I think this debate is about a lot more than پیلوت or خلبان.
A smear campaign would be something like, getting a panel together to claim TOLO news or a member of Tolo wrote Sirajuddin Haqqani's NY Times piece. Oops.
As for funding...
A smear campaign would be something like, getting a panel together to claim TOLO news or a member of Tolo wrote Sirajuddin Haqqani's NY Times piece. Oops.
As for funding...
Most internet-based sources suggest TOLO received large chunks of funding from US govt AND Rupert Murdoch.
That is problematic for several reasons, firstly it raises perceptions of bias when the whole projected is funded by a foreign govt, secondly...
That is problematic for several reasons, firstly it raises perceptions of bias when the whole projected is funded by a foreign govt, secondly...
Murdoch has a well-documented history of campaigning for certain candidates and tarnishing others using his media conglomerate.
He has successfully overturned govts he disagrees with. Latest was the Turnbull govt in Australia.
He has successfully overturned govts he disagrees with. Latest was the Turnbull govt in Australia.
Given the potential for such conflicts of interest, it is natural that people will question the impartiality of TOLO news and where it will replicate the behaviour of its main financial contributor.
And the point she made was more to do with having a neutral publicly-owned and public serving new agency than a smear campaign against TOLO.
The alternatives are either govt mouthpieces or private conglomerates pursuing 'hidden' agendas.
The alternatives are either govt mouthpieces or private conglomerates pursuing 'hidden' agendas.
