Most any journalist which works for a quality newspaper (which doesn't toe a national or governmental line) would qualify as a better source of information than this person.
But, you asked for one, so here's one:
https://www.theatlantic.com/author/anne-applebaum/
[EDIT: typo]
All I'm seeing - scanning the titles and summaries - is a very straightforward towing of the party line! Putin/Russia bad, "Democracy" + democrats good.
Does she do anything other than echo the democratic position/talking points? I'm on page 3 and haven't seen anything other than the standard fare I'd expect from the left side of political dialectic.
PS
I wonder how she reconciles:
The U.S. Shouldn’t Be a ‘Sleazy Offshore Principality’ - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/10/us-shouldn...
plus
Liberation Without Victory (an interview with Zelensky) - https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/04/ze...
with
https://www.occrp.org/en/the-pandora-papers/pandora-papers-r...
.. which shows in no uncertain terms that Zelensky is deeply into sleazy offshore creations. He was offshore, before he even started the TV company, that he owns, that propelled him to fame, staring as the president of the Ukraine (in the show), which certainly planted in the minds that possibility in advance of actually winning the election and taking half the production company as his governmental staff!! You'd think his script-writers wrote this!
Key Findings from the Panama Papers link:
"Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his partners in comedy production owned a network of offshore companies related to their business based in the British Virgin Islands, Cyprus, and Belize.
Zelensky’s current chief aide, Serhiy Shefir, as well as the head of the country’s Security Service, were part of the offshore network.
Offshore companies were used by Shefir and another business partner to buy pricey London real estate.
Around the time of his 2019 election, Zelensky handed his shares in a key offshore company over to Shefir, but the two appear to have made an arrangement for Zelensky’s family to continue receiving money from the offshore."
Why don't trustworthy, quality "journalists" discuss Zelensky's dodgy dealings?! Hmmm.. Surely not because they are control system mouthpieces?!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Applebaum
The first 2 paragraphs:
"Anne Elizabeth Applebaum[4] (born July 25, 1964) is a Polish-American[5] journalist and historian. She has written extensively about Marxism–Leninism and the development of civil society in Central and Eastern Europe.
She has worked at The Economist and The Spectator,[6] and was a member of the editorial board of The Washington Post (2002–2006).[7] Applebaum won the Pulitzer Prize in 2004 for Gulag: A History published the previous year.[8] She is a staff writer for The Atlantic[9] and a senior fellow at The Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.[10]"
"Applebaum is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.[70] She is on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy and Renew Democracy Initiative.[71][72] She was a member of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting's International Board of Directors.[73] She was a Senior Adjunct Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) where she co-led a major initiative aimed at countering Russian disinformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE).[74] She was on the editorial board for The American Interest[75] and the Journal of Democracy.[76]"
"In 1992, Applebaum married Radosław Sikorski, who later served as Poland's Defence Minister, Foreign Minister, and Marshal of the Sejm. He is a Member of the European Parliament. The couple have two sons, Aleksander and Tadeusz.[77] She became a Polish citizen in 2013.[78] She speaks Polish and Russian in addition to English.[79]"
If this deeply embedded elite journo is who you trust to give you the low-down on what's going on, no wonder we are so far apart in understanding what is going on!
You presented a Youtube video by a pro-Russian activist who has been repeatedly caught out lying.
I presented an actual journalist and credible domain expert who has not.
That's my definition of what constitutes 'journalism'.
Fundamentally, if you find Anne Applebaum unpalatable, there are a hundred others who are reporting truthfully from Ukraine, and not pushing Putin's propaganda.
If you want to find 'the opposing view' about Ukraine, find a credible journalist or news source from the Russian free press and present their views. That's if you can find any remaining free press in Russia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_freedom_in_Russia
> As of 2022, Russia ranked 155 out of 180 countries in the Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders.[1] In the 2017 Freedom House Freedom of the Press report Russia scored 83 (100 being the worst), mostly because of new laws introduced in 2014 that further extended the state control over mass media.[2] Freedom House characterized the situation as even worse in Crimea where, after the 2014 annexation by Russia, both Russian jurisdiction and extrajudicial means are (according to Freedom House) routinely applied to limit freedom of expression.
[EDIT: typo]
Who's going to correct her? The governance structure supports her, has put her where she is, to do the job that she doing - perfectly!
The governance structure would only attack her (or allow for her to be attacked) if she had stepped out of line, reporting on something that isn't on message. But they certainly won't find anything on her!
I notice you don't comment on my info on Zelensky and the Panama papers. Isn't that newsworthy? Is that not a lie by omission?
I mention it because Applebaum is fine to broach offshore issues apparently, and fine to laud Zelensky - but why are his long-term offshore activities unknown to the masses? Would it be because we - the good guys - are as propagandised as the baddies? We're even more propagandised, I'd say.
This has nothing to do with the original point of this thread, which I'll repeat is that Eva Bartlett cannot be trusted as a source of credible information:
> Bartlett describes herself as an "independent writer and rights activist."[3] She writes commentary pieces for RT's website.Critics contend that her advocacy amounts to participation in a disinformation campaign whereby the aim is to lessen the responsibility of the Assad regime for the acts of indiscriminate killing during the war.
> In late 2016, Bartlett gained controversy over a video that went viral, in which said that Syrians "overwhelmingly support" Bashar al-Assad, as evidenced by the results of the 2014 election.[13][14] The election was seen as illegitimate by a number of countries and international organizations,[15][16][17] while Russia has endorsed Assad's mandate. Further, she has characterized the White Helmets as being part of a Western propaganda campaign, alleging that rescues by that organization are hoaxes whereby they "recycle" the same children in footage of staged rescues,[13][14][18] and that "no one in eastern Aleppo has heard of [the White Helmets]".[13] In the same video, Bartlett falsely claimed that the al-Quds Hospital bombing in April 2016, where 55 died, never occurred, saying it was rebel propaganda.[4][19] Bartlett's claims were amplified by Russian-controlled outlets such as RT, Sputnik News and In The Now.[20][13] The claims were found to be false by Channel 4 News and Snopes.[1][3][4][5] The broader "same girl" internet meme has been categorized as a derivation of the "crisis actor" conspiracy theories
All the best.