two independent anonymous experts and she’d struggle to find even one such person who’d agree with her. I have to say I know I’m well able to cause grief myself but i do wonder if she actually stirs up genuine debate or just trouble. Her blog is comment free and everywhere she goes she simply attacks. All the while actual issues arent discussed at all.

JRL has limits, but is still influential when it comes to Eng. language media folks covering the Russia beat.

Venues like Siberian Light are providing a much added punch. One that needs to be further ignited.

Unlike some other editors, I’m extremely impressed with Andy Young and Sean Guillory. Their respective knowledge level and non-politicization approach to the subject matter is refreshing from what’s typically present at the highly promoted/funded venues.

JRL got someone I am familiar with a job with an indirectly Rusisan government funded Moscow paper. No one was picking up his articles. JRL was the only one. Media people covering Russia get JRL.

JRL’s prejudices just might have screwed others from getting jobs. The Russian government funded media should be made aware of this situation.

Boo JRL.

Sorry to have missed your last post. It’s politically unhealthy for some some to feel free to criticize The Wall Street Journal, while not doing the same with JRL, for promoting an ongoing imperfection which can be easily improved upon.

Andy:

Okay. There’s still no legitimate excuse for JRL’s track record.

If we go by the LR posted comments, number of hits, cited elsewhere mode – I’ve done quite well, beyond a reasonable doubt. Unlike LR – my appeal is one that’s more academic, to go along with a pop mass culture enough level of being interesting for the masses.

IMHO, that’s what good media is about.

It does promote web sites. Check its home page:

http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson

All of those sites no doubt gave JRL some $$$$.

In a number of instances, JRL’s record in selecting material has qualititively hindered the Eng. language flow of news and commentary regarding the former USSR.

There’s no legitimate excuse whatsoever for JRL to have censored in the way that it has.

Points detailed in the above interview.