One America News network and the Kremlin’s Sputnik outlet like to spread fake news relating to Syria. At times they do so using the same Russian government front. This effort serves the Kremlin’s interests.
And that’s why One America News network will fail to get the Daily Beast retract a story on OAN’s sometime-synergy with the Kremlin. OAN’s lawyers are making the same demand of MSNBC, which referenced the Daily Beast‘s reporting on a recent episode of Rachel Maddow’s show.
More on the Syria angle in a moment. But first, the legal side of things. To start, let me suggest that the Daily Beast frame OAN’s notice before action letter. Because OAN has about as much chance of succeeding in this effort as matter has to escape the event horizon of a black hole. Assessed against reality, OAN’s claim isn’t just weak, it’s utterly self-destructive.
The story begins with a July 22 Daily Beast report by Kevin Poulsen. In that report, Poulsen outlines the links between an OAN staffer Kristian Rouz and the Kremlin’s Sputnik news network. Poulsen points out that Rouz has been simultaneously working for both OAN and Sputnik, and that Sputnik is a Russian government front organization designed to influence westerners towards the Kremlin’s policy positions. Far more often than not, that means influencing westerners against U.S. interests.
OAN is enraged by this.
Amusingly, however, in their notice before legal action letter (which I have seen), OAN’s lawyers do not factually contradict the central premise of the Daily Beast‘s reporting. Namely, that Rouz works (or did recently work) for both OAN and Sputnik, and that OAN and Sputnik fake news reporting sometimes overlap. Instead, OAN’s lawyers “demand that [the Daily Beast] 1. Immediately cease and desist in publishing defamatory statements about our client, whether the statements are made by you or by third parties; 2. Issue a public retraction of the defamatory statements, making clear that OAN is not [a] paid Russian propaganda…”
OAN’s lawyers give the Daily Beast until August 15 to respond. Again, the Daily Beast should do nothing of the sort. To prove that the Daily Beast‘s reporting is defamatory, OAN’s lawyers would have to prove that the news outlet engaged in actual malice in their reporting. OAN would need to show that the Daily Beast knew they were lying in their reporting or showed reckless disregard for the truth in their reporting.
Ain’t going to happen. Syria is why.
Because as the Daily Beast documents, both Sputnik and OAN have spread Russia-originating fake news on the White Helmets humanitarian organization. That group rescues and recovers civilians injured or killed in Syrian regime or Russian air strikes.
In a recent OAN story, reporter Pearson Sharp relied on a report from a Russian government front organization to claim that the White Helmets have been faking chemical attacks in Syria. What Sharp neglected to mention, however, is that the organization responsible for that report, the Foundation for the Study of Democracy, is a Russian government front. The foundation and its work exist to help Moscow conceal Bashar Assad’s repeated use of chemical weapons in Syria. Hence why the Foundation also features in reports from Sputnik and its sister organization, RT.
Now back to Rouz.
While it’s not clear whether Rouz has engaged in direct OAN reporting on Syria, we should suspect his influence. As I’ve explained, Russia pays its American-based Sputnik employees and contributors so that they have time and space to operate broader Russian influence operations. This effectively allows Russia to double the bang for its active measures buck. I would also note that the Daily Beast reports Rouz was educated at Novosibirsk State University. That’s notable in context of the Daily Beast‘s further reporting that Rouz started writing for Sputnik before he arrived on U.S. soil. Novorsibirsk State University is one of Russia’s finest and thus a favored place for Russian intelligence service recruiting.
But I digress, because this isn’t the first time OAN has pushed Kremlin fake news on Syria. Following a April 2018 chemical weapons attack in Douma, Syria, Perason Sharp — escorted by Syrian regime handlers — declared that the chemical attack had not, in fact, occurred. “The residents told me,” Sharp said with a straight face. He was apparently unaware — as I documented at the time — that the Syrians and Russians had sanitized the attack site. After investigating the Douma attack, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons reported evidence that chlorine had been used there.
I like and respect some of OAN’s reporters, but this fake news effort to cover up war crimes is a disgrace. OAN’s Syria reports here help shield Assad and Moscow from the consequences of their deliberate and ongoing targeting of innocent Syrian civilians.
