Part III: How The Powerful Manipulate Truth
This series is produced in collaboration with The Conversation.
In the third installment of our series on truth, we’ll unpack how media, the information machine and the powerful manipulate the truth.
Guests
Shelley Inglis, executive director of the Human Rights Center. Professor of human rights and law at the University of Dayton. (@inglis_shelley)
Cynthia Hooper, professor of history and director of Russian and Eastern European Studies at the College of the Holy Cross. (@CynthiaHooperHC)
Razzaq Al-Saiedi, researcher and fellow with the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative. He also works with Physicians for Human Rights documenting war crimes. (@Razzaq_alSaiedi)
From The Reading List
The Conversation: “Russia responds to Mueller report: Moscow wins, Putin is stronger than Trump and US is a ‘pain in the a – –’” — “‘A mountain has given birth to a mouse. The ‘Russian affair’ falls to pieces before our eyes.’ So pronounced the Russian news site Gazeta.ru, as word of the completed Mueller report swept around the world.
“Thus far, official Russian response to the Mueller findings has been scornful. Leaders are taking the conclusions of U.S. Attorney General William Barr – that the report shows no collusion between the Kremlin and U.S. President Donald Trump – as a chance to dismiss all claims of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
“The Mueller investigation in fact confirms that Russian government agents did meddle in U.S. politics, resulting in the 2018 indictments of 25 Russians. But Russian agencies like the Ministry of Foreign Affairs call charges of covert information warfare ‘far-fetched lies.'”
The Conversation: “In the wake of Syrian missile strike, a look inside Russia’s alternate media reality” — “On April 11, the White House released an intelligence report accusing Russia of trying to cover up the use of chemical weapons by Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad through a global disinformation campaign replete with ‘false narratives.’
“As a professor of Soviet history with an interest in media studies, I’ve been following Russia’s response to the chemical attack and subsequent U.S. missile strike – the various television and print news stories, tweets and analyses put forth by Russia’s domestic and international media outlets.
“Together, they’re reflective a larger Russian information strategy: Stress a unified message at home but sow discord abroad.”
Deutsche Welle: “Iran election: Voters likely to punish ‘powerless’ reformists” — “Many Iranians chose to abstain from voting in the parliamentary election on Friday. Ahead of the polls, there was a lot of chatter on social media and other platforms about boycotting the election.
“A survey by the Institute for Social Studies at Tehran University in early February said that not even one out of four Iranians in the capital Tehran would cast their ballot. This is in sharp contrast to the 2016 vote, which recorded a 62% turnout countrywide, and around 50% in Tehran.
“Mohammad Sadeq Javadi Hesar, who is a member of the reformist Etemad Melli (National Trust Party), anticipated a low turnout this year. ‘The driving force behind elections in Iran has always been the youth, as well as academics. But now they are disappointed by the government’s hollow promises. They are frustrated, especially because they haven’t seen a reasonable response to the crises in the past two years,’ Hesar told DW.
“Women activists in Iran are also disgruntled. ‘Whoever goes to the polls will endorse the regime’s crimes,’ 12 women political prisoners at a prison in Tehran wrote in an open letter. These activists called for an election boycott to protest against the regime’s brutal handling of demonstrators.”
This article was originally published on WBUR.org. [Copyright 2020 NPR]
