David Harvey on The Disinformation Project

David Harvey writes:

What concerned me, and why it is that I do not mourn the departure of the Disinformation Project from the landscape, was the lack of rigour and the approach that was taken. Critical theory and neo-Marxist analysis – the conflict between the “empowered” and the “disempowered” – dominated the discussion along with the use of imprecise and opaque language. A further matter of concern was the reluctance to publish the data which supported the conclusions that the Project had reached.

Yet Mainstream Media uncritically drank the Disinformation Project Kool Aid, citing their sound bites as authoritative when clearly they were not. In this respect the Disinformation Project was promulgating its own form of if not disinformation, then misinformation. If it is the latter then they were entitled to express their opinion. But it should have been something MSM should have critically analysed and they did not.

Fact checking done well, can be a good thing. For example the US based Factcheck is usually highly reliable and neutral. However other fact checkers have been appalling, such as AAP.

A rigorous neutral Disinformation Project could have been a valuable thing. But it wasn’t rigorous or neutral.

Comments (36)

Login to comment or vote

Add a Comment