logoalt Hacker News

0xDEAFBEADyesterday at 11:41 AM5 repliesview on HN

I'm of the opinion that there is considerably more wailing about US government propaganda than actual US government propaganda. People who reference supposed US government propaganda rarely provide much in the way of concrete examples. Probably because there are legal restrictions on covert propaganda in the US:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/covert_propaganda

To be clear, I'm happy to grant that:

* The Pentagon won't provide jets for your war movie if your war movie portrays the US military in a bad light

* The US engages in information operations in foreign countries, e.g. discouraging people in the Philippines from getting the Chinese COVID vaccine

* Voice of America and similar US-government sponsored outlets are, in fact, sponsored by the US government

But the notion that covert, English-language US government propaganda is ubiquitous and effective seems like a half-baked, un-falsifiable conspiracy theory with little supporting evidence.

The internet is full of false or misleading claims about the US which go un-refuted. There's just way too much low-hanging fruit going un-picked here to believe that the USG is running massive English-language covert propaganda ops.

A specific example of a false anti-American claim which is extremely widespread: Many Europeans believe that the US promised to protect Ukraine in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. This is false. We only promised to go to the UN Security Council, which we did. You can verify for yourself with a quick trip to the UN website, the memorandum is not very long: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/P...

If the American government possessed the propaganda wizardry that people ascribe to it, I expect the entire internet would be well-acquainted with the actual contents of this memorandum. Instead, you have randos like me trying to fight a tsunami of misinformation (likely Ukrainian-origin) related to this memorandum, using only a shovel.


Replies

gpvosyesterday at 1:24 PM

> Many Europeans believe that the US promised to protect Ukraine in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

European here, following the Ukraine situation closely. I absolutely never heard that one. The main issue in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum that has been mentioned in the media in recent years is that Russia would respect the independence, sovereignty, and existing borders of Ukraine, which is clearly there in article 1. Thanks for the link though, it is quite enlightening.

throwaway27448yesterday at 2:03 PM

Have you ever read Manufacturing Consent? A conspiracy is not necessary for wide-spread propaganda campaigns—just a confluence of incentives that act against the common interest (even in the US) but work in the interest of the ruling class.

show 1 reply
tumdum_yesterday at 12:03 PM

> Many Europeans believe ...

> ... misinformation (likely Ukrainian-origin) ...

Your post is also "a half-baked, un-falsifiable conspiracy theory with little supporting evidence" ;)

show 1 reply
mopsiyesterday at 12:24 PM

"UN Security Council action" is a broad term that can include deployment of international UN-led military forces, as in the Korean War: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Command

A few years prior to the Budapest Memorandum, the UN Security Council had authorized military action to liberate Kuwait. 42 countries participated in the coalition that drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Gulf_War

The expectation at the time was clearly more than just "we'll bring it up at the UN for dicussion". The current weaseling over the exact wording looks weak and pathetic, and has a certain flavor of propaganda that tries to convince everyone of something that's not quite true. The fact remains that the US strong-armed Ukraine out of nuclear weapons, and when Ukraine was eventually invaded, tried to strong-arm Ukraine into surrender. This reflects very poorly on the US.

show 2 replies
6510yesterday at 4:12 PM

>I'm of the opinion that there is considerably more wailing about US government propaganda than actual US government propaganda.

okay....

>People who reference supposed US government propaganda rarely provide much in the way of concrete examples.

YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT