The company that manages the Russian news
outlet R.T. (Russia
Today) announced this week that it had received a letter from the U.S.
Department of Justice requiring it to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act(FARA). The Russian
news outlet Sputnik
International may be next.
FARA was passed in 1938 to require entities or individuals who
represent foreign governments to disclose their relationships, activities, and
finances. Registration would not stop R.T. from broadcasting in the U.S.
or censor its programs – it is a paperwork requirement – but it would formally
label R.T. an arm of the Russian government rather than an independent media
source. This, in essence, would tell Americans that news from R.T. should
be considered suspect.
As a practical matter, all news – particularly
from government-sponsored sources – should be considered skeptically.
That includes the British-owned BBC and U.S. government-funded PBS.
Trevor Burus wrote of PBS earlier this year in the Daily Beast:
A 1969 memo outlined the administration's goals: creating a
new "public" media network to compete with more independent sources
such as NET. That network could be controlled because the White House would
'have a hand in picking the head of such a major new organization if it were
funded by the Corporation [CPB].' That major new organization became PBS.
Many other foreign news services are strongly
government-influenced even if the government does not hold an ownership share.
Does Le Monde reflect the views of the French government? Does The
London Times have a British viewpoint? Russia and China have a number of
news agencies that have operated for years under the guidance of their
respective Communist parties; The People's Daily, Pravda, and Izvestia were
never told to register.
But, you say, there was a report in January from
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) that singled out R.T.
as "a state-run propaganda machine," part of Russia's attempt to
interfere with the 2016 presidential election.
This is the heart of the issue – the American government is still
trying to blame Russia for the outcome of our election. The Russians were
not found to have altered voting machines, cast illegal ballots, or destroyed
legitimate ballots, so the DNI was reduced to saying the American public was
duped by R.T. programming. Pretty good for an outlet almost no one is
watching. R.T. didn't even make the ratings in a 2015 Nielsen
survey of the top 94 cable channels in America. According to
the Economist,
among its top 15 YouTube hits presently are earthquakes, grisly accidents, and
Vladimir Putin singing "Blueberry Hill."
There are important principles at stake here for the American
audience, for bilateral relations, and for journalism.
1. Registration is a two-way street. The U.S. is likely to
find its media outlets in Russia ostracized and excluded, maybe even barred
entirely. Since the Russian government has a heavier hand with
journalists than our own government does, it is not in our interest to let this
happen.
2. There are countries presently systematically destroying their
own free press. Turkey, a NATO member, comes to mind. If
journalists operate under duress and threat of imprisonment at home – as do the
Turkish media – why should they be considered independent operators in the
U.S.? The Justice Department would have a credible case for warning
Americans about Turkish media as propaganda by journalists intimidated by their
own government.
3. Blaming Russia for the choices Americans made last November is
insulting; Americans are generally smart enough to put foreign broadcasting in
its proper perspective. Al Jazeera America – owned by the government of
Qatar – never had more than 60,000 viewers on a single night (State of the
Union 2015) and generally had about 10,000 viewers in any given hour in a
country with 100million cable-linked homes. It died.
R.T. has a certain benefit. It is worth understanding the
Russian vantage point on important issues – and watching the Russians'
generally rather overt propaganda. The greatest value has been excellent
reporting on Russia's Syria operations, including video of some of the air and
ground operations they are supporting. R.T. also provides strong coverage
of Russia's president, including lengthy videos of conferences and meetings
where Vladimir Putin outlines his policies. This kind of information
often is missing in Western reporting, and even better, many of Putin's
appearances in conferences and meetings are complete (including his annual
Q&A with the Russian public), which allows Americans to evaluate them
in their entirety. You won't find that kind of unedited coverage of
Russia in the American media – in fact, it is hard to find unedited coverage of
theAmerican government in American media.
In today's world, where social media have outpaced old-time news
outlets, trying to sanction or ostracize R.T. or any other source that is
primarily a social media or internet phenomenon is a pointless exercise and
likely to backfire.
It has been the Russian goal from the days of the USSR to sow
doubt among Americans about our government, our laws, and our electoral system.
The Justice Department decision is an admission that they believe Russian
propaganda can do that to us. It makes us look fearful rather than
strong, foolish rather than smart. An American government with confidence
in its system and its citizens wouldn't feel the need to hand them that
victory.
