Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

aoav.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 242 posts

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#111

Post by fakedang »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #74
dgroshev wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a luxury belief that requires the privilege of being unbombed. I invite you to explain this to Ukrainians.

It's the UK we're talking about here. To skip the currently political sensitive topics of who is helping who with what, who feels the consequences, what prices are affected because of that, let's go a bit further in the past... for example, UK taxpayers money went for bombing Iraq for the "weapons of mass destruction" when Tony Blair already knew those didn't exist. At some point you have to ask, is it really for def…

And the same UK taxpayer money is now being spent to ferociously defend Ukraine, and in turn European interests. That same UK taxpayer money is spent to promote freedom of the seas for global trade, whether it be the Hormuz, the Malacca Strait, the Indian Ocean, the Atlantic, the Baltic or the Horn of Africa.

Defence spending is only as good as the government that controls it, but you can't be serious if you're discounting the importance of military readiness at all times, given the world we live in.

The UK's military spending has always been much more justifiable, especially given that the country actually spends a lot on education and healthcare too (and I will argue that both of them are some of the SOTA systems in the world currently, in spite of their challenges).

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#112

Post by RobotToaster »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #28

> These individuals had also been quoted, featured, or otherwise used as commentators in UK media coverage of defence, conflict, or national security issues. If they are promoting defence spending or plugging their employers products that's bad, but using their experience to comment on the Iran war or Ukraine, or Russian/Chinese Spy networks doesn't seem that bad?

There's lots of indirect ways to promote "defence" spending, such as promoting more involvement in a conflict.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#113

Post by throw_a_grenade »

alansaber wrote: post #6

"Ex UK military members discover the private sector pays 10-20x more" underlines the title, but yes, media should disclose it. But even if they were "just" retired ex-military, their bias would be the same (being a member of the UK military).

10-20× more in private sector for senior leadership/advisory role sounds reasonable, but still, I wonder if some part of that compensation stems from the fact that the person is availing him/herself as an asset of influence, i.e. can be used to push narrative through media while posing as independent, credible expert. Needs further research and/or A/B testing I guess.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#114

Post by ZeroGravitas »

dgroshev wrote: post #92
coldtea wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What land did Tony Blair grab? You can disagree with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq without making the exaggerated claim that this was part of some kind of long-term imperialist occupation. Yeah, just a few decades years, to secure oil deals and/or keep control of the region. No biggie. That this can be said with a straight face about invasions to two countries that created civil war, suffering, hundreds of t…

Saying that it's the invasions that created civil wars and suffering in Afghanistan and Iraq is just exceptionally ignorant. Here's a taster: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Ba%27athist_Ir... For all their failures, the allies never bombed cities with nerve agents.

Your page says:

> Saddam committed crimes of aggression during the Iran–Iraq War

Which links to a page about the war:

> Iraq was aided by [...] the United States, the United Kingdom,

> After years of military and economic losses, decreasing morale, intensifying Iran–U.S. relations, and little international action against Iraqi attacks on Iranian civilians, Iran agreed to a ceasefire with Iraq under United Nations Security Council Resolution 598.

So they basically did.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#115

Post by subscribed »

pbiggar wrote: post #42
flumpcakes wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK doesn't have some imperialist policy of land grabs like Russia, or diplomacy through violence. In the current Iranian war the UK is only allowing it's bases to launch defensive missions, i.e. strike offensive capability or incoming missiles. So no, it is in fact the defense sector. What countries have a defense sector, if the UK doesn't?

Defensive missions? Was the UK under attack?

I guess schoolgirls were naughty and saying bad words about the UK, hence arming the American planes with bombs to use on civilians and civilian infrastructure.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#116

Post by gib444 »

pjc50 wrote: post #86
JdeBP wrote: post #76

It is interesting to look at the details and see who the (news) 'media' are in this case. Going through the details, I find 1 instance (under Kemp) of the BBC, and everyone else is the 'usual suspects', the Telegraph , the Mail , GB News , the Sun , the Times , and so forth. The Guardian is only mentioned in context of exposing these conflicts of interests; and whilst I am surprised to find LBC and Nation Cymru as no…

> the Telegraph, the Mail, GB News, the Sun, the Times Indeed. These are pay-to-play propaganda and should not be accorded the dignity of "newspaper". Peter Oborne's resignation from the Telegraph is still worth reading: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31510152

And The Times and The Sun aren't even British. They're owned by News Corp which is American

And The Telegraph is about to become German

GB News is quite likely Russian ultimately lol

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#117

Post by genewitch »

how can anyone trust any media report? Even if it is reported from multiple outlets? In the US the sum is around 39 billion dollars for pharma advertising, nevermind our military-industrial complex, as well.

How can any media that has underwriting or advertisers actually do genuine reporting? Ask yourself this!

The only way to really report on the "news" is to not be supported by advertisers or underwriting.

I've known this since Dr. Naji Dahi's class in 2002, with upkeep by Adam Curry and John C. Dvorak, as well as having worked for ABC and a KKR Joint that's all up in "media".

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#118

Post by rigonkulous »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #28

> These individuals had also been quoted, featured, or otherwise used as commentators in UK media coverage of defence, conflict, or national security issues. If they are promoting defence spending or plugging their employers products that's bad, but using their experience to comment on the Iran war or Ukraine, or Russian/Chinese Spy networks doesn't seem that bad?

In the context of Julian Assanges' treatment by UK media, and his subsequent disassembly at Belmarsh, who cares what they have to say about Russia or China.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#119

Post by dgroshev »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #114
dgroshev wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that it's the invasions that created civil wars and suffering in Afghanistan and Iraq is just exceptionally ignorant. Here's a taster: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Ba%27athist_Ir... For all their failures, the allies never bombed cities with nerve agents.

Your page says: > Saddam committed crimes of aggression during the Iran–Iraq War Which links to a page about the war: > Iraq was aided by [...] the United States, the United Kingdom, > After years of military and economic losses, decreasing morale, intensifying Iran–U.S. relations, and little international action against Iraqi attacks on Iranian civilians, Iran agreed to a ceasefire with Iraq under United Nations Sec…

I don't think anyone engaging in a good faith discussion would make the conclusion you just made.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#120

Post by SuddsMcDuff »

flumpcakes wrote: post #10
sourcegrift wrote: post #2

No wonder they are so pro russia (but pretend otherwise ), they want the war to go on and on, have people die on both sides.

Source? The UK has been extremely vocal about defending Ukraine's sovereign rights and has spent a lot of money supplying it with defensive equipment. Russia despises the UK. The UK does have a few right wing pro Russia people, just like the US does. Just like most of Europe does. It is the fringe view and not reflected in state policy.

> The UK does have a few right wing pro Russia people

"Right wing" people like George Galloway? Put your obvious bias aside for a moment and just say "a few pro Russia people".

Post reply on HN