Geo Political PR for Russia – Anglo Right Wing Media – US Propaganda Infrastructure

Article on Putin’s Russian attempt to influence US elections after the Brexit EU Referendum and the use of PR public relations agencies.

Relating to Ivy Lee and Edward Bernays who saw PR as in the same ecosystem as propaganda, but brings in the issue of ‘agents’ and foreign agent registers e.g. the US FARA Foreign Agents Registration Act. 

We have seen the outcomes of Brexit, Trump, Russian invasion of Ukraine and in Australia The indigenous Voice referendum promoted via right wing or conservative media, influencers and social media.

Further, it has had the desired effect on many of the faux anti-imperialist left who both accuse Ukraine via NATO of being an aggressor versus Russia, then many of the same support Palestine, but avert their gaze from Hamas?

Many, including the right, criticise right wing media cartels like Murdochs’ Fox News, influencers and ‘left’ media of following Kremlin talking points on Ukraine; see Fox News, GOP Republicans including the Koch Network’s ‘Freedom Caucus’, influencers like Farage and Bannon, hard right authoritarian leaders like Orban, Netanyahu etc.

It would appear that Putin’s people have been successful in adopting US Murdoch led right wing media e.g. Fox News, fossil fuel Koch Network think tanks and nativist Tanton Network agitprop, via PR agencies and ‘agents’, to negatively message against Ukraine including anti-semitism directed at Zelensky while describing Ukraine as Nazi?

Fast Company:

‘How Western PR Firms Quietly Push Putin’s Agenda

Another front in Russia’s effort to shape the hearts and minds of Americans has received little attention in mainstream U.S. media since the election.

BY SUE CURRY JANSEN

The Russian attempt to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election, using what intelligence agencies call “active measures,” has dominated U.S. headlines.

There is, however, a second front in Russia’s effort to shape the hearts and minds of U.S. citizens, and it’s received almost no attention in mainstream U.S. media outlets since the election.

As someone who studies the growth of global public relations, I’ve researched the roles PR firms play in shaping public perceptions of international affairs. For years, Russia has been involved in public relations campaigns that have been developed and deployed by prominent, U.S.-based, global PR firms–campaigns intended to influence U.S. public opinion and policy in ways that advance Russia’s strategic interests.

LEGAL PROPAGANDA?

Public relations is an industry that seeks to cultivate favorable impressions of corporations, products, individuals, or causes. A company or public figure might hire a firm to increase visibility, advance marketing agendas, promote strategic initiatives, or manage a crisis.

But things can get tricky when foreign governments get involved. When they hire PR firms to influence public opinion in other countries, they could undermine the domestic values and goals of the targeted nations.

In the 1930s, the PR firm of Ivy Lee–who, along with Edward Bernays, is regarded as a “founding father” of the public relations industry–was accused of circulating Nazi propaganda in the U.S. In response, Congress enacted the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) in 1938, which required foreign propagandists operating in the U.S. to register with the government. In 1966, FARA was amended to cover people promoting the economic and political interests of their foreign clients.

In what has become an infamous example of political PR, Kuwait hired numerous U.S. and U.K. firms to drum up support for the 1991 Persian Gulf War. As part of that effort, PR giant Hill & Knowlton audaciously created a front group to hold hearings, led by two U.S. Congressmen, on Iraq’s human rights violations. Called the “Human Rights Caucus,” the group wasn’t actually an official congressional caucus.

More routinely, foreign nations hire PR firms to attract foreign investments and promote tourism and trade. Such efforts are completely legal, and business as usual for corporate PR firms and lobbyists. All they have to do is register under FARA.

While foreign government-funded advocacy campaigns are legal, they can be far from transparent. PR strategies are generally designed to hide the persuasive effort because, as the industry saying goes, “the best PR is invisible PR.”

BURNISHING RUSSIA’S IMAGE

Russia’s domestic PR business has grown rapidly since the end of the Cold War, but Russian authorities prefer to use Western firms when targeting Western audiences. Since the U.S. is both a dominant force in PR–15 of the 20 largest global firms are American–and a prime target of Russian influence efforts, it’s not surprising that Russian president Vladimir Putin’s forces would turn to U.S. firms for PR services.

Industry publication PRWeek reports that Russia has spent $115 million on Western PR firms since 2000, with most going to the U.S. firm Ketchum, a division of Omnicom. (To put that in context: According to the Center for Public Integrity, the 50 countries with the worst human rights violation records have spent $168 million on American lobbyists and PR specialists since 2010.)

From 2006 to 2014, Ketchum had ongoing contracts with the Russian government and its state-owned energy company Gazprom.

Charged with improving Putin’s and Russia’s image abroad, Ketchum facilitated op-eds by Russian officials in publications around the world, including Putin’s 2013 New York Times article warning the U.S. on Syria.

According to ProPublica, Ketchum also placed what appeared to be independent opinion pieces praising Russia in the Huffington Post, on CNBC’s website (where links to those stories are no longer active), and in other publications without acknowledging their sources. 

The firm lobbied Time magazine to name Putin “Person of the Year,” which it did in 2007.

That same year, according to Reuters, Ketchum tried to convince the U.S. State Department to soften its assessment of Russia’s human rights abuses. The firm also contacted reporters who cover Russian human rights abuses and urged them to tone down their criticism.

Faced with intense criticism after Russia seized Crimea in 2014, Ketchum formally ended its contract with Russia in March 2015, tersely announcing that it “no longer represents the Russian Federation in the U.S. or Europe with the exception of our office in Moscow.” However, one of its partners, GPlus, continued the relationship under similar terms.

EXPLOITING THE LOOPHOLES

Late last year, Russia’s Minister of Communications Nikolay Nikiforov announced that the Kremlin would be seeking new contracts with Western PR firms this summer to improve its global image, with the intent of spending between $30 and $50 million a year, and possibly more. He indicated that Russia is seeking smaller, less expensive, and perhaps less visible firms than Ketchum.

PRWeek quoted a leading Russian political analyst, Stanislav Belkovsky, who told the publication, “There are a number of schemes that can be used to avoid U.S. accounting rules on lobbying and PR.” In other words, he was pointing out that there are ways to avoid registering with FARA, and thereby concealing the sources of the pro-Russian messaging.

Indeed, the Project on Government Oversight, an independent nonpartisan watchdog group, cites loopholes in FARA that make it difficult to police violations. Even when violations are discovered, prosecution is rare. Instead, lapses are usually remediated by late filing. This is what happened in the recent cases of Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort, who represented pro-Putin forces in Ukraine, and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who represented Turkey. Though they had both been working as foreign lobbyists for an extended period of time, they only recently filed with FARA as foreign agents.

And because the U.S. regulates lobbying, and not PR, another common legal loophole involves contracting with firms that have both public relations and lobbying arms. Clients will then channel as much of their business as possible through the PR arm.

THE BLURRY LINE BETWEEN PR AND NEWS

PR as a subject is rarely covered by the mainstream media in the U.S., but nonprofits like ProPublica, the Center for Public Integrity, the Sunlight Foundation, and NPR fill some of the void.

It’s in contrast to the U.K., where publications like the Guardian extensively cover the nexus of public relations, politics, and policy. During Prime Minister Tony Blair’s tenure, PR grew rapidly in Britain as politicians and businesses adopted U.S.-style electioneering and promotional techniques. Perhaps for this reason, British media outlets are more attuned to the ramifications of public relations.

The Trump administration’s attack on mainstream media as purveyors of “fake news” and its promotion of “alternative facts” has rallied journalism to a vigorous defense of the First Amendment, and has led to calls for critical media literacy.

Yet research indicates that as much as 75% of U.S. news begins as public relations. For transparency advocates, this is a problem. By definition, PR is a biased, monetized form of communication that seeks to advance the vested interests of clients. Even some public relations industry figures have recently acknowledged their field’s role in the dissemination of “fake news.”

During the past two decades, the newspaper industry has contracted, with advertisers and readers migrating to the internet. Conversely, the PR industry has experienced growth in both employment opportunities and salaries. In the U.S., there are now nearly five PR people for every reporter. Americans are now being exposed to more public relations than ever before.

While some PR serves worthy causes–promoting health, education, charity, and disaster relief–I believe all PR deserves closer scrutiny because it bypasses the norms of democratic processes: transparency, accountability, and the right of all interested parties to have a voice in civic debates.

To Bernays, the terms “public relations” and “propaganda” were interchangeable. We should think of PR the same way, scrutinizing it with as much critical rigor as we view propaganda.

---

Sue Curry Jansen is ‌‌‌professor of media and communication at Muhlenberg College. This essay originally appeared at the Conversation.’

For more blogs and articles on Conservatives, Cultural Dimensions of Marketing Communications, EU European Union, Evangelical Christianity, Koch Network, Marketing Strategy, Media, Political Strategy, Populist Politics and Russia click through:

Putin Owns Trump’s GOP Republicans & UK Conservatives?

Posted on April 19, 2024

Observed over the past several years confusion and surprise around the success of Trump, GOP etc. and UK Conservatives’ mutual admiration for authoritarian Christian nationalists, including the likes of Vladimir Putin and Russia?

Firsts signs emerged around Brexit promoted by Murdoch led media inc BBC, along with Barclays, Legatum (now behind GB News), Atlas Koch Network think tanks at Tufton Street and nativist right wing influencers including Nigel Farage, Boris Johson etc. and leveraging ageing, low info and regional voters.

Media Misinformation and Distrust – Fox News – Rupert Murdoch – Roger Ailes – Vladimir Putin

Posted on April 16, 2024

Relevant article from the past on methods of media communication, misinformation and shared techniques between Putin’s Russia e.g. IRA Internet Research Agency troll farm, Fox News and related media outlets.

While Roger Ailes was apparently not well liked by Lachlan or James Murdoch, he was left to his own devices at Fox News by Rupert Murdoch to assist in creating narratives and talking points for the right and profits, especially amongst the GOP Republicans, developing mistrust amongst voters.

Russian Influence and Propaganda in Anglosphere – GOP Republicans, UK Conservatives, Media and Think Tanks

Posted on April 12, 2024

Analysis via Rolling Stone article on GOP Representatives being informed by and using Russian talking points e.g. to denigrate Ukraine, EU European Union, the west and liberal democracy.

However, this assumes that the same GOP representatives have always been informed well, while avoiding media, influencers, Christian groups and think tanks?

One would argue that no man or woman is an island, let alone purely objective and original as most of our knowledge is gained from media, especially in US and Anglosphere, that is informed by Atlas – Koch Network think tanks, Murdoch led right wing media e.g. Fox News and influencers, while many Christian groups have had long term links with Russia from Soviet times (and influence operations?).

Radical Libertarian Disinformation Machine – Koch Network by Nancy MacLean

Posted on October 19, 2022

Many nations, at least in the Anglosphere, have experienced disinformation whether related to climate science or fossil fuels, Covid science, education or democracy, and of late witnessed ‘Trussonomics’ in the UK, another version of Buchanan’s ‘Kochonomics’ or ‘radical right libertarian’ ideology.

However, where does this disinformation come from?

According to historian Nancy Maclean it’s a ‘deny and delay’ strategy of Koch Bros. or Koch Network which includes astroturfing, ‘Dark Money’, creating research, gerrymandering, SLAPPs, universities, Christians and conservatives.

Koch Industries – Putin – Russia – Ukraine – Koch Network – Think Tanks

Posted on April 20, 2022

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine many commentators, journalists, academic and political activists, of both left and right, who have seem to have acted in the interests of Putin’s Russia, why?

Many within or influenced by the US radical right libertarian Koch Network of think tanks and related organisations e.g. Fox News, which have promoted views that seem to support Putin e.g. claims of fake news on Ukraine civilian deaths, blaming NATO, appeasing Putin and demanding no economic sanctions.

Russia and Anglosphere – Conservatives and Oligarchs – War vs EU and Future

Posted on July 26, 2023

Very good insight into and overview of Putin’s Russia and the ‘west’ including the Anglosphere from Alexander Etkin (CEU Wien) in Russia’s War Against Modernity.

Following are significant excerpts from Etkind’s analysis from reviewer at Inside Story (Australia) Jon Richardson, on how it endeavours to explain Russia, and one would add many other nations too, mirroring the radical right or corrupt nativist authoritarians with support from fossil fuels & industry oligarchs, consolidated right wing media, think tanks and leveraging ageing electorates.

Conservative Christian CNP – Council for National Policy in US – Influence in UK, Russia and Europe

Good overview from Tamsin Shaw through ByLine Times of how the US and UK politics, funding, networking and campaigning, crosses over with various oligarchs, groups and nations, of dubious outlook.

Influence of Koch Network’s faux libertarian or free market think tanks, joined with nativism of Tanton Network faux environmentalism, media cartels led by Murdoch et al including Musk, Christian Conservatives and influencers, on latter the Council for National Policy.

Now, post Brexit and Trump analysts are seeing the architecture of influence using technology to help its cause whether in legacy media, online or social media to promote deeply nativist Christian authoritarian policies, as ‘conservative’, to help the cause of oligarch donors or investors, flying under the radar or astroturfing. 

‘Political Technology’ and the Transatlantic Alt-Right: The Data We Should All Know About

Inspired by Anne Nelson’s book, Tamsin Shaw dissects the history of America’s Council for National Policy and its connections to Brexit, Trump, Russia and the revelations of Edward Snowden

TAMSIN SHAW

29 JUN 2023

Everyone in Britain should have heard of America’s Council for National Policy (CNP). Anne Nelson has shown in her vital book Shadow Network: Media, Money and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right, that the most powerful leaders on the radical right in America emerged from this secretive organization. Lists of members have sometimes been leaked.

They include Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, Ginni Thomas, Ali Alexander, and other supporters of the 2021 attempted coup in the States. The core of its membership has been constituted for decades by America’s big billionaire families, the DeVoses, the Princes, the Kochs, the Mercers and so on. This concentration of power and influence might be reason enough for the British people to be aware of the CNP. But its members have also been surreptitiously active in the UK for over a decade, with undeniable impact.

Robert Mercer and Steve Bannon, both CNP members, will be known to readers of Byline Times for their involvement with Cambridge Analytica, (Mercer owned it; Bannon ran it), which was responsible for the data operations behind Brexit and the Trump campaign. But their operations on the ground in the UK are much more extensive. Bannon has often said that Brexit and Trump’s election were “one event”. The groundwork had been laid for a long time.

Bannon started grooming Nigel Farage around 2011. Farage loved it, of course. Although he’d enjoyed several years of being amused by his own speeches in the European Parliament, as a right-wing nationalist provocateur he was treated like an oaf by his weary multilingual colleagues. In 2012, just after Bannon had been appointed by Andrew Breitbart to be executive editor of the right-wing website Breitbart News, he invited Farage to Washington and New York to meet his powerful American friends.

When Farage later told a New Yorker reporter, “I have got a very, very high regard for that man’s brain,” it was hard not to hear it as an exclamation of gratitude. After all, Bannon set him on a path to having a successful show on RT (formerly Russia Today), having meetings with the Russian ambassador to the UK, being the victorious champion for his cherished cause, Brexit, and on first-name terms with the President of the United States.

But while Bannon is known for cultivating people like Farage, Raheem Kassam of Breitbart, even Boris Johnson, it was Robert Mercer who paved the way by astroturfing a transatlantic right-wing movement.

Peter Jukes is one of the few people to have exposed this aspect of their activities. Mercer sponsored the Young Americas Foundation and its offshoot, the Young Britons Foundation, with a typical American far-right agenda. In 2013, Jukes tells us, they met for a conference in Cambridge and discussed, amongst other things, their preferred candidate for Prime Minister, with Boris Johnson being the favourite. Raheem Kassam and other prominent Brexit supporters were amongst them.

2013, Jukes points out, was a critical year for establishing the influence campaigns they would benefit from. As Putin was making plans to take Crimea, Yevgeny Prigozhin (now notorious for being head of the Wagner Group) set up the Internet Research Agency to deploy social media influence operations. In Britain, Chris Wylie and Alexander Nix were setting up the Cambridge branch of SCL Group, the strategic communications company that would become Cambridge Analytica.

It was also a critical year for the relationship between the US far right and Russia. The affinity between the views of the American right and those of Putin was openly declared by self-described “paleo-conservative”, Pat Buchanan, who shocked many traditional conservatives with the claim that he, like Putin, saw Obama’s America as the greatest source of evil in the world. Putin is an ally, he wrote, in the struggle against “the militant secularism of a multicultural and transnational elite.”

The passage of anti-gay legislation in Russia, as well as a shared loathing for the liberal Pope Francis, created more common ground. Buchanan particularly praised the joint American-Russian organization, the World Congress of Families (WCF), for pioneering cooperation. The chair of the Dignitatis Humanae Institute (a far-right Catholic organization of which Bannon is a patron), Italian politician Luca Volonte, is a WCF official, as is the Institute’s trustee and former Breitbart contributor, Austin Ruse.

But though Buchanan was then the face of this US-Russian relationship, he was far from being the fulcrum on which it would turn. To understand the real power brokers, we have to go back the CNP and their decades of activism.’

For more article and blogs on Conservatives, Evangelical Christianity, Koch Network, Media, Political Strategy, Populist Politics and White Nationalism click through:

Putin’s Russia – Dugin – Alt Right – White Christian Nationalism – the Anglosphere and Europe

Lobby Groups, Policy, Government and Influence

DeSmog: Council for National Policy

Putin’s Supporters in Europe and Anglosphere: Willing Dupes and Useful Idiots?

Radical Libertarian Disinformation Machine – Koch Network by Nancy MacLean

Strange Conservative Political Links – The Anglosphere, Hungary and Russia

Good Reads: Anne Nelson – Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right

Good Reads: Katherine Stewart – The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism

Monopoly Media Bias in Australia

Unknown to the outside world in which Rupert Murdoch the proprietor of NewsCorp has a high profile, Australia now has some of the most shallow, narrow and politicised media, while promoting autocratic white nativist libertarian ideology imported from the US.

News content and /or themes are the same across all media i.e. local political content via government press conferences (only), for international, only UK and US content, then promoting or focusing audience upon (need for) low prices, low taxes and low costs while encouraging consumer spending on real estate, auto, retail and lifestyle using mortgages and credit (Australia has some of the highest household debt in the world).

Otherwise it’s mostly dog whistling immigrants or population growth, refugees, LGBT rights, social security recipients (but not pensioners), taxes, patriotism through accusing others of treason or being ‘foreign agents’ (US citizen Murdoch not?), China or at other times India, the EU European Union etc.

Further to misinforming or society and worse, i.e. misleading the audience through misrepresentation of data and analysis, it is difficult to have an insightful view of any key issue vs. much ‘fluff’ and dog whistling round social issues in Australian media while avoiding e.g. climate science and legislation on environment, emissions, etc..

Worse, while a handful of financially troubled right wing and Liberal (conservative) friendly legacy media outlets have been allowed to merge, consolidate and expand their reach, the media landscape is dominated and even monopolised by the same right wing media whether print, radio or free to air television broadcasting.  These same media groups are influential in deciding elections and referendums, especially in regions with ageing monocultural electorates with a ‘mid-western’, ‘southern’ in the US or ‘regional England’ on Brexit, strategies; their most recent obsession has been China while being accused of sub-contracting for the White House administration on trade and defence issues (drawing on ASPI sponsored by global arms makers).

Recently former Prime Ministers Rudd (Labor) and Turnbull (Liberal conservative) teamed up on a petition with 500 thousand plus signatures demanding an inquiry into media (bias) in Australia.   However, the political classes, especially nativist conservatives and the Liberal National Party coalitions, are answerable to commercial media and/or corporate donors, especially NewsCorp setting the agenda with US white nativist libertarian agit prop (to mask deeply libertarian policies).

Following is a good summary or overview of the media landscape in Australia and the issue for society, the electorate and good government.

‘The effect of Right-wing bias in Australia’s media

Australia’s mainstream news media is largely tied to the Liberal Party which is driving our nation towards authoritarianism, writes Richard Gillies.

AUSTRALIA’S MEDIA is more concentrated than in some countries that are under dictatorships, such as Turkey and Russia. The ownership and management of practically all of Australia’s print and television media, with exception to Network 10, have links to the Liberal Party. News Corp, chaired by Rupert Murdoch and majority-owned by the Murdoch family, owns around two-thirds of the print media and is a majority stakeholder in Foxtel and Sky News.

Nine Entertainment, which was established by the Liberal-linked Packer family and is chaired by former Liberal member Peter Costello, owns the Nine Network, about a third of Australia’s newspaper publications and subscription television service Stan. Seven West Media, which is majority-owned and chaired by Kerry Stokes, another Liberal supporter, owns Channel 7 and any major newspaper publications that are not owned by News Corp or the Nine Entertainment.

Ita Buttrose, another person with links to the Liberal Party, is chairperson of the ABC. Although most of Australia’s media is owned and run by Liberal supporters, there have been times when Australia’s media wasn’t biased…..

….The ABC is commonly perceived as being Left-wing. This is probably due to its coverage of social matters such as gender and racial issues. While the ABC focuses on these “issues” that are literally skin-deep and disproportionately reporting on ethical issues when they relate to Labor, the ABC is a perpetuating the Liberal-National Coalition’s evasion of scrutiny over the record levels of corruption that now occur in government…..

….Foxtel, a company owned by News Corp, is also one of Australia’s worst offenders for multinational tax avoidance. This is conjecture, but Sam Dastyari’s work on establishing a Royal Commission into the banking sector and an inquiry into multinational tax avoidance might have given some people in the media incentive to politically assassinate him. Sam Dastyari achieved these feats as an opposition Senator. Those in control of the media might have given some thought as to what he might accomplish if he was still a Senator and Labor were in government….

….This resulted in the most spectacular decline in wealth and prosperity in Australia since at least World War II. The media’s bias towards the Liberal Party despite their unquestionable incompetence and record levels of corruption means that Australia is effectively operating as an authoritarian State.

Traits of authoritarianism can be seen elsewhere as the Coalition planned to give itself powers to spy on us. Homes and offices of political dissidents and opponents are raided by the Federal thought police while the Government, in classic authoritarian style, spends a third of the country’s GDP on military equipment as poor children rely on donations for education.

Australia’s largest media companies are tolerant of all of this because they and their customers greatly benefit from federal (conservative LNP) coalition governments.’

For more articles and blogs about nativist right wing media bias in Australia click through Asian century, Australian politics, climate change, conservative, critical thinking, economics, environment, fossil fuel pollution, immigration, libertarian economics, media, political strategy, populist politics, science literacy and white nationalism.