There is no good "communist" news source. You can subscribe to TeleSur English, which is funded by the good governments in Latin America. But it's go a shoestring budget. For most world events you really just need the headline and you can find what you need to know about it from there.
Unfortunately the problem with the "soft" end of the global propaganda machine is not so much the subtle manipulation of the narrative and the use of cues and conflation but rather it's one of focus, and especially a lack thereof.
One stark example of this for the avid antifascist is obviously the narrative on neo-fascist movements in the Ukraine. It went from a semi-regular blip on the screen to being deafening silence and even outright denialism.
While critical engagement with the bourgeois media can provide you with ways to deconstruct their propagandistic messaging, unfortunately there is no easy solution to what is effectively a global media blackout on the "inconvenient" subjects.
Super true. It's frustrating how little attention is paid to a lot of countries right now. Wish a podcast like Chapo would actually be useful for once and interview someone in like Niger or Etheopia or Pakistan or Azerbaijan or Japan or something.
There's events happening in every country every day and not nearly enough coverage of 99% of it. I really do wish there was a central place to learn about whats happening.
The problem is that trying to find guests or, preferably, correspondents is you have to do your due diligence and vet them thoroughly - your credibility is on the line if they turn out to be a charlatan or if they have some utterly dogshit positions because ultimately it can compromise the integrity of the podcast if they host the wrong guest.
Ideally you get a reputable org on the ground to vouch for the person in question but even then you still have to vet that organisation and hope that they'll come through for you.
When you put that fact up against the other fact that the content beast hungers eternally it's no surprise that you get a focus on the settled historical facts and (often pretty vague) general commentary and general statements of position and recounting of the recent current affairs. It's much easier to do that than it is to do the higher-risk, time intensive work of engaging with boots on the ground.
There is no good "communist" news source. You can subscribe to TeleSur English, which is funded by the good governments in Latin America. But it's go a shoestring budget. For most world events you really just need the headline and you can find what you need to know about it from there.
Unfortunately the problem with the "soft" end of the global propaganda machine is not so much the subtle manipulation of the narrative and the use of cues and conflation but rather it's one of focus, and especially a lack thereof.
One stark example of this for the avid antifascist is obviously the narrative on neo-fascist movements in the Ukraine. It went from a semi-regular blip on the screen to being deafening silence and even outright denialism.
While critical engagement with the bourgeois media can provide you with ways to deconstruct their propagandistic messaging, unfortunately there is no easy solution to what is effectively a global media blackout on the "inconvenient" subjects.
Super true. It's frustrating how little attention is paid to a lot of countries right now. Wish a podcast like Chapo would actually be useful for once and interview someone in like Niger or Etheopia or Pakistan or Azerbaijan or Japan or something.
There's events happening in every country every day and not nearly enough coverage of 99% of it. I really do wish there was a central place to learn about whats happening.
Yeah, me too.
The problem is that trying to find guests or, preferably, correspondents is you have to do your due diligence and vet them thoroughly - your credibility is on the line if they turn out to be a charlatan or if they have some utterly dogshit positions because ultimately it can compromise the integrity of the podcast if they host the wrong guest.
Ideally you get a reputable org on the ground to vouch for the person in question but even then you still have to vet that organisation and hope that they'll come through for you.
When you put that fact up against the other fact that the content beast hungers eternally it's no surprise that you get a focus on the settled historical facts and (often pretty vague) general commentary and general statements of position and recounting of the recent current affairs. It's much easier to do that than it is to do the higher-risk, time intensive work of engaging with boots on the ground.