this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
108 points (100.0% liked)

World News

1041 readers
30 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There is already a serious problem in modern discourse with the term "independent media," a phrase commonly defined as any media outlet, no matter how big an empire it is, that is not owned or funded by the state (as if that is the only form of dependence or control to which media is subject). But even at this extremely low bar, all these outlets fail. Indeed, Weimers' warning underlines the fact that none of them are independent in any meaningful way. They are, in fact, completely dependent on USAID for their very existence.

Not only that, but some USAID-backed journalists candidly admit that their funding dictates their output and what stories they do and do not cover. Leila Bicakcic, CEO of Center for Investigative Reporting (a USAID-supported Bosnian organization), admitted, on camera, that "If you are funded by the U.S. government, there are certain topics that you would simply not go after, because the U.S. government has its interests that are above all others."

While USAID specifically targets foreign audiences, much of its messaging comes back to America, as those foreign outlets are used as credible, independent, and reliable sources for newspapers or cable news networks to cite. Thus, its bankrolling of foreign media ends up flooding domestic audiences with pro-U.S. messaging as well.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago (22 children)

I wonder if they're really that stupid to give up this super-efficient means of soft power over some progressive things they've done or intentionally handing influence in parts of the world to Russia for a bit of money for themselves while taking a calculated risk of maybe having to retake control militarily (which is more costly but could be a problem for the next admin).

[–] ThePiedPooper@discuss.online 7 points 1 week ago (20 children)

Trump is a Russian agent. It immediately explains everything he does.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 week ago (6 children)
[–] ThePiedPooper@discuss.online 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Explain why Trump is sucking Russia's cock like a good little sell-out whore then.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Explain why you can’t help but make homophobic remarks that I have to remove then.

[–] ThePiedPooper@discuss.online 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There wasn't a single homophobic word in that whole comment. The only word you could take issue with was whore, but you didn't indicate that.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So let's assume a man sucking a cock as an insult isn't homophobic, so is being active in sex bad?

You can criticize people without mocking the world's oldest profession. You can criticize people without calling them a cocksucker.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's also framed in a misogynistic manner, even though both parties are men the whole reason it can be seen as insulting is by alluding to shame for subservient sexual actions traditionally used to reinforce gender roles.

Nothing wrong with oral, or with consensual subservience in bed, so therefore it must draw on historical shame to be insulting, just like using "gay" as an insult even though there's nothing wrong with that either.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago

BlueMAGA sure love their homophobia

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)