JOIN US OR YOU’RE RUSSIAN ASSETS
Saturday, July 28th, a blog post appeared on Medium that once again highlighted the hysterical disregard for human decency and dignity directed to anyone, no matter their background, who dare to criticize or reject the method and model of the Russian narrative shaped by a few specific individuals.
Their proposition is very simple: Anyone who disagrees with us is an asset to the Kremlin. Stop criticizing us.
The authors of the Medium post added this unemployable writer’s name with eight others to their extensive list of individuals and institutions that they have publicly accused of serving the Kremlin’s cause.
Mature educated people can engage in conversation and controversy without becoming contaminated, converted, or crucified as traitors.
That’s why I am not shocked nor angry with the authors’ of this blog, they are not mature adults, they have a history of being irrational mudslingers whose sole contribution to social media is to accuse individuals of being Kremlin assets.
The creators of this now suspended Medium piece, have a storied history of accusing people to the extent that readers respond with “wait, they’re serious? Not a parody?”
In fact in previous posts, the authors have labeled Jay Z, Beyonce, Christiane Amapour, Howard Dean, Clive Bundy, and Carl Sagan as “Kremlin assets, AKA Agents of Influence”
Saturday’s article doxed my wife with an accusation that my wife’s professional move three months ago to the Department of Interior’s Tulsa Field Solicitor’s Office was actually her “joining the Trump administration” as a payment for being a Kremlin asset. It’s not common practice to label all federal employees “part of the president’s administration.” Saturday’s accusations were shared over 3,000 times on Twitter before Medium suspended it two and a half days later.
My anger and disgust over the article is with serious, reputable experts and professionals who legitimized this blog and its authors.
Those who amplified this nonsense should be embarrassed and held accountable to correct their smearing of experienced professionals, academics, and journalists. Do they actually agree with all of these serious allegations? Did they even read the piece before endorsing it to their own followers?
It’s widely known that a writer’s name means everything to their work. So in turn the writers, analysts, and pundits who amplified this blog must have taken all the allegations within the article seriously.
There’s no cherry picking the facts here, the article asserts that the people referenced therein are some sort of “useful idiot” posse — made up of seasoned professionals, academics, and journalists who are highly regarded by the international community and then there’s me. A nobody.
Why is the “nobody” the headline worthy individual? Dustin Giebel.
Since this piece was read by so many, I’m obligated to address some of the context that the authors maliciously ignored to shape this ludicrous narrative of a Kremlin posse.
Nina Jankowicz
Nina Jankowicz is a disinformation expert, an Eastern European analyst, and Global Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Kennan Institute. She has provided strategic communications guidance to the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry. She is a Fulbright Scholar, who received her MA in Russian, Eurasian, and East European Studies from Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. She’s fluent in Russian and proficient in Polish and Ukrainian.
They say Nina’s criticism on McKew’s creditability is an attack, that her disagreeing with McKew’s opinion is suspect, and that she “works for one of Putin’s closet ally’s.”
Their accusation is that Nina, as a Global Fellow at The Kennan Institute, is part of “Kremlin controlled opposition” because The Kennan Institute has held events celebrating the Alfa Fellowship program, a respected exchange between the West and Russia. They cite an Atlantic Council article that “Alfa Group are Russian President Vladimir Putin’s closest oligarchs.”
That’s it.
First: The authors and professionals who amplified this piece must not understand what The Kennan Institute is or what a non-resident fellowship entails.
Second: Nina doesn’t work for The Kennan Institute. She is a Global Fellow. She receives no salary, no editorial oversight. Importantly, she never held the Alfa Fellowship, nor was she involved in the events the authors cite.
The Kennan Institute started in 1974 and is one of the top regional policy and exchange programs in the world — it’s primarily US government funded.
When people with credibility endorse a message that claims the well-respected Kennan Institute at the Wilson Center is a Kremlin front, they’re building distrust in our institutions with disinformation.
Natalia Antonova
They probably don’t know that Natalia is a rather well known and admired individual. Their argument is Natalia was the last editor-in-chief of The Moscow News when it shut down in 2014 and since her articles are currently available on a Russian propagandist website she’s obviously controlled opposition.
Most experienced Russia watchers know the situation so the comical interlude of the article has received some chuckles.
The parent company of the Moscow News, RIA Novosti, was liquidated by presidential decree. In other words, Putin nationalized an independent publication which would obliviously include its digital archives. This is basic stuff folks.
A person can be slandered very easily by omitting character. The authors purposely withheld a well-known fact…Natalia Antonova didn’t leave the Moscow News because it shut down, she left because she wasn’t going to be Putin’s propagandist.
The idea that Natalia is in any way helpful to Putin or the Kremlin would rely solely on not knowing a single thing about her. I recommend Googling her and her work, the world would benefit immensely if more people were like Natalia Antonova.
It’s almost impossible for an informed individual to believe that the “Information Warfare Specialist” and “Spy Brief’er” -who contributed most to the sharing of this article, would not know this about Natalia.
Seva Gunitsky
Seva Gunitsky, an academic, wrote an article that went way over these authors’ head. They say Seva’s piece is “warning us of the dangers of punishing Putin, another classic propaganda technique.”
I doubt anyone who shared Saturday’s article offered Seva the curiosity of reading his article before amplifying allegations that included his name.
To summate Seva’s article: Russia’s long term motivation is the pursuit of derzhavnost and American foreign policy might be more effective if it identified that motivation— It’s a “Know Thy Enemy” piece.
“A word that’s difficult to render into English precisely, derzhavnost essentially means both being a great power and being recognized as such by others.”
It’s why we have to ignore a litmus test of demands and questions from the authors of this blog, because their main motivation is also derzhavnost. “They want to be a great power and be recognized as such by others.”
IT’S A TRAP! You have to agree with their echo chamber, one that believes Vlad is short for Vladimir, Carl Sagan is active measures, and just going to Moscow in June is super suspicious [World Cup guys. You could have just asked me.]
SCOOP: People who understand Russia have been to Russia
There’s no room for nuance or reason in their piece. Why did McKew call this piece stellar?
Seva is not the only academic brought into this, they used a screenshot of Sean Guillory, a Russian Historian with the University of Pittsburgh, Center for Russian & East European Studies and the host of the best Eurasian politics and history podcast, saying he has a friend who works at Sputnik.
The caption of this image says “Who doesn’t have friends who work for admitted propaganda outfit Sputnik, right?”
That’s it? No other information needed. You are your friends. That is ridiculous, right?
A Russian historian is unfortunately added to my posse and since Sean says he has a friend, who admits they propagate: BOOM! Kremlin asset: Academic LABELED. No other evidence needed.
Who needs proof folks? Jim, who runs the Russia Without BS blog is mentioned as being mean. BOOM!! Kremlin Assest: Popular Blogger LABELED!!!
Besides the authors’ poor evidentiary standards, they lack the self-awareness to notice their claims can produce some humorous hypocrisy.
Like their claim Michael Colborne, a journalist who has been seen in Foreign Policy and Coda Story, is a “useful idiot” merely because Russia Today quoted his tweet in an article. Treating people with dignity? Nah, LABELED.
But this Colborne thread is great. A think tank labeled every guest who appeared on Russia Today as an “Useful Idiot.” So, do you know what Harrison Ford, Evander Holyfield, Mr T, Will.I.Am, Oliver Stone, David Frum, Stephen Fry and Vivienne Westwood all have in common? It is a fun eclectic list of Useful Idiots for the Kremlin.
You can clearly see in the screenshot, Colborne started his thread with a disclaimer (& FWIW: I personally never would) so we know Colborne thoughts on a RT appearance. Yet, they state multiple times in the piece — if you go on RT, even once — you are a useful idiot. Colborne hasn’t, but guess who has?
Spoiler, it’s Eric Garland. Who was very excited to slander all of us, he retweeted this garbage ELEVEN times before Medium suspended the piece. He is also on the think tanks list. Game theory doesn’t need self-awareness I guess.
“DUSTIN GIEBEL AND RUSSIA’S CONTROLLED OPPOSITION IN ACTION”
The article is about me. The authors’ leading principle of evidence that I am under the Kremlin’s control — my focus changed.
Their smears of qualified individuals, saddling me to the real and imaginary sins of my college professor, knowledge of the Russian language is suspicious, ignoring almost all context, and bringing my family into this because MY FOCUS CHANGED.
There’s a damn good reason my focus changed. IT WAS ALL OF THIS BULLSHIT.
It wasn’t because I don’t believe there is something to Russiagate, I do. I just stopped assuming more than what was directly presented. Yeah, that caused me to change some positions. Watching disinformation and absurd accusations being endlessly thrown around for months had me concerned.
But it was precisely this moment right here:
Russian Journalist, Alexey Kovalev, was accused of a lot things that day: soft on Putin, calls for him to leave a country he wasn’t in, comments that Russians are vile. All because they didn’t agree with his opinion and they did not care to know more than that. This was the moment.
Kovalev runs Noodlerremover, a website dedicated to debunking Russian State Ran Media. He has it linked on his Twitter bio. “Kovalev’s opinion’s was wrong and he’s Russian. GET HIM!!!”
For years Kovalev took it upon himself to fight Russian propaganda from Moscow, Putin is not a fan of those types. We all know that.
Russian journalists who fight Kremlin propaganda are stellar individuals who do not deserve our mob mentality driven by ignorance.
Tatyana Felgenhauer was stabbed in the throat the following month.
So yea, I re-evaluated my social media activity. (Something I highly recommend doing.) I found that even I got sweep away in the madness of the news cycle, I believed things that contradicted my own knowledge obtained through years of interest in Russia. I decided that adding another voice to everyone else’s screams only compounded the emotional problems of disinformation.
Having searched my conscience and evaluated my skills, I found my time on social media could be put to better use by not adding to the narrative, but by pointing out the unaddressed context of the narrative.
It hasn’t been easy, a writer who writes grand entertaining pieces that connect all the Russian dots is a lot more employable than a writer who voices a “hey, wait a minute” piece.
I contend that I have not always been wise with this approach, but I have attempted to pursue the truth with an absence of hyperbole, diligently sharing my source material pubically, and trying to show humility.
I am keeping an open mind.
Their example of my “criticism” here is illuminating
Adding factual information for context is a problem to these people. I’m not attacking, or criticizing Luke, I have no issues with Luke. He’s respectful to other individuals.
The truth is not what “they” are worried about.
It’s the either-or fallacy
“Anyone who criticizes/corrects/disagrees/attacks [person] credibility is helping the Kremlin.”
The Kremlin doesn’t like Molly McKew, it’s true, but that doesn’t mean McKew should not be held accountable for her words and actions. She is responsible for giving Russia Today the artillery necessary for their articles, not individuals who have nothing to do with Russia Today. Quit blaming independent journalist for Russian propaganda.
The “because I said so” model is only acceptable as a rebuttal by an exhausted parent dealing with their agitating child and no where else.
The above tweet came from Molly just hours before the authors’ posted the slanderous article, which was later removed by Medium for violations of the terms and conditions of publications.
McKew has consistently smeared people for holding her accountable. John, Louise, Eric, all of them, they don’t want their narrative questioned. Two of these people have premium Twitter accounts because… money.
I had been warned numerous times in advance that I would be subjected to this vile type of attention but naively, I was shocked to find out it would drag in creditable professionals who are held with high regard just because we talk on Twitter.
“Wait, Dustin Giebel? Who?
“DUSTIN GIEBEL AND RUSSIA’S CONTROLLED OPPOSITION IN ACTION”
Why is the piece about me? Why am I the headline? Why does a renowned “Information Warfare Specialist,” who’s name has appeared in Politico, Wired, MSNBC, CNN, and who has testified on Capital Hill, feel the need to warn people about my message? I’m literally a nobody to most of the world.
I am a freelance writer who finally gave up trying to make it as a sustainable career earlier this year. I haven’t written in months. She is so above me. She has more followers; she is verified on Twitter, I am not; and I am sure as shit that she makes way more money than me. She shouldn’t even have time for me.
Why would she even care about my critique of her work? Cause it’s true.
It’s because people were sick of being smeared when they asked Molly McKew for her credentials as an Information Warfare Specialist. Inquiring about someone credentials is not attacking someone, that’s the part of the gig. That’s life as an expert. So I did the work.
In March I wrote a Medium post on my findings of McKew’s credentials. McKew’s a former lobbyist, as most people know, but she’s was also a registered foreign agent for longer than she claims. I included the government documents because, you know — basic sources are needed to make those types of claims.
I wrote my article with caution, I wanted people to listen without rejecting it because people like McKew. I measured my tone, I refused hyperbole, and I empathized at one point. Molly never addressed my article. I am well aware that as a nobody, I can’t put myself on a limb with some tripe bullshit, the blow back would be bad — Boy I had no idea the blowback is worse when you bring sourced material.
McKew shared this smeared filled Medium piece twenty-three minutes after it was posted, those who respect McKew shared it. Some pretty well respected people shared it. Which then amplified it to more and more people. I started to receive threats within hours.
Threats to myself. Threats to my wife. Threats to my two-year old daughter. That is some scary shit.
The conspiracy theory people threatening our family immediately make me wonder if they are like the ones motivated enough to hunt down a pizza place in DC because of a fictional story. The people who are responsible for this slander, just happen to be the ones spending a lot of time, repetitively beating the drum of how serious this situation is and comparing to Pearl Harbor.
I guess I should give myself credit where credit is due, I am important enough to be some sort of nemesis of the great Molly McKew. So great, they had to use numerous extremely accomplished people — that I’m not worthy of a comparison too — to smear me as a propagandist. Not because I doxed her family, not because I built some narrative based in fiction, but because I called attention to publicly available information that she feels isn’t relevant. And it is not like my article mattered anyway it was five months old — Molly is still out there — creditable as ever — making everything worse.
Doxing my wife, smearing actual experts, insulting my friends, and rounding up discourse that results in threats will never accomplish the goal of turning the thoughts of McKew, Schindler, Garland, or Mensch into actual facts.
My conclusion from March 1st Article on McKew
“Which leads us to the biggest stumbling block involving McKew and the war on fake news; her network. She is packed with numerous credible supporters that have taken the place of actual credentials.
Big name outlets lean on her as if she was an actual expert, which is causing a plague of misinformation. If she is an expert she is a bad one. If she is not an expert then she shouldn’t comment on things she doesn’t know — she also needs to correct the unforced errors she does make.
The worst part of this is seeing genuinely knowledgeable people treated as jealous halfwits while attempting to correct her misinformation. It’s tiresome.
The media doesn’t see how they’re communicating incentives for being a charlatan. I’ve seen multiple experienced journalist leave this country because their expertise is not appreciated here.
If we do not or cannot remedy this soon, 2018 will become the gracious intro to a more disheartening era to follow.”
