Posted by ALP on October 30, 2009, 10:38:21, in reply to "The Media Lens Editors did not "protect" Lenin"
Lenin's loyalty to the ML eds stretched to attacking Monbiot for supporting me (when I criticised them over their NS column). But now that Lenin's book has been subjected to the ML "analysis", Lenin is reinforcing the point that I made (which at the time he called "ridiculous" - ie that the ML eds insist that dissent must criticise the "host media" in a "serious and sustained" way):
"Given this, it is absurd to insist that leftists who make use of the corporate media always add a reference to the complicity of the host in the problem under discussion." (Lenin) http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1256854137.html
And since Lenin brings up this NS business again, and mentions me, perhaps, Ian, as someone who can still post to ML, you might consider posting a link there to my latest comments (since they mention the NS thing in the context of Pilger/Monbiot, double standards, etc):
http://dissident93.wordpress.com/2009/10/29/medialens-monbiot-pilger/
I can understand why you might be reluctant to do so (given the atmosphere over there), but the fact that you might be reluctant might answer your own question to Smash (about why he wasn't posting on some issues).
Message Thread:
« Back to thread
