Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
@bifouba@kolektiva.socialImportant original research on the role of think tanks in manufacturing consent for genocide.
❞ In summary, my research shows that five out of these seven Western think tanks promoted a pro-Israel perspective – although this varied in degree between extreme and more subtle. Pro-Palestinian perspectives were in some instances completely ignored; in other instances, they were marginalised; and in one instance, they were ridiculed. For these five think tanks – the Brookings Institution, the Heritage Foundation, CFR, CSIS, and Chatham House – extensive and continual bias towards Israel was shown even eight months after October 7, 2023. At any time, such bias is reprehensible, but at the time of a genocide it is unforgiveable. Portraying Israel in favourable ways has played a crucial role in silencing pro-Palestinian perspectives, decontextualising the situation, and helping to provide cover for a genocide. The two think tanks that were the most critical of Israel were the Cato Institute and the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), both for very different reasons.
The fact that not all seven Western think tanks promoted pro-Israel bias implies that those that did made a deliberate decision to do so – a decision that would have been made by people in leadership positions, i.e., “gatekeepers”. In this report I show how this happens through the careful curation of what narrative is given dominance via techniques of framing, selective coverage, the omission of relevant facts, and who is allowed to speak by processes of inclusion and exclusion. ❝
https://www.securityincontext.org/posts/hegemony-factories-or-independent-thinkers