Russian blacklist dating
The piece referenced those 200 websites as "routine peddlers of Russian propaganda." The piece relied on what it claimed were "two teams of independent researchers," but the citing of a report by the longtime anticommunist Foreign Policy Research Institute was really window dressing.The meat of the story relied on a report by unnamed analysts from a single mysterious "organization" called Prop Or Not – we don't know if it's one person or, as it claims, over 30 – a "group" that seems to have been in existence for just a few months.The only difference was, Phillips didn't use emoticons: "We're getting a lot of requests for comment and can get back to you today =)" Prop Or Not told The Intercept."We're over 30 people, organized into teams, and we cannot confirm or deny anyone's involvement." "They" never called The Intercept back.
It has no analog that I can think of in modern times.
Headlined "Russian propaganda effort helped spread 'fake news' during election, experts say," the piece promotes the work of a shadowy group that smears some 200 alternative news outlets as either knowing or unwitting agents of a foreign power, including popular sites like Truthdig and Naked Capitalism.
The thrust of Timberg's astonishingly lazy report is that a Russian intelligence operation of some kind was behind the publication of a "hurricane" of false news reports during the election season, in particular stories harmful to Hillary Clinton.
But if that same source also demanded anonymity on the preposterous grounds that it feared being "targeted by Russia's legions of skilled hackers"?
Any sane reporter would have booted them out the door.