Difference between revisions of "Sarah Rainsford"
(add long quote from Media Lens) |
(Zakharova comment) |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
She has lived in [[Russia]] since [[2000]]. | She has lived in [[Russia]] since [[2000]]. | ||
| − | She has had her Visa revoked; meaning she can never return.<ref>''https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58213845''</ref> [[Russia]] have done this as a reciprocal move against [[British]] | + | She has had her Visa revoked; meaning she can never return.<ref>''https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58213845''</ref> [[Russia]] have done this as a reciprocal move against [[British]] harassment of Russian journalists.<ref>https://www.rt.com/russia/531925-bbc-correspondent-expelled-visa-moscow/</ref> |
| − | ==Media Lens on her | + | ==Russian Foreign Ministry comment== |
| + | Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman [[Maria Zakharova]] stated on [[Telegram]]<ref>https://t.me/MariaVladimirovnaZakharova/656</ref>: | ||
| + | {{QB|Western media are in a flurry: they are asked to comment on the information that a British journalist working in Moscow will not have her visa extended. This is surprising. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1. Despite repeated warnings<ref>https://www.mid.ru/ru/maps/gb/-/asset_publisher/0OgUTpTSJ2GM/content/id/4449668#sel=5:1:yhi,5:24:gjf</ref> the Anglo-Saxon media group did not pay attention to the fact that in response to London's actual visa-mobbing of the Russian correspondent in Britain, appropriate measures would be taken. And we regularly made statements asking the British to stop persecuting Russian journalists. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 2. The BBC and the correspondent herself took up a defensive position and did not comment on the situation to their colleagues. I wonder why? Is there no reason to inform about it or is it the wrong reasons? Go ahead, don't hold back. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 3. Traditionally, Western media have not been interested in the fate of Russian journalists whose British (or for example American) visas have not been extended. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I can say that everything was clearly explained to the representatives of the BBC who recently visited the Foreign Ministry. So she should actually have something to tell.}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Media Lens on her output== | ||
In 2017 the media analysis group [[Media Lens]] wrote<ref>https://www.medialens.org/2017/mass-media-siege-comparing-coverage-of-mosul-and-aleppo/</ref> of Rainsford's reporting: "The propaganda pitch of BBC News towards government power is longstanding. Sometimes this propaganda bias is most obvious when its news reporters examine the propaganda of Official Enemies, blithely unaware of how it reflects on themselves and their own employer. | In 2017 the media analysis group [[Media Lens]] wrote<ref>https://www.medialens.org/2017/mass-media-siege-comparing-coverage-of-mosul-and-aleppo/</ref> of Rainsford's reporting: "The propaganda pitch of BBC News towards government power is longstanding. Sometimes this propaganda bias is most obvious when its news reporters examine the propaganda of Official Enemies, blithely unaware of how it reflects on themselves and their own employer. | ||
Revision as of 02:34, 18 August 2021
 Sarah Rainsford      (journalist) | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Born | Sarah Rainsford UK |
| Residence | London, UK |
| Nationality | British |
| Alma mater | Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge |
Sarah Rainsford is a BBC reporter.
Biography
She has lived in Russia since 2000.
She has had her Visa revoked; meaning she can never return.[1] Russia have done this as a reciprocal move against British harassment of Russian journalists.[2]
Russian Foreign Ministry comment
Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stated on Telegram[3]:
Western media are in a flurry: they are asked to comment on the information that a British journalist working in Moscow will not have her visa extended. This is surprising.
1. Despite repeated warnings[4] the Anglo-Saxon media group did not pay attention to the fact that in response to London's actual visa-mobbing of the Russian correspondent in Britain, appropriate measures would be taken. And we regularly made statements asking the British to stop persecuting Russian journalists.
2. The BBC and the correspondent herself took up a defensive position and did not comment on the situation to their colleagues. I wonder why? Is there no reason to inform about it or is it the wrong reasons? Go ahead, don't hold back.
3. Traditionally, Western media have not been interested in the fate of Russian journalists whose British (or for example American) visas have not been extended.
I can say that everything was clearly explained to the representatives of the BBC who recently visited the Foreign Ministry. So she should actually have something to tell.
Media Lens on her output
In 2017 the media analysis group Media Lens wrote[5] of Rainsford's reporting: "The propaganda pitch of BBC News towards government power is longstanding. Sometimes this propaganda bias is most obvious when its news reporters examine the propaganda of Official Enemies, blithely unaware of how it reflects on themselves and their own employer.
On December 15, 2016, Moscow correspondent Sarah Rainsford delivered a classic example on Aleppo in this segment[6] shown on BBC News at One:
Consider her words:
‘On the ground in Syria, Russia’s special forces – shown here for the first time on state television. The commentary is all about a heroic fight against terrorists. No mention here of any civilians caught up in the bloodshed.’
Imagine Rainsford saying this of Western reporting on Mosul:
‘The commentary is all about a heroic fight against terrorists. No mention here of any civilians caught up in the bloodshed.’
Then, to camera, Rainsford said:
‘For Russia, the conflict in Syria was always about projecting its power and influence. As the West stalled [sic], Moscow moved in. The message to Russians here that they were helping to protect the world from terrorism. The message to the world, that Russia under Vladimir Putin is a political and military power to be reckoned with.’
A BBC News reporter would never point out that war in the Middle East is about the US ‘projecting its power and influence’.
Rainsford continued, over library footage of the severe damage done by Russian forces to Grozny:
‘As to brutal bombing campaigns, Russia has done that before. This is not Aleppo, but Grozny in Chechnya – a city flattened in what President Putin also called a war on terror. In this latest conflict, he’s faced no calls at home for restraint.’
Finally, over a clip of ISIS fighters with captured Russian arsenal at Palmyra:
‘But, with all the focus on Aleppo, this happened. Russian troops were forced to abandon their positions in Palmyra, as militants from ISIS moved in. Recapturing this Syrian city was also once trumpeted by Russia as a great victory.’
Can you imagine BBC News ever doing a comparable segment analysing US or British propaganda about the assault on Mosul? Or Sirte in Libya? Or Fallujah? Or Belgrade? Have BBC News journalists not, in fact, effectively ‘trumpeted’ each of these ‘as a great victory’ for the West? So, it is a worthy task for the BBC to critically assess the propaganda of the evil enemy, but not that of ‘our’ own side.
References
- ↑ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58213845
- ↑ https://www.rt.com/russia/531925-bbc-correspondent-expelled-visa-moscow/
- ↑ https://t.me/MariaVladimirovnaZakharova/656
- ↑ https://www.mid.ru/ru/maps/gb/-/asset_publisher/0OgUTpTSJ2GM/content/id/4449668#sel=5:1:yhi,5:24:gjf
- ↑ https://www.medialens.org/2017/mass-media-siege-comparing-coverage-of-mosul-and-aleppo/
- ↑ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvuFbuabWig&feature=youtu.be
