How to read media reports on Ukraine: a dictionary guide to 2014 Doubletalk

ostrich hiding its head under sand to protect it from strong wind copy

 

2014/08/25 - 21:58 • Analysis & Opinion

by Adrian Bryttan

Call it double-talk, euphemisms, gobbledygook, or just plain lies, whatever…. Here’s what several phrases bandied about in newspaper and TV news ‘reports’  really mean:

‘local pro-Russian militia’        =    Russian mercenaries

‘rebels’                                          =    Russian mercenaries

‘pro-Russian separatists’          =    Russian mercenaries

‘local self-defense forces’          =    Russian mercenaries

‘Ukrainian separatists’              =    Russian mercenaries

bunny-rabbit-making-hand-shadow_thumb[3] copy

…while Western concern levels keep hitting new highs (or lows):

‘We are deeply concerned’               =    we are sh**ting our pants

‘We are seriously concerned’          =     we are sh**ting our pants, honest

‘We are increasingly concerned’    =   we are sh**ting our pants, no kidding now

‘We are gravely concerned’             =   please, just make it all go away!

‘I have not heard reports’                =    of course I know…

‘We don’t know yet’                          =    we damn well know but will not say it…

It is important to realize Moscow’s focus is not on information, per se. At its core, Russian propaganda must defend the indefensible. (A long tradition starting with “Pravda” (truth?!) which continues today). Moscow double-talk experts and their troll armies in the media and internet are aiming at emotional buttons, using words like ‘defend’, ‘stabilize’, ‘protect’ the life and health of Russian ‘citizens’, ‘compatriots’, ‘ethnic’ Russians from a vague, non-existent ‘oppression’.

They knew people would be manipulated (at least for some time) by white paint with red crosses on trucks and tanks. They knew they had gained several important days while the media dickered over the Crimean invasion and repeated reports of “we’re not sure where these soldiers and tanks and equipment are from”. (One CNN reporter even walked up to a masked green man in boarding a personnel carrier to ask “So, where are you guys from?”  Guys??? What was she thinking of?)

Orwell copy

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov often states ‘we want to help Ukrainians agree among themselves’. And what could sound more reasonable? Well, here’s the news descriptions of how they are ‘helping’:

‘humanitarian aid’            =     Russian invasion

‘peace keeping forces’       =    Russian invasion

‘uncontested arrival’         =    Russian invasion

‘Russian incursion’            =    Russian invasion

‘Russian entry’                    =    Russian invasion

‘unauthorized crossing’     =    Russian invasion

‘reunification’                     =    Russian invasion

‘absorption’                         =    Russian invasion

‘major escalation’              =    Russian invasion’

‘illegal action’                      =    Russian invasion’

‘military involvement’      =    Russian invasion

Where do all these labels and talking points originate?

Well, in Europe many have been traced back to Russian Embassies and Consulates which sent the media Moscow’s weekly spin and disinformation – stories like Ukraine is “deeply divided” and “ethnic Russians fear oppression” and “fascist (neo-Nazi, junta etc) rabble of the Maidan”.

image copy

The powerful Podesta Group, a high-powered Washington advocacy and strategic communications group (“we work with Capitol Hill policymakers, recruit third-party allies, connect with the media and build coalitions to champion our clients’ agendas – in short, we know how to get things done.”) advocated for Yanukovych and the Party of Regions. Podesta Group and the public relations firm Mercury received lots of money from an innocuous sounding think thank in Brussels, the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. In reality, the ECFMU was only a financial front for Sergei Klyuyev and the Party of Regions.

Speaking of money, American conservative bloggers and writers were paid  to present stories favorable to the Party of Regions in 2012. At that time, articles echoing Yanukovych’s government appeared on leading conservative outlets like Red State, Breitbart and Pajamas Media.

 Another crucial weapon is punctuation.

Quotation marks can imply verbal irony or doubt:

A Washington Post  8/22 headline: Russian aid convoy enters eastern Ukraine; Kyiv official denounces ‘invasion’.

– So, the word [invasion] is held up to question, but the Russian [aid convoy] is not?

Radio Free Europe 8/25 headline: Kyiv confronts ‘Russian’ armor as Moscow announces new aid convoy.

– So Kyiv’s report of the armor being Russian is questionable, but the convoy is definitely an aid convoy?

 

Then there is waffling and plain and simple goggledygook:

EU: “The information possessed by the EU concerning the human aid convoy is ‘insufficient’ and ‘controversial’.

There are many other examples that were used to blow smoke over things like a Crimean ‘referendum’, ‘rejoining’ Russian motherland, a ‘long shared and common history between Ukraine and Russia’, ‘Novorossiya’ (New Russia)…

 

Double-talk is not limited to media reporters. Finally, ISEUConcerned is a Twitter group that focuses on EU euphemistic gobbledygook with black humor:

BtKjq1aIIAErwHd.jpg-large

Some tweets from that site showcasing the DoubleThink of today’s prevaricating Poloniuses :

“ISEUConcerned is the new watchdog of European (in)action! People accuse us of doing nothing. But we’re doing something everyday: expressing our concerns for example! Or selling weapons to Russia…”

“By sending Russia a message, we’re sending Russia a message about our commitment to sending a message to Russia.”

“If Russia won’t support peace in Ukraine, we’re ready for drastically measures. That means threatening Russia with more drastically measures.”

“We won’t negotiate with terrorists. But you, Untermensch, should!”

 

  • Brent

    You missed one!!!

    “Convoy 200” also knows as “Donetsk parade” or “repatriating dead Colorados”….

  • sandy miller

    I know how did Ukraine lose the media in USA and why?

    • jwz

      Because stupid Americans have been led to believe that the only choice is for us to send American troops over to Ukraine to fight. And we don’t want to fight any more wars in this country. All we care about is awards shows on TV, who the Kardashians are banging this week, and which celebrity dumped a bucket of ice water over his head.

  • Dana black

    propagandapress!

  • Svarun

    I agree with this article, but I HAVE to point out another, extremely important issue, IMO. Russian special services recently carried out a large scale hybrid (military & disinfo) operation and a large part of Ukrainian media – deliberately or not – took part in it.

    Small-scale Russian diversion attacks combined with disinfo campaign distracted and confused ATO forces in the South sector making them turn against alleged massive invasion forces crossing the border (this threat is real but it didn’t happen… yet). Ukrainian heroes fighting in Ilovaysk got a difficult situation (which is improving by now) because of that.

    https://www.facebook.com/dostali.hvatit

    For instance media were spreading “news” on Russian forces seizing Telmanove – coming from an anonymous source of course – like wildfire. It would take a single phone call to check it – and debunk it. A single phone call, alas… at the same time, social networks and commentators were yelling out loud: THERE ARE NO RUSSIAN FORCES IN TELMANOVE!!! There were no retraction, no updates clarifying the situation what else apologies for the blunder. The articles stayed as they were published…

    FYI, Ruslan Storcheus, the commander of Kherson battalion was killed near Ilovaysk last night – as well because of extreme irresponsibility or treachery of few (allegedly) Ukrainian “journalists” taking part in Russian disinfo campaign. Sorry, I’m really pissed off because I LOVE Ukraine.

    Glory to the Heroes!