Piers Robinson

Robinson has argued that Western news media and their respective governments act in concert, especially in the area of foreign affairs. He puts this down to "overreliance on government officials as news sources, economic constraints, the imperatives of big business and good old-fashioned patriotism". He has said western governments frequently manipulate the media through "deception involving exaggeration, omission and misdirection". As evidence of government use of propaganda he cited Tony Blair's suggestion that the "war on terror" would require a "dedicated tightly knit propaganda unit".[8] In "The Propaganda Model: Still Relevant Today" he examined the propaganda model put forward by Herman and Chomsky and concluded that it is still useful in describing how the corporate media works.[9]

In an opinion piece in The Guardian, Robinson described the UK government's use of the Research, Information and Communications Unit to covertly support grassroots Muslim organisations as an example of black propaganda.[8]

Robinson is known for his work on the CNN effect,[10] a term that refers to the "influence that televised images and news coverage exercise on foreign policy decisions, especially during military interventions and humanitarian crises."[11] In his 2002 book, The CNN Effect: The Myth of News, Foreign Policy and Intervention, he argued that "sympathetic news coverage at key moments in foreign crises can influence the response of Western governments."[12] In Robinson's framework, which focused on "the type of media coverage a crisis attracts and on level of policy certainty within the establishment in relation to the crisis", a strong CNN effect requires two conditions: 1) media coverage that is highly critical of national policy, while simultaneously emphatically reporting on civilians and refugees, and 2) policy makers in a state of indecision with no clear policy regarding use of force. In terms of this framework, Robinson characterised the 1994 NATO intervention in Bosnia that followed the siege of Goražde as exemplifying a strong CNN effect. If either condition is missing, influence on policy makers' attitudes is likely to be weak.[11]

Robinson gave a positive review to 9/11 Unmasked by David Ray Griffin, saying it represents "a serious challenge for mainstream academics and journalists to start to ask substantial questions about 9/11".[13][14] When asked to defend his views, he stated "My position, as has been the case for some time, is that [conclusions detailed in 9/11 Unmasked] demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that significant parts of the official narrative are very likely to be incorrect" and "It is no longer tenable for academics and journalists to avoid asking probing questions about the possible involvement of state actors in the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 requires further analysis and investigation and this is a position I share with many other academics."[14]

Robinson has paid particular attention to the role of the US and UK governments in manipulating intelligence prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq to increase the perceived threat posed by Iraq.[8] Robinson conducted a study of UK media coverage which concluded that most UK mainstream media reinforced official views rather than challenged them.[15]

Robinson and other members of the SPM working group including Vanessa Beeley, Tim Hayward and David Miller have gained considerable attention for disputing the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Civil War[16], most notably in the Douma incident, alleging a coverup by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons[17], and extremist links of the White Helmets[18][19][20], which has led to accusations by The Times newspaper that the group are "apologists for Assad".[21][22][23] The work of the SPM working group on Douma has been endorsed by the Russian Government.[24]

Robinson has argued that there is no persuasive evidence to implicate the Russian government in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and says Russia has been blamed to distract from the West's "aggressive regime change strategy" in the Middle East.[7] He also opines that there is no persuasive evidence showing Russia conducted any significant propaganda campaign to influence the 2016 US Presidential election.[7]

Robinson says that reports of anti-semitism in the UK Labour Party have been exaggerated for political purposes.[7][25]