The Canary – UK independent news featured on RT’s Sputnik

Written By: - Date published: 1:35 pm, August 21st, 2016 - 36 comments
Categories: colonialism, Globalisation, International, Media, Politics, uk politics - Tags:

The Canary has been the UK’s outstanding new online media outlet of the last 12 months. It is independent, co-operative, democratic and socialist in operation. But it is also a fully commercial enterprise.

The people who work there do so co-operatively, share directly in the profits, get to see and vote on every media piece as it develops and is edited, and all their journalists are unionised.

Growing rapidly, it is now more popular online than establishment loyalist media sources like The Independent, Economist, and New Statesman.

The Canary is one of the few places you can get fair coverage of Jeremy Corbyn and his ongoing struggles against the Blairite right wing of UK Labour.

The Canary co-founder and editor in chief Kerry-Anne Mendoza herself has a background in banking, management consulting and blogging.

She grew tired of the consistently narrow neoliberal perspective of the mainstream media and decided to launch something very different. Mendoza also reported from Gaza during Operation Protective Edge, during which Israel used its US supplied military might to kill hundreds of Palestinian civilians a week, including up to 500 Palestinian children.

Reporting on stories and angles that the corporate MSM tends to ignore, their current top line story is on how cultural expectations of being the financial breadwinner hurt mens health and life expectancy.

RT’s George Galloway interviews her on his own show Sputnik.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfhLxmoKgjA

Hat tip to Paul for pointing out this interview!

36 comments on “The Canary – UK independent news featured on RT’s Sputnik ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Garibaldi 1
    21 August 2016 at 1:58 pm

    Wait till Wayne gets hold of this one! Here you are pandering to those commos on RT again. Don’t you know we have to stick with that oracle Hosking?!!

  2. Robert Guyton 2
    21 August 2016 at 6:45 pm

    This is really interesting. I wonder if it will attract many comments from TS readers 🙂

  3. Paul 3
    21 August 2016 at 7:00 pm

    Thanks for giving this a wider audience, cv.
    It is a fantastic interview.
    The following are also new and interesting news sources in the UK.

    http://novaramedia.com/
    https://off-guardian.org/

    • Colonial Viper 3.1
      21 August 2016 at 7:16 pm

      Thanks again for your contribution Paul.

      You might find this article on a presentation given in Kuala Lumpur about the US doctrine fueling ‘humanitarian war’ and how it is raising the risks of world wide conflict, interesting.

      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-20/americas-humanitarian-war-against-world

      • Paul 3.1.1
        21 August 2016 at 7:21 pm

        Very interesting.
        This part stood out for me.

        The world is at a dangerous crossroads. The United States and its allies have launched a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity.

        Under a global military agenda, the actions undertaken by the Western military alliance (U.S.-NATO-Israel) in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, Palestine, Ukraine, Syria and Iraq are coordinated at the highest levels of the military hierarchy. We are not dealing with piecemeal military and intelligence operations. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Asia Pacific region.

        Connected.

        MSM promotes dodgy docs as well as child-exploitation in drive for war.
        https://off-guardian.org/2016/08/20/msm-promotes-dodgy-docs-as-well-as-child-exploitation-in-drive-for-war/

        Clinton will reignite the Syrian war if she is elected.

        • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1
          21 August 2016 at 7:26 pm

          And of course the TPP is just another front in an economic war to isolate China. Why else would you deliberately exclude China from a Asia Pacific-centric economic agreement!!!

  4. Paul 4
    21 August 2016 at 7:23 pm

    Another good source of news.

    Empire Files: Abby Martin Exposes What Hillary Clinton Really Represents

    Digging deep into Hillary’s connections to Wall Street, Abby Martin reveals how the Clinton’s multi-million-dollar political machine operates.

    This episode chronicles the Clinton’s rise to power in the 90s on a right-wing agenda, the Clinton Foundation’s revolving door with Gulf state monarchies, corporations and the world’s biggest financial institutions, and the establishment of the hyper-aggressive “Hillary Doctrine” while Secretary of State. Learn the essential facts about the great danger she poses, and why she’s the US Empire’s choice for its next CEO.

    • swordfish 4.1
      21 August 2016 at 7:54 pm

      Hillary stoking a resurgent US Imperialism ?

      Democrats as the militaristic War Party ?

      Hillary in alliance with neo-conservatives and other foreign policy hawks ?

      Shhhhh 
 that’s a taboo subject for Clinton’s liberal and progressive boosters.

      Can lead to acute Cognitive Dissonance. Best not thought about.

  5. Bill 5
    21 August 2016 at 7:34 pm

    I’m wondering how they’ll follow up on their ‘Boy in an Ambulance‘ piece where they’ve essentially followed the mainstream and unwittingly reported Al Nusra propaganda. I’d like to believe they’re big enough or honest enough to acknowledge a cock up. We’ll see.

      • Psycho Milt 5.1.1
        22 August 2016 at 1:25 pm

        First casualty of war is truth. If you imagine only one side’s issuing you with self-serving propaganda, you’re a sucker.

        In the above-two instances, the facts remain that yes Iraq did invade Kuwait, loot it and torture/kill a lot of people, and yes the Assad regime and its Russian backers are targeting civilians in rebel-held areas (a few of which areas are held by rebels as unpleasant as the Assad regime). Getting worked up over particular instances of faked propaganda is pointless.

  6. Wayne 6
    21 August 2016 at 8:39 pm

    RT is about as convincing as Fox, though they are both slickly produced, more so than BBC or CNN both of which I think are more authorative.
    As for Syria and President Clinton, I don’t see how she will be much different to Obama.
    The war might end with Assad controlling the west, the insurgents (anti ISIS that is) controlling the centre and the Kurds the northwest. Perhaps a Bosnia type solution with a single country with it various parts governed by people who don’t talk or trade with each other.

    • Colonial Viper 6.1
      21 August 2016 at 8:43 pm

      George Galloway does a very good interview with Mendoza. She explains perfectly why she set up The Canary, and why it is already surpassing established outlets like The Independent, Economist and New Statesman.

      Yes, Wayne, the interview was carried on RT. The BBC could have chosen to interview Mendoza first if they wanted, you know.

  7. Sanctary 7
    21 August 2016 at 8:53 pm

    You have to be realistic about RT. It is a propaganda channel, in exactly the same way Fox news is. Since reality has a left wing bias it isn’t as batshit crazy as Fox news, but you still need to view it with your critical sensors set to high.

    • Colonial Viper 7.1
      21 August 2016 at 8:57 pm

      Is your problem in this interview with Mendoza or with George Galloway?

      BBC could have chosen to interview Mendoza first you know, instead of RT.

      • Bill 7.1.1
        21 August 2016 at 9:12 pm

        Isn’t the point simply that stuff on the BBC, needs to be processed through filters and that the same applies to RT (or Al Jazeera or whoever) ?

        • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1
          21 August 2016 at 9:20 pm

          for sure. However in this kind of format the critical eye needs to go on Galloway who occassionally loves his dramatics as an interviewer, as opposed to RT in general. Larry King who has a show on RT America has said previously that he has never had any direction from the network on editorial lines or questions to ask or stay away from.

          • Bill 7.1.1.1.1
            21 August 2016 at 10:49 pm

            Why would there be direction from the network on editorial lines or whatever? There is possibly less chance of that happening on RT than there is on the BBC – ie, it will happen from time to time.

            The point is the institutional mind set that builds over time and that plays out as self censorship. I’d imagine that some programme makers at the BBC reckon they have free reign while the truth is that they only got to hold the positions they do because they adhere to certain institutional norms that “must” and “will” be defended/preserved.

            Meanwhile, RT is like the free newspaper that’s being given away with the intention of undermining the main daily. It doesn’t have to care too much about what lines individual programmes take – provocative is good.

            And that’s a good thing, but still requires that a viewer exercises some critical nous.

            I’m also guessing the same easy going regime wouldn’t hold for RT programming that was broadcasting to Russia though 😉

            If the BBC wasn’t so locked into its colonial “World Service” nonsense – the supposedly objective and authoritative ‘Voice of the BBC’ – then it could do the same for a Russian audience as RT does for an English speaking audience. But it won’t/can’t.

            • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1.1.1
              21 August 2016 at 10:55 pm

              I’m also guessing the same easy going regime wouldn’t hold for RT programming that was broadcasting to Russia though 😉

              All the western news services are available in Russia 🙂

              The anti-Russian sentiment prevalent in the western media has been very politically helpful to Putin as it has finally convinced the ordinary Russian that western leaders are intent on demonising their country for everything possible.

              I am guessing for instance that banning from the Olympics Russian athletes who have never tested positive for drugs, but allowing US and British athletes to compete who have had prior confirmed drug offences is going to drive Putin’s popularity up even further.

              • Bill …
                21 August 2016 at 11:12 pm

                Yeah, but are western news services available in Russia in Russian? And are they any different to what we see? (I’m guessing not).

                And does RT broadcast the same programmes to its Russian audience as it does to an English speaking audience? (I’m guessing not)

                It’s a bullshit propaganda struggle that RT are ahead of the game on (being more flexible or faceted) and that we can use in order to better understand things.

                But it doesn’t work the same the other way around for Russian language speakers in Russia – they get two doses of fairly constrained and predictable propaganda.

                Don’t know that I’m expressing this very well. Tired.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  21 August 2016 at 11:31 pm

                  BBC News in Russian

                  http://www.bbc.com/russian

                  Having said that Putin has certainly taken strong steps to prevent foreign funded “colour revolution” style media and NGO operations against the Kremlin.

                  One other perspective to consider is that most adult Russians over 40 years of age can understand and identify the dynamics of state propaganda far better than the average westerner (who can’t believe that they are propagandised at all), because those Russians had to lead lives under the oppressive propaganda of the former Soviet Union including state rags like Pravda.

                  RT is certainly directed towards foreign audiences and not Russian audiences.

                  • Bill …
                    21 August 2016 at 11:43 pm

                    Yeah, it’s in Russian but is going to be the exact same lines that we hear. That’s fundamentally different to what RT is doing with its English service.

                    As for reading between the lines – yes, that was how many in Eastern Europe learned to understand the news – by what was not being said. But from something I read some years back, it seems that the understanding for the need to be wary and highly critical didn’t carry over into the post Soviet era.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  21 August 2016 at 11:39 pm

                  Guardian list of Russian media closures and resignations during Putin’s time

                  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/25/how-russia-independent-media-was-dismantled-piece-by-piece

      • Sanctuary 7.1.2
        21 August 2016 at 10:40 pm

        I don’t have a problem with either interview although I think in general Galloway is an idiot. But I dislike in principle RT, which is a lapdog broadcaster of Putin’s grotesque and lawless gangster state.

        • Colonial Viper 7.1.2.1
          21 August 2016 at 10:58 pm

          Have you noticed the propagandistic phrases that you seem to throw out there willy nilly?

          “Lapdog broadcaster” “Putin’s grotesque lawless gangster state.”

          Let me ask you a question here – how many foreign governments has Russia illegally destroyed in the last 20 years, and how many foreign governments has the US illegally destroyed in the last 20 years?

        • Bill 7.1.2.2
          21 August 2016 at 11:02 pm

          Do they only broadcast pro-Russian propaganda (lap-dog stuff) – or do they also offer a different perspective on stories broadcast by the lap dogs to western establishments (CNN, BBC etc)?

          If the latter (and I’d say that’s the case), then good. And don’t get me wrong – I’m not fan-clubbing here.

          But where two well resourced news networks provide quite contrasting takes on the same stories, then there is a better chance for us (the viewer) to weigh things up, or see between the cracks, and arrive at a closer approximation of the truth of any given news story.

          • Colonial Viper 7.1.2.2.1
            21 August 2016 at 11:21 pm

            RT pushes a lot of political narratives and current affairs analytical perspectives which undermines the approved western MSM narratives. Therefore by definition RT is considered an enemy media organisation.

            Take Syria for instance. RT will occasionally note that Russia is the only country which has asked for, and received, permission for its military to operate in sovereign Syrian territory against ISIS. US, UK and France in comparison are operating in Syria illegally. Western media never really make a point of this.

            I do find it odd that some on The Standard decry the obvious bias, politicisation and neoliberal coverage of the corporate mainstream media…but suddenly they are fair and balanced in comparison to alternative news sources like Al Jazeera, RT or CCTV.

            • Psycho Milt 7.1.2.2.1.1
              22 August 2016 at 1:34 pm

              Please don’t lump Al-Jazeera in with a state propaganda outfit like RT. One of them’s a news service and one isn’t.

              RT will occasionally note that Russia is the only country which has asked for, and received, permission for its military to operate in sovereign Syrian territory against ISIS.

              Just like Afghanistan, and hopefully it works out just as well for them. The US put troops into Vietnam at the “request” of the “sovereign” South Vietnam government, too – the best propaganda is always true-but-misleading.

    • Psycho Milt 7.2
      22 August 2016 at 1:28 pm

      Since reality has a left wing bias it isn’t as batshit crazy as Fox news…

      There’s little that’s left-wing about the kleptocracy running Russia at the moment. They have more in common with the kind of nationalist authoritarian regimes you see in the Third World. It’s a mistake to imagine that RT has a left-wing bias – it has a Russian-national-interest bias, which is nowhere near the same thing.

  8. Nessalt 8
    22 August 2016 at 10:22 am

    “Blairite right-wing of (UK) Labour”

    What i love about this stupid statement is that if somehow Corbyn defeats the right wing of labour, he still has to defeat the left wing of the conservative party and the right wing of it too. in other words, about 70% of the total vote for the two main parties is against corybn being prime minister.

    When are the hard left of this country going to accept that elections are won in the middle, on pragmatic, widely inclusive policy and lost on exclusionary, outdated leaders and the concepts and “ism”‘s they represent?

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.