Reuters Unmasked

I have often written about how Lenin’s work “Party Organization and Party Literature” is still extremely relevant in the modern world, and that an “independent” press simply does not exist today. This has provoked some outright frustration from media outlets who are desperately trying to portray themselves as exactly that sort of “independent” media, but every day more and more facts come out that undermine this idea. “The freedom of the bourgeois writer … is simply masked (or hypocritically masked) dependence on the money-bag, on corruption, on prostitution,” Lenin wrote. Only now, so-called objective journalism doesn’t even take the trouble to imitate professional activity.

Following U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo’s statement that Rosneft continues to buy oil from Venezuela and “continues to throw a lifeline to the regime,” the extremely authoritative and well-known Reuters agency published its “investigation”: “Venezuela skirts U.S. sanctions by funneling oil sales via Russia.” This article isn’t the first time that Rosneft has been presented as an “instrument of the Kremlin,” supporting the sanctioned regime.

The word “investigation” is in quotes because the sources of this information were not disclosed, and there is every reason to believe that it simply does not correspond to reality. Rosneft made a statement in which it called the Reuters article a blatant lie, designed to provoke Rosneft. “Reuters,” the company stated, “has stopped operating as an agency and a source of public information. The organization is systematically engaged in the creation and dissemination of targeted misinformation, the validation of rumors in the interests of its clients, and inventing press events designed to inflict damage on the Russian economy, Russian companies and the Russian state. In essence, these actions are informational sabotage. We consider it necessary to turn to law enforcement agencies in order to prevent the illegal activities of this pseudo-agency on the territory of the Russian Federation.”

This statement seems pretty harsh (especially if you consider the reputation that Reuters has built over the decades) and yet after a few days, Reuters published corrections to the news story. The agency was unable to confirm that the payments were made according to the scheme stated in the original version of the article. The journalists were unable to determine that the republic received money from the sale of oil through Rosneft (bypassing U.S. sanctions) and clarified that experts do not see any sanctions violation. “This is an unprecedented admission that we were correct in our evaluation, at least when it comes to this publication,” said Rosneft spokesperson Mikhail Leontyev.

When you get right down to it, what we are talking about here is that Reuters isn’t living up to its reputation when it comes to verifying facts. Moreover, I’ve noticed that the agency’s publications and the decisions of the U.S. administration on new sanctions are absolutely synchronized. For example, when Reuters wrote—based, as always, on the opinion of unnamed sources—that “Siemens turbines delivered to Crimea despite sanctions,” the United States soon imposed sanctions against Power Machines.* After the introduction of sanctions against Oleg Deripaska’s companies, Reuters immediately published material that describes how these companies circumvent sanctions.**

The tactic of politicizing the activities of Russian companies has been used by Reuters since the beginning of this Venezuelan epoch. The agency tried unsuccessfully to prove that the Maduro government was using Gazprombank to circumvent U.S. sanctions. Against the backdrop of escalating pressure through sanctions from the United States, the agency published a series of articles, the purpose of which was to emphasize how Russia was closely connected with Caracas and was deliberately ignoring the restrictions that had been imposed.

When you get right down to it, in matters related to Russia, Reuters operates unilaterally. The agency essentially does not publish neutral news on Russian topics. Its goal is to inflict as much harm as possible on the Russian state, and to have new sanctions imposed on Russian businesses. This is primarily due to geopolitical conflict and competition in the global market.

As a result, we end up with journalists who are engaged in the creation and dissemination of misinformation, the validation of rumors, and fictional press events. All of the above suggests that Rosneft’s call for the termination of Reuters’s operations is quite reasonable. This time, I do not think that such a decision will be made. But the fact that this issue is, as they say, on the agenda, is beyond a doubt.

As for the most recent article on Venezuela, it seems as though the journalists have been advised to temporarily back down. With the exacerbation of conflict over sanctions with Iran, it looks like the United States does not want any extra headaches at the moment. But in future, when it will be decided at the political level to play the Venezuelan card against Russian companies, the Reuters agency can calmly return to this topic and recall once again the sources that it now renounces.

*Translator’s note: Power Machines is a Russian energy systems manufacturing company, and is implicated in the Reuters article regarding the Crimean sanctions violation.

**Translator’s note: Oleg Deripaska is a Russian oligarch and was one of 24 Russian nationals subject to U.S. sanctions in 2018 due to a variety of allegations.