3 ms·
American news outlets generally don't report on issues outside their borders unless... ...they think there's a chance to start a war. Compare the coverage of p
by jessaustin 6y ago
American news outlets generally don't report on issues outside their borders unless...
...they think there's a chance to start a war. Compare the coverage of protests in India to those in Hong Kong. In India they want the government to coddle big business and rich people less: zero coverage. In Hong Kong they wanted to embarrass Chinese communists: wall-to-wall coverage. Often we can see this phenomenon in a single nation. When a few relatively wealthy capitalists protested the duly elected government of Venezuela a couple of years ago, we heard all about it. Two days ago Maduro's government won reelection in a landslide, and we haven't heard a peep. The fact that large majorities of Venezuelans support their current government makes it more difficult for us to start the war that John Bolton wants, so that won't be mentioned on CNN.
- jariel 6y agoThe election was widely discredited as fraudulent, remember Putin as 85% approval ratings and if China held an election literally tommorow, Xi would win, after all, nobody is allowed to say anything about him. But it's moot: the US President is Tweeting something and there's a court saying something about the elections which is 100x more important than anything about Venezuela, at least in America. It'd have to be the slowest news day in the US for news about any kind of strikes to make the US news. It's not on the Guardian, BBC, CBC either.
- jessaustin 6y agoThe observation is not that certain nations are not covered; that would be pointless. The observation is that those nations that are covered, are only covered when coverage increases the chance of massive USA "Defense" Department spending.