Ralph Nader et la presse-Pravda

Ralph Nader et la presse-Pravda

Le fameux dissident Ralph Nader, dissident sans relâche depuis des décennies, donne un long entretien à Chris Hedges, de Truthdig.com, le 3 janvier 2011. Son propos est très large et embrasse l’impuissance extraordinaire de la gauche américaniste (insistons dans ce cas, une fois n’est pas coutume, sur le qualificatif si souvent employé par nous d’“américaniste”). Le titre, extrait de ses réflexions, nous dit tout : «The Left Has Nowhere to Go»…

Nous nous attachons ici à un aspect de la diatribe de Nader, contre la presse-Pravda US, les fameux journaux de référence, New York Times et Washington Post en tête. Nader constate cette extraordinaire rejet de tout ce qui est “libéral” (progressiste) par des journaux qui s’affichent “libéraux” (progressistes), et leur dévotion absolue à tout ce qui vient de la droite la plus dure, la plus extrême, pourvu certes qu’elle soit institutionnalisée. Nader ne parvient pas à totalement expliquer cette attitude, malgré les hypothèses de la corruption, du conformisme extrémiste, des pressions de corporate power, de la frayeur de psychologies faibles, etc. Malgré tout cela, il n’arrive pas à comprendre complètement cette situation, et on le comprend… Dans ce cas, l’explication du poids, de l’influence, de la direction du Système a sa place, ô combien.

«The banishment from the corporate media, Nader argues, has been one of the major contributors to the demoralization and weakening of the left. Protests by the left, which get little national or local coverage, have steadily dwindled in strength across the country. The first protest gets little or no coverage and this leads to movements, as well as the voices of activists, being diminished and finally suffocated.

» “The so-called liberal media, along with Fox, is touting the tea party and publicizing Palin,” Nader said. “There was an editorial on Dec. 27 in The New York Times on the Repeal Amendment, the right-wing constitutional amendment to allow states to overturn federal law. The editorial writer at the end had the nerve to say there is no progressive champion. The editorial said that the liberals and progressives have faded out to let the tea party make history. And yet, for months, all The New York Times has done is promote Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. They promote Newt Gingrich and the neocons on the Op-Ed pages. The book pages of the newspaper ignore progressive authors and pump all the right-wing authors.

»“If we don’t raise hell, we won’t get any media,” Nader said. “If we don’t get any media, the perception will be that the tea party is the big deal.

» “On one notorious Sunday, Oct. 10, two of The New York Times’ segments led with a big story about Ann Coulter and how she will change her strategy because she is being outflanked by others,” Nader said. “There was also a huge article on this anti-Semite against Arabs, this Islamaphobe, Pam Geller. Do you know how many pictures they had of Geller? Twenty on this front-page segment. The number of anti-war Op-Eds in The Washington Post over nine months in 2009 was 6-to-1 pro-war. We don’t raise hell. We don’t say Terry Gross is a censor. We don’t say that Charlie Rose is a censor. We have got to blast publicly. We have got to hammer them, because they are the tribune of right-wing fascist forces.

» “Three thousand people rallied to protest the invasion and massacre in Gaza two years ago,” Nader said. “It was held four blocks from The Washington Post. It did not get a single paragraph. People should march over to the Post and say ‘Fuck you! What are you doing here? You cover every little blip by the right-wing and you don’t cover us?’

»“They are afraid of the right-wing because the right-wing bellows, and they have become right-wing,” Nader said of the commercial press. “They have become fascinated by the bias of Fox. And they publicize what Fox is biased on. The coverage of O’Reilly and Beck and their fights is insane. In the heyday of coverage in the 1960s of what we were doing, it was always less than it should have been, but now it is almost zero. Why do we take this? Why do we accept this? Why isn’t Chris Hedges three times a year in the Op-Ed? Why is it always Paul Wolfowitz and Elliott Abrams and all these homicidal maniacs? Why are they there? Why is John Bolton constantly published in The Washington Post and The New York Times? Where is Andrew Bacevich? Bacevich told me he has had five straight Op-Eds rejected by the Post and the Times in the last two years. And he said he is not inclined to send anymore. How many times do you hear Hoover Institution? American Enterprise Institute? Manhattan Institute. These goddamned newspapers should be picketed.”»

dedefensa.org