Last week we published an article about the bizarre behavior of a prominent writer at the London Times entitled: Creepy London Times Moron Cyber-Stalks Leading UK Russia Expert. It generated a lot of interest and was republished on various sites. As a result, 29 people have contributed almost 700 to a legal crowdfund to sue the writer, Oliver Kamm, and the Times.
So we are happy to bring some more background on the case, first published at RT.com at the end of October of this year.
As if to confirm the sinister implication that Kamm is actually in cahoots (or more) with security agencies, our original article has disappeared from Google search! We've had a handful of people around the world try it. Type in any variation of the title, and the Russia Insider version doesn't appear. The only site it does seem to appear on, the Russophile, doesn've have a working link to the article. So it's been disappeared from the public's collective memory. The search function on RI is also powered by Google, which works very reliably, we use it everyday continuously and never had a problem. But the article about Kamm doesn't appear there either. Hmmm.
Actually this is quite a gift for RI and this case. I ask readers to try yourselves and get back to us in the comments section, and if this is widely confirmed, then we will be delighted to write an article about it - titled perhaps: Hey Google, Why Are You Blocking Our Article About That London Times' Cyberstalker?
It would be interesting to find out who the higher-ups are who are protecting Kamm. Some speculate that is is James Harding, Head of BBC News and Current Affairs, who originally appointed Kamm in the first place. Also interesting is that Kamm has been at the forefront of the neocon/fake-left campaign to discredit RT and get Ofcom to take it off air.
Please head over to the legal fund and drop a few coins in the jar. This story is just getting started.
You see this is the thing about these morons we are up against, they are none-to-bright, and have proven a remarkable talent over the years for just making themselves look ridiculous, shooting themselves in the foot, and all manner of self-destructive behavior, which is why they are losing the public debate rather dramatically. They think the public is stupid - big mistake.
Victory is ours!
Charles Bausman, Editor, Russia Insider
The Times used to be regarded as Britain’s newspaper of record. But in recent years, the historic title, once renowned for its sober and balanced coverage, has morphed into a crude neo-con propaganda organ.
It’s shilling endlessly for US-led wars and ‘interventions’ and attacking - often in the most obnoxious way possible - those who dare to question the War Party narrative. Needless to say, RT - which urges its viewers to ‘Question More’ (a very dangerous thing in an age of Imperial Truth Enforcement) - has been in the Times’ line of fire.
In fact, over one weekend at the end of July and the beginning of August - a time when most normal people turn their mind to things like ice cream, sun loungers and beaches - the Murdoch-owned newspaper ran at least six articles on RT (and attack pieces on Russia’s Sputnik news agency too, making it a total of seven Russian-media-focused hit-pieces in just two and a half days).
These pieces are not just about criticizing RT, which of course everyone has the right to do. They also seem to be about trying to exert pressure on regulatory bodies to go after RT and take action against a channel that doesn’t toe the neo-con editorial line.
One of the articles was an opinion piece claiming that RT was a “fake news channel” which had “no place on our screens”.
The author, one ‘Oliver Kamm,’ has been in the forefront of The Times campaign, and, based on the tone and the general take, might have been the author of otherwise ‘author-less’ introduction editorial to the aforementioned 7-piece Times slam.
Earlier, in October 2014, Kamm wrote a hit piece on the launch of RT UK in which he urged UK media regulator Ofcom to take action against what he called “a den of deceivers”.
This week, he was at it again. One day after the news broke that NatWest was to close RT UK’s bank accounts, Kamm declared in a furious Times column that denying RT a bank account was “the least of the problems we should be making for it”.
“It’s past time that Britain’s civil society, broadcasting regulator and elected government ceased pussyfooting around with RT,” he thundered. Once again, Kamm’s piece made it to a prominent placement on RT UK’s Wikipedia page.
But who is this ‘Oliver Kamm’, the man who sets himself up as a media censor and an arbiter of journalistic standards? Based on my personal experience, he seems to be more an obsessive and extremely creepy cyber-stalker, rather than a journalist.
— Irk Hudson (@IrkHudson)28 сентября 2016 г.
Kamm’s Internet behavior (which involves the relentless hounding of principled anti-war activists) is truly shocking, but no less scandalous is the way that powerful and influential members of the UK’s neo-con establishment, have promoted and protected him.
— @ROBN1980 (@robn1980)3 октября 2016 г.
Having been digitally stalked and defamed by Kamm for over ten years, after I critically reviewed his pro Iraq-war book for the Daily Telegraph in 2005, I decided earlier this month to publish a detailed 6,000 word expose of Kamm’s very disturbing and very vicious stalking campaigns - prior to launching a crowd-funded legal action against him and his employers.
— John Hilley (@johnwhilley)4 октября 2016 г.
Rather than reining Kamm in after detailed evidence of his stalking was presented to them, The Times instead clearly decided to make the ex-banker and hedge-fund manager, who had no background in journalism before he was appointed a leader writer on the paper in 2008, the man to spearhead their attacks on RT.
By doing so, the credibility of the paper has been tarnished still further. Kamm tweets obsessively about RT - denigrating it as a ‘fake’ station that hardly anyone watches.
— Stephen Hildon (@StephenHildon)27 ноября 2015 г.
But if it were true that hardly anyone watches RT, the obvious question is: why does the Times’ leader writer devote so much time and energy to attacking it? The answer is clear: Kamm targets RT not because it’s unpopular, of course, but because too many are watching.
A European Parliament briefing paper from last November admitted that RT had "garnered a huge global audience."
"It is estimated to have 2.5 million viewers in the UK (year-on-year, a rise of 60%) and 3 million in US urban areas, while in South Africa it is by far the largest European news channel."
The paper also conceded that: "Russian-language media broadcast from Western countries do not enjoy the same popularity in Russia as RT does in the West."
Meanwhile, the journalist Glenn Greenwald has noted Kamm’s prominence in the anti-RT campaign and highlighted the double standards involved:
“The most vocal among the anti-RT crowd - on the ground that it spreads lies and propaganda — such as Nick Cohen and Oliver Kamm — were also the most aggressive peddlers of the pro-U.K.-government conspiracy theories and lies that led to the Iraq War. That people like this, with their histories of pro-government propaganda, are the ones demanding punishment of RT for “bias” tells you all you need to know about what is really at play here,” Greenwald wrote.
The good news for those who want to see a media landscape where a wide range of views are heard (and not just neo-con and ’liberal interventionist’ ones officially approved by The Times), is that the attacks seem to have been counter-productive. Establishment gatekeepers who think they have the right to tell us what channels to watch and which to boycott are finding that their influence is on the wane.
RT’s popularity, despite the relentless neo-con campaign against it - or perhaps partly because of it - continues to grow.
In 2014, we were told that the BBC World’s Service feared losing ‘the information war’, because of the expansion of RT.