The authors call for the creation of an “internationally recognized ratings system for disinformation” that would furnish news organizations and
bloggers with the “analytical tools with which to define forms of communication.” While they throw in an obligatory caveat that “top-down
censorship should be avoided” (exactly how is left unexplained), they nonetheless endorse what amounts to a media blacklist. “Vigorous debate and
disagreement is of course to be encouraged,” the authors write, “but media organizations that practice conscious deception should be excluded from
the community.”
What qualifies as “conscious deception” is also left undefined, but it isn’t difficult to surmise. Organizations that do not share the
authors’ enthusiasm for regime change in Syria or war with Russia over Ukraine would almost certainly be “excluded from the community.” Weiss,
for instance, has asserted repeatedly that Russia is to blame for the July 2014 downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. But would a news
organization like, say, The Atlantic or Der Spiegel be “excluded from the community” for writing about a German intelligence report that indicated
the missile in question did not come from Russia? Would journalists like Robert Parry be blacklisted for questioning the mainstream account of the
tragedy? Would scholars like the University of Ottawa’s Paul Robinson be banned from appearing on op-ed pages and cable-news programs for
challenging the notion that there is, in the words of Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States, “no civil war in Ukraine,” but rather a war
“started and waged by Russia”? |
