Hacker News Reader

Comment by pyuser583 | Hacker News Reader

The article was originally published by The Irrawaddy - an amazing, high quality online-paper.

The Irrawaddy does detailed and ethical journalism about Burma/Myanmar, a part of the world ruled by an authoritarian regime.

There's no Irrawaddy for Venezuela, Afghanistan, or North Korea. We only see them by the shadows they leave on other countries.

But because of the hard work of The Irrawaddy, Burma/Myanmar is much more visible to English-speaking audiences - a touchy demographic in the country being covered.

The least you could do is link to the original publisher, especially when they are such an amazing group.

View on HN

You said all that (which I agree with), but you didn't provide a link:

https://www.irrawaddy.com/in-person/interview/war-on-citizen...

Ok, we've changed the URL above to that from https://globalvoices.org/2024/06/28/war-on-citizens-how-the-.... Thanks!

Hahaha, I’m so sorry. You are right. Thank you.

It's also been heavily criticized for using rhetoric that supports the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya minority in Myanmar[0] and being a mouthpiece for the Burmese government. The editor-in-chief has denied these allegations but has run a number of problematic pieces. Like a cartoon depicting a dark-skinned Rohingya cutting in line in front of other ethnic minorities, and another one which suggested Bangladeshis were waiting at the western edge of Myanmar ready to invade. Or running a fake news piece stating that the US ambassador alleged the Rohingya “would demand a Rohingya State or Muslim State” if their ethnic name were officially recognized

It's also funded by the US (specifically, the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy has given it $150-200k every year since 2005)[1]

[0] https://www.bustle.com/p/is-the-us-funding-anti-rohingya-new...

[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-is-the-us-government-fundi...

> There's no Irrawaddy for ... North Korea.

Rimjin-Gang [1] publishes news from North Korea in Japanese, English, and Korean. Their articles are based on reports from people inside North Korea using smuggled cellphones and focus on daily life.

A list of other sources is at [2]. Note in particular 38North [3].

[1] https://www.asiapress.org/rimjin-gang/

[2] https://guides.library.cornell.edu/c.php?g=225914&p=1790887

[3] https://www.38north.org/

> There's no Irrawaddy for Venezuela, Afghanistan, or North Korea

There are several for Afghanistan (Tolo, Rukhsana, Bano, Khaama, Pajhwok, etc) and Venezuela (Pitazo, Efecto Cocuyo, Runrun). You just choose not to read them, or don't want to put the legwork to find and read Spanish, Pukhto, Dari, Uzbek, or regional English publications.

And Irrawaddy has issues as well - they lack the ability to report on what's happening on the ground in Arakan, Sagaing, and Chinland and just repeat what spokespersons of those region's warlords say.

Myanmar has become a Southeast Asian Syria or Libya with every regional power in the region (China, Thailand, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam) funding, aiding, and abetting warlords both within the Tatmadaw as well as within the various liberation coalitions.

It feels weird how certain internet users (especially because most people on HN only started hearing about Irrawaddy after using junk subreddits like CredibleDefense or WorldNews) are following this horrible conflict with a sense of glee or at least entertainment. It's horrid.

>It feels weird how certain internet users (especially because most people on HN only started hearing about Irrawaddy after using junk subreddits like CredibleDefense or WorldNews) are following this horrible conflict with a sense of glee or at least entertainment. It's horrid.

Noticed the same as well and it's happening over all social networks! I've seen this happening since Russia invaded Ukraine, so I assume it's cause of social media campgains and propoganda that started at the time - conflicts were dyed black and white removing all nuance, and people got off on "supporting" the side they picked

Venezuela has Caracas Chronicles, which is great.

https://www.caracaschronicles.com/

If that is the original article, you can send an email to hn using the contact link and they can update it.

> The Irrawaddy does detailed and ethical journalism about Burma/Myanmar, a part of the world ruled by an authoritarian regime.

Why does it feel like every time someone promotes 'ethical journalism' here, it's always state backed propaganda? Not only that, people use propaganda terms like 'authoritarian regime'.

> There's no Irrawaddy for Venezuela, Afghanistan, or North Korea.

No. There are many british, american, etc funded propaganda outlets ( fringe and major ) targeting these countries.

> But because of the hard work of The Irrawaddy, Burma/Myanmar is much more visible to English-speaking audiences

Could it be because britain, the former colonial master of myanmar, is trying to overthrow the regime?

> especially when they are such an amazing group.

Are they 'amazing' though?

Why does it feel like every time someone promotes 'ethical journalism' here, it's always state backed propaganda?

A quick keyword search on the phrase easily refutes the supposition you're making here.

Not only that, people use propaganda terms like 'authoritarian regime'.

Probably because it would seem to be a reasonable enough description of the system of government in that country since 1962.

Meanwhile the weirdly exaggerated language you're using here seems to be in itself quite propagandistic.

> A quick keyword search on the phrase easily refutes the supposition you're making here.

You don't have to do a quick keyword search. The 'ethical journalism' the guy referred to in this comment thread is a US government funded propaganda outlet.

> Probably because it would seem to be a reasonable enough description of the system of government in that country since 1962.

But not the colonial british government before 1962? Can you show me on reuters article calling the colonial british government 'authoritarian'?

Funny how the democractic russian government and indian governments are called authoritarian, but not the saudi government? Strange.

Lets hope myanmar stays authoritarian long enough to maintains its independence. So many people with political agendas.

But you didn't reference just that one comment.

You specifically took the trouble to make it look like this was something that keeps happening all the time, via the carefully chosen phrasing:

every time someone promotes 'ethical journalism' here,

That's where things started to get weird in this thread.

The democractic russian government ...

Before they got weirder still.

You really are deluded if you think the Russian government is "democratic".

>But not the colonial british government before 1962? Can you show me on reuters article calling the colonial british government 'authoritarian'?

And even if the British government before that was authoritarian, does that remove the details around the current government being extremely repressive? How about addressing that before going directly to whatabout ism with what might have been the case over 50 years ago?

Finally and generally, just because a given website receives financial support from some U.S. organization doesn't automatically make it propaganda or free of ethical journalists. The details of what they report and how do matter, so does it's factual accuracy, regardless of funding.

My comment included a lot of stock phrases and low-thought words. “Authoritarian regime,” etc.

Sorry. That was poor style on my part.

I also made some sweeping statements about media coverage in other countries.

Sorry. Low thought on my part.

I was trying to give credit to some folks who deserve it, but instead I made what looks like a State Department press release.

Sorry.

I’ve been trying to spend less time writing these comments out. You can spend a day on a couple paragraphs. Not a good use of time.

I’ll be more careful in the future.

What a bizarre response. But not unexpected.

“The least you could do is…”.

Being a fan of some journalists doesn’t justify being this aggressive. There are nicer ways to say this.

If the article is indeed based off another article, I think that is really the very least it could do without risking being called out for plagiarism.

That really wasn't aggressive. How would you have phrased it?

>>“The least you could do is…”. > There are nicer ways to say this.

Could they be as effective, though?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com