(G)GP does the classic "it's freedom fighting when we're doing it". Either call both propaganda, or call both alternative narratives, otherwise your bias is blatantly showing.
Really important to first, pick that example of content moderation and then point out that he's an Israeli. Maybe think about why you used that example when there are countless others regarding free speech/internet freedom.
I would point to the opposite bias, the guardian mentions Chinese surveillance tech exported to Africa, but makes no mention of Israeli spyware exports. The Israeli export of civil repression technology, expertise and training is actually very well documented, having a lot of practice with such oppression domestically.
As if the guardian was overly pro-Israeli. I would argue that it makes more sense in that context to mention Chinese surveillance tech, because it's not an ally of the US.
It’s extremely relevant. The Trump admin just facilitated the sale of TikTok to an ardent Zionist for an incredibly cheap price, and Netanyahu himself gave a talk saying it was the most important event in the “eighth front” of their war. Same just happened with CBS.
Larry Ellison (the new owner of TikTok) personally vetted Marco Rubio for fealty to Israel.
The United States is days away from going to war with Iran on behalf of Israel, which makes this even more important.
Israeli mega donors Miriam Adelson, Larry Ellison, Ronald Lauder, etc, have given Trump literally hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign donations to facilitate this special treatment of Israel and to help transfer control of these media orgs to Israelis. They have all stated openly that this is the case.
>These programs were largely about ensuring that American propaganda can reach people in Iran or similar places.
This. The og point of USAID wasn't AID as per the name would misleadingly let you believe, but spreading pro-US anti-USSR propaganda, and only like 3% of that program was spent on actual AID, like food and medicine for the third world, but most of it went to funding media, news and journalists across LatAm, Asia, Africa dn EE, that would push domestic support in those regions for US policies and be critical of US adversaries.
US doesn't fund "freedom" of anything out of selflessness, it funds policies that are guaranteed to benefit it over its rivals, and use the word "freedom" to legitimize it. Once those benefits no longer materialize, the funding also goes away.
The budget for USAID in 2024 was $25.6 billion [0]. $ 9.5 billion were allocated to health programs and $ 1.1 billion to agriculture, education and infrastructure [1]. You can do the math.
>only like 3% of that program was spent on actual AID, like food and medicine for the third world, but most of it went to funding media, news and journalists across LatAm, Asia, Africa dn EE, that would push domestic support in those regions for US policies and be critical of US adversaries.
3%? There was a lot of waste with the program but surely, please give this at least 30 seconds of thought.
> only like 3% of that program was spent on actual AID, like food and medicine for the third world, but most of it went to funding media, news and journalists across LatAm, Asia, Africa dn EE
Source please. This doesn't pass the smell test, because the largest expenses in international aid programs are usually related to healthcare and agriculture. Propaganda is very cheap compared to producing and distributing malaria drugs or grain to the most remote corners of the world or building water sanitation plants in places that have no roads and no electricity.
Growing up in a post-communist country, Hollywood and the US music and gaming industry had more impact on the "US-isation of our country" than USAID propaganda, back then.
But today most of Hollywood productions and music coming out of the US is pure trash that people abroad now reject it as propaganda garbage.
US destroyed its global soft power, not by defunding USAID, but by forcibly injecting unpopular ideologies into its entertainment industry instead of sticking to tried and true formulas, ideals and values that transcend cultural and language barriers.
A program that helped people evade real censorship is "feeding them US propaganda" and social media awash with state-sponsored trolls tearing our societies apart is "an alternative geopolitical narrative" - bit of a spin, isn't it?
> American propaganda can reach people in Iran
> American’s exposure to alternative geopolitical narratives
In the same breath!
I downvoted you because I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
(G)GP does the classic "it's freedom fighting when we're doing it". Either call both propaganda, or call both alternative narratives, otherwise your bias is blatantly showing.
1 reply →
it's the good ol' "calling one side propaganda, but the other narrative" gasp, but reversed from usual western pov
so it's a downvote either for consistency (and neutrality) or for the sake of lol :)
Really important to first, pick that example of content moderation and then point out that he's an Israeli. Maybe think about why you used that example when there are countless others regarding free speech/internet freedom.
I would point to the opposite bias, the guardian mentions Chinese surveillance tech exported to Africa, but makes no mention of Israeli spyware exports. The Israeli export of civil repression technology, expertise and training is actually very well documented, having a lot of practice with such oppression domestically.
As if the guardian was overly pro-Israeli. I would argue that it makes more sense in that context to mention Chinese surveillance tech, because it's not an ally of the US.
2 replies →
It’s extremely relevant. The Trump admin just facilitated the sale of TikTok to an ardent Zionist for an incredibly cheap price, and Netanyahu himself gave a talk saying it was the most important event in the “eighth front” of their war. Same just happened with CBS.
Larry Ellison (the new owner of TikTok) personally vetted Marco Rubio for fealty to Israel.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1nww6cp/larry_ell...
The United States is days away from going to war with Iran on behalf of Israel, which makes this even more important.
Israeli mega donors Miriam Adelson, Larry Ellison, Ronald Lauder, etc, have given Trump literally hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign donations to facilitate this special treatment of Israel and to help transfer control of these media orgs to Israelis. They have all stated openly that this is the case.
>These programs were largely about ensuring that American propaganda can reach people in Iran or similar places.
This. The og point of USAID wasn't AID as per the name would misleadingly let you believe, but spreading pro-US anti-USSR propaganda, and only like 3% of that program was spent on actual AID, like food and medicine for the third world, but most of it went to funding media, news and journalists across LatAm, Asia, Africa dn EE, that would push domestic support in those regions for US policies and be critical of US adversaries.
US doesn't fund "freedom" of anything out of selflessness, it funds policies that are guaranteed to benefit it over its rivals, and use the word "freedom" to legitimize it. Once those benefits no longer materialize, the funding also goes away.
The budget for USAID in 2024 was $25.6 billion [0]. $ 9.5 billion were allocated to health programs and $ 1.1 billion to agriculture, education and infrastructure [1]. You can do the math.
[0] https://factually.co/fact-checks/politics/usaid-budget-2024-...
[1] https://factually.co/fact-checks/health/usaid-2024-food-medi...
>only like 3% of that program was spent on actual AID, like food and medicine for the third world, but most of it went to funding media, news and journalists across LatAm, Asia, Africa dn EE, that would push domestic support in those regions for US policies and be critical of US adversaries.
3%? There was a lot of waste with the program but surely, please give this at least 30 seconds of thought.
My bad, it was 5-15% of USAID that went towards food aid to countries in need.
Source please. This doesn't pass the smell test, because the largest expenses in international aid programs are usually related to healthcare and agriculture. Propaganda is very cheap compared to producing and distributing malaria drugs or grain to the most remote corners of the world or building water sanitation plants in places that have no roads and no electricity.
Makes the future interestingly unpredictable other than the inevitable fading of the US-isation of the rest of the world.
>US-isation of the rest of the world
Growing up in a post-communist country, Hollywood and the US music and gaming industry had more impact on the "US-isation of our country" than USAID propaganda, back then.
But today most of Hollywood productions and music coming out of the US is pure trash that people abroad now reject it as propaganda garbage.
US destroyed its global soft power, not by defunding USAID, but by forcibly injecting unpopular ideologies into its entertainment industry instead of sticking to tried and true formulas, ideals and values that transcend cultural and language barriers.
23 replies →
A program that helped people evade real censorship is "feeding them US propaganda" and social media awash with state-sponsored trolls tearing our societies apart is "an alternative geopolitical narrative" - bit of a spin, isn't it?
[flagged]
Exactly this. The fact that you got downvoted tells a lot about how much political propaganda has infiltrated HN.