Huffington Post, CNBC ran articles bought and paid for by Kremlin's PR agency

Discuss

20 Responses to “Huffington Post, CNBC ran articles bought and paid for by Kremlin's PR agency”

  1. Joe Buck says:

    Since Huffington Post does not pay, if follows that they are going to wind up with a lot of material that someone else paid for.

  2. PathogenAntifreeze says:

    “but we do make sure none of them are being paid to pimp by Putin”

    How can BoingBoing be sure unless they’re using the “enhanced interrogation techniques” du jour??!!

  3. vonbobo says:

    Odd- I have always felt news and information was biased at the least, or typically just verbatim quotes from the people involved (press release), or now just farmed by bots and retouched by someone not even fact checking the material. I thought the internet was going to overcome some of these problems, but it is just making it worse.

    This story feels more like insider rats, rather than “Scoop” blowing the lid off something unthinkable.

  4. Phoc Yu says:

    How is this any different than places that report RT articles?  Both are directly funded by the Kremlin.

  5. MrCoelho says:

    At least we’ll never be told how a piece of news or information should gall or please us here. Although knowing the official “Mutant Stance” on everything is extremely helpful.  Especially when trying to successfully navigate social interactions at parties that my Watchismo watches and Boingboing Tees have garnered invites to.  It would be horrifying to be discovered as someone who doesn’t toe the freethinking line.

  6. Cowicide says:

    AWww… look!  Huffington Post is growing up to be worthless, mainstream media.

    • lafave says:

      Deepak Chopra was an early columnist – that’s the moment I knew HuffPo was worthless.

      Then came the link aggregation stories and the unpaid writer complaints.

      Forever worthless – just in seedier and seedier ways. But at least Arianna gets invited to all the best parties now/still.

      • Antinous / Moderator says:

        Arianna used to be Arianna Stassinopoulos before she was Arianna Huffington. She was regularly featured in Interview magazine in the 70s and 80s while she disported herself with the likes of Jacqueline de Ribes and Sao Schlumberger. She doesn’t need HuffPo to get party invitations, just to pay for the jets and jewels.

        • lafave says:

           Hence my use of the word “still”

          Not being sarcastic. You’re still my fave mod. :) – see – non-sarcastic smiley.

          • Antinous / Moderator says:

            I just mentioned it because I don’t think that people realize that she was a socialite before she was a politico.

          • cdh1971 says:

            Yeah…it’s funny…when I first learned she had reinvented herself as a pundit (or whatever the fcuk) and launched the Huff… Post, I thought to myself WTF? Zsarianna Garborington? 

            I am aware of the criticisms and agree with many, but I do still find the H-Post useful. The comment sections are often interesting, or at least entertaining.  

        • cdh1971 says:

          “Gulfstreams are a Girl’s Best Friend”

  7. BillStewart2012 says:

    Well, we certainly know that the US press would never uncritically carry press releases from their corporate overlords or government as if they were actual news!  Certainly not FBI press releases about how “Unconfirmed terrorist chatter indicates that TERRORISTS may be planning to attack $LANDMARK in $YOURCITY over the upcoming holiday weekend and the police and National Guard are being deployed to protect YOU.”  Because the standards of responsible journalism require that they spend a lot of time discussing the possible implications, such as how what the terrorists could do to $LANDMARK or what would happen if they attacked $OTHERLANDMARK instead.

    And the US press, especially highly respected liberal sources such as the New York Times and National Public Radio would never adopt the government’s preferred language, such as “enhanced interrogation techniques” or “harsh interrogation” or “the standard enhanced pat-downs that have always been required”, instead of politically incorrect but more common terminology such as “torture” or “threats of sexual assault intended to produce compliance with newly installed scanners.” 

    (Seriously, I think the first time I heard NPR news use the word “torture” when discussing Gitmo, except for Terry Gross’s interviews, was this decade.)

  8. beemoh says:

    >”on behalf of the Russian government by its public-relations firm, Ketchum.”

    Gotta mislead ‘em all?

  9. townandgownie says:

    And we believe you why?

  10. princeminski says:

    SEE!?? SEE!?? I demand a new election at once!

  11. Deidzoeb says:

    I recall in Intro Public Relations class at Eastern Mich U (insert denigrating comment here about how far from ivy league that is) around 1992, the prof explained that a sort of untapped area of PR was writing articles favorable to a client, and getting them placed in big mags. He had written an informative article about time clocks used in Olympic trials and NASCAR, which was accepted in something like Time or Car & Driver. Not sure if the mag was aware that he had been paid by Timex or some stopwatch maker to write the article, but the brand was mentioned multiple times in the article. Wheee!

Leave a Reply