CounterSpin

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260911.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). HarperCollins (2006) This week on CounterSpin: Some 3,000 people died when planes hit the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. One hundred twenty-five people died at the Pentagon in Virginia, and at least 265 people were killed—passengers and crew—on the planes used to carry out the attacks. It was a day of horror and grief. But then it became an excuse for more horror and more grief, inflicted “in the names of” people who were no longer here to say whether that was what they would want. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is currently striving for relevance by declaring that current Mayor Zohran Mamdani should not attend commemorative ceremonies. We hear about what Giuliani did when he was mayor with a 2007 interview with Wayne Barrett, then senior editor at the Village Voice and co-author, with Dan Collins, of Grand Illusion: The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260911Barrett.mp3 Broadleaf Books (2023) Also on the show: Giuliani isn't alone in saying that New York city's mayor should stay away from anything to do with September 11, 2001, because, because, well because, you know! The same reason no Germans are allowed in the Holocaust Museum. And no white Americans are allowed in the South. Hatred, fear, accusations against Muslims have been around forever, but some people—and some media—leapt on that day's crime to use as cover for a bigotry they always harbored, now free to weaponize wherever they chose. CounterSpin talked about Islamophobia many times with writer and organizer Maha Hilal, author of Innocent Until Proven Muslim: Islamophobia, the War on Terror and the Muslim Experience Since 9/11. We hear just one of those conversations this week. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260911Hilal.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent press coverage of Donald Trump’s sanity. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260911Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260904.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). CCR (7/30/26) This week on CounterSpin: No humor intended: Listening to this show might make you a domestic terrorist. Yes, the Trump White House is trying to make anyone a “terrorist” who speaks out publicly, or co-signs silently, against their plans or policies. That for sure means anyone who signs up on lists in support of outlets like this one, that make such dissent a core concern. At a time where we're being told that speaking out in criticism of those in power is a crime, we need news media that do more than just narrate that nightmare. But that's not what we have. The net is widening; which side are you on? Samer Araabi is the associate director of political education and research at the Center for Constitutional Rights. He wrote recently about how Trump is employing “counterterrorism” as an effort to target anyone who dissents at all in the face of the stuff they're doing. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260904Araabi.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent coverage of modern-day lynching, erasure of history and the lethal impact of targeting immigrants. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260904Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260828.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). New Republic (8/24/26) This week on CounterSpin: Corporate news media obscure it, almost like it's their job, but we still understand that laws and policies land on differently situated people differently. I can believe that there are millionaire congressmembers who genuinely cannot imagine pushing through a sickness, or ignoring a health concern, because they can't afford the doctor visit…people who haven't even ever waited for an appointment, or struggled to fit it around a work schedule. But that's the reality of millions of us, most of us. So current corporate media talking about how universal care, or Medicare for All, is, as Forbes magazine puts it, “a brand, not a plan”? Media who elitesplain that “oh, you don't want to live in Canada, just trust me on that”? They don't speak for the most of us, who just want to see a doctor, in a regular way, please. But they can speak OVER us. We'll talk about Medicare for All—and the things you're likely to read about it—with Abdullah Shihipar, public health researcher and writer, from the Brown University School of Public Health. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260828Shihipar.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at press coverage of press pool censorship and “reverse surgery.” https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260828Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260821.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). New York Times (8/15/26) This week on CounterSpin: The US news media marked the anniversary of August 2021's nominal withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. A New York Times story explained that Taliban flags were “flying high along the streets of Kabul,” but that the deeper truth is that “the Taliban are holding Afghan society in a chokehold that spares no one.” But, the paper alleges, “The Taliban know the world wants a stable Afghanistan—one that isn't a source of refugees, drugs or terrorism.” I don't have enough breath to describe the hypocritical fantasizing in that sort of statement. But CounterSpin has hosted numerous reporters, researchers and activists over the course of the decades of devastating US intervention in Afghanistan—which did not, in fact, suddenly and righteously begin in the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks. We'll hear some of those conversations this week. And I will say, there has been some attention rightfully paid to the abandonment of Afghans who, at great danger to themselves, helped US troops, and who are now treated as yet more brown hordes seeking to sneak into the US. But those historical, human rights–based conversations are being overwhelmed by storylines like that from the Times, that talks about Afghanistan's “fragile peace” being “already at risk,” every bit as though the United States hasn't played a monumental role in making that peace impossible. And while we're reimagining history, please recall Dan Rather, on David Letterman on September 17, 2001, describing his definition of his job as journalist: “George Bush is the president, he makes the decisions, and, you know, as just one American, if he wants me to line up, just tell me where.” We're going to hear from Phyllis Bennis from the Institute for Policy Studies; from Matthew Hoh, senior fellow with the Center for International Policy; and Sonali Kolhatkar, host/producer of Rising Up With Sonali, and author—most recently—of Breaking ICE: Community Defense Against State Terror and MAGA Fascism. And there is much more about Afghanistan on FAIR.org. Phyllis Bennis: https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260821Bennis.mp3 Matthew Hoh: https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260821Hoh.mp3 Sonali Kolhatkar: https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260821Kolhatkar.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260814.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Al Jazeera (8/12/26) This week on CounterSpin: It was not a shock when Donald Trump's Justice Department greenlit the merger of Paramount—owned by the scion of the Trump-adjacent Ellison family—with Warner Bros Discovery. Who cares if a single entity (that loves Donald Trump and all he stands for) controls a vast empire of the movies, cable TV and streaming services we have access to? It turns out a lot of people care, and that's why the merger, presented as a done deal weeks ago, is actually on the ropes. We'll get a state of play from Jessica Gonzalez, co-CEO of the public advocacy group Free Press. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260814Gonzalez.mp3 Extra! (12/08) Also on the show: A sitting congressperson stated publicly: “Every single Muslim holding public office in America is a Trojan horse, and a threat to both national security and our republic. We refuse to be silent.” The fig leaf, if there were one, is off. Folks are just out here saying all Muslims (well, except for Dr. Oz) are devils, criminals, evil—and woe betide anyone who doesn’t sign up for that perverse, hateful view. News media could declare such racist, ignorant, ahistorical, anti-democratic—did i say racist?—they could call all that out, and remove anyone spouting it from respectful public conversation. But: We have the media we have, so people who hate Muslims because they're Muslim have a seat at the grown-up table, and a microphone. Islamophobia in media is not new. It wasn't new when FAIR produced a report about it in 2008. We'll hear today a conversation we had around that report, which we called Smearcasting: How Islamophobes Spread Fear, Bigotry and Misinformation, with former FAIR staffers Isabel MacDonald and Steve Rendall. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260814MacDonald_Rendall.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260807.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). CT Mirror (7/30/26) This week on CounterSpin: If you look for media coverage about the Farm Bill that's currently passing through Congress, you can find it–at sites like agriculture.com or agri-pulse.com, or those outlets that have “ag” sections. If you look for coverage of SNAP, the largest food assistance program in the country, you can find that lots of other places. And while some of those headlines are about “Deadbeat Parents” and “SNAP Fraud,” these days many more say things like “Nearly 19K State Kids Have Lost SNAP Benefits Over Past Year” (that's Connecticut) or “Illinois Launches New Program to Provide Food Benefits to People Who Lost SNAP,” or “Small Grocery Stores Cutting Inventory, Considering Layoffs as SNAP Dollars Decline.” Overwhelmingly, local reporters are documenting how cuts to SNAP are hurting people and communities. But the lack of major media stories linking the program to the Farm Bill seem somehow emblematic of the opacity around this country's lawmaking on critical questions around food. We get an update from Gina Plata-Nino, director of SNAP policy and advocacy at the Food Research & Action Center. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260807Plata-Nino.mp3 Also on the show: People who rely on food benefits programs have long been a punching bag for both right-wing ideologues and their corporate media enablers. Claiming people working full time jobs that don't provide enough to feed their families are really just grifters living high on your dime is a time-honored tactic, no matter how far it falls afield of reality. We talked about that last year with the president of Food Research & Action Center, Crystal FitzSimons; we add a little of that conversation as well. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260807FitzSimons.mp3

60 Minutes announced a batch of new hires to replace a number of staffers fired by CBS network commissar Bari Weiss, with the most prominent addition being longtime conservative New York Times columnist Ross Douthat (Washington Post, 7/28/26). 60 Minutes executive producer Nick Bilton—brought in by Weiss from Vanity Fair—called Douthat “one of the preeminent public intellectuals in America today, a thinker of uncommon rigor and a journalist of deep empathy.” FAIR has been chronicling Douthat for a while now. Here’s some of the outstanding examples we’ve catalogued of his “empathy” and “rigor.” That Silly Commentariat Ross Douthat was far from alone (Extra!, 6/16) in his confidence that “Donald Trump isn't going to be the Republican nominee” in 2016, as he declared in the (New York Times (1/7/16). Douthat was a bit more confident than most in the accuracy of his crystal ball: “The entire commentariat is going to feel a little silly when Marco Rubio wins every Republican primary,” he predicted on Twitter (9/25/15). Defending ‘Juan Crow’ ICE agents killing Alex Pretti (Texas Public Radio, 2/1/26). Ross Douthat (5/2/10) criticized those who were “impugning the motives” of an Arizona immigration law that has been denounced as a “Nazi” or “near-fascist” law, a “police state” intervention, an imitation of “apartheid,” a “Juan Crow” regime that only a bigot could possibly support. But the Arizona law, Douthat argued, was just a response to the federal government's failure to “regain…control of its southern border. There is a widespread pretense that this has been tried and found to be impossible, when really it's been found difficult and left untried.” Real “control,” he suggested, would involve “enforcement measures that will inevitably be criticized as draconian: some kind of tamper-proof Social Security card, most likely, and then more physical walls along our southern border.” As FAIR noted at the time, actually trying to purge some 11 million residents from the country would involve measures that would be draconian by any standard. Douthat wrote that his vision of “control” would require “shared sacrifice from Americans accustomed to benefiting from cheap labor”—an acknowledgement that forcing millions of workers out of our economy would be serious hardship for those who remain. “You can see why our leaders would rather duck the problem.” Douthat wrote. As FAIR (5/3/10) responded at the time, “Yes, you can see why politicians don't want to destroy the lives of millions of people in order to worsen the economic condition of hundreds of millions.” We Need More Babies—No, Not Those Babies Ross Douthat (New York Times, 3/27/21). Ross Douthat has long been obsessed with the so-called “baby bust” (FAIR.org, 2/7/23). The columnist (1/21/23) argued that those worried about climate change are naively missing the real threat: a “population bust” that will result in “a zero-sum struggle between a swollen retired population and the overburdened young.” It's highly debatable that a population bust is even an economic problem—and it's certainly not an unsolvable one (CEPR, 1/17/23). But assuming the primacy of a population crisis allows Douthat to upsell his conservative wishlist: namely, reducing entitlements for the aging and ending abortion (New York Times, 1/21/23, 12/14/22). The global population is actually expected to continue growing for at least another 25 to 50 years, as Douthat acknowledged when he noted that the population of Africa could triple by the end of the century. But Douthat sees Black and brown people not as solutions, but as part of the problem. If “even a fraction of this population” migrates, he warned, the balance between successful assimilation on the one hand, and destabilization and backlash on the other, will help decide whether the age of demographic decline ends in revitalization or collapse. His baby bust obsession is clearly grounded in xenophobia and white nationalist anxieties.  In Europe, he argued (10/1/22): The preferred centrist solution to both economic stagnation and demographic diminishment, mass immigration, has contributed to Balkanization, crime and native backlash—even in a progressive bastion like Sweden. He was even more blunt in a column (10/20/18) headlined “Fear of a Black Continent”—subtitled “Why European elites are worrying about African babies.” In it, Douthat warned of the dangers of increasing African migration to Europe, but said that  attempts to slow the African birthrate would be “cruel”—so, instead, anyone who hopes for something other than destabilization and disaster from the Eurafrican encounter should hope for a countervailing trend, in which Europeans themselves begin to have more children. If that sounds like eugenics, that’s because it is. Pelosi’s World—and Ours “Pondering what [Democratic House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi and her compatriots are rejecting gives us a pretty good sense of what they're for,” Ross Douthat (11/14/10) wrote. Part of that nightmare vision was “a world where the Social Security retirement age never budges, no matter how high average life expectancy climbs.” Douthat seemed unaware that the “retirement age” had already been rising when he wrote that for seven years; since 2003, every year-long cohort of retirees has had to wait two more months  to reach what’s called “full retirement age.” These “budges” continued until 2026, with the “full” retirement age now 67 (FAIR.org, 11/15/10). Get the Iraq War Wrong the Right Way Matt Damon in Green Zone. Offering a critique of the Iraq War drama Green Zone, Ross Douthat (3/14/10) offered a “narrative of the Iraq invasion, properly told,” that ended with: And you had Saddam Hussein himself, the dictator in his labyrinth, apparently convinced that pretending to have WMD was the best way to keep his grip on power. This was based on the popular but evidence-free notion that Saddam Hussein fooled the US into thinking he still had chemical and biological weapons (Extra!, 1–2/04, 5–6/04). As FAIR (3/15/10) wrote, “Needless to say, when you're complaining that a fictional film isn't factual enough, you want to make sure that your facts aren't fictional.” (As a college student, Douthat was also wrong about the Iraq invasion in real time, writing in the Harvard Salient—2/14/02—that Saddam Hussein “is busy trying to acquire a nuclear bomb, to supplement his extensive collection of biological and chemical weaponry.”) Repeal Roe and We’ll Stop Killing Doctors Dr. George Tiller Ross Douthat (6/8/09) blamed the murder of Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider, on Roe v. Wade: “By enshrining a near-absolute right to abortion in the Constitution, the pro-choice side has ensured that the hard cases are more controversial than they otherwise would be,” he wrote: One reason there's so much fierce argument about the latest of late-term abortions—Should there be a health exemption? A fetal deformity exemption? How broad should those exemptions be? —is that Americans aren't permitted to debate anything else. Douthat offered what he presented as a compromise: “If abortion were returned to the democratic process, this landscape would change dramatically,” because arguments about whether and how to restrict abortions in the second trimester—as many advanced democracies already do—would replace protests over the scope of third-trimester medical exemptions. What would women gain from losing their bodily autonomy? The result would be laws with more respect for human life, a culture less inflamed by a small number of tragic cases—and a political debate, God willing, unmarred by crimes like George Tiller's murder. As FAIR (6/12/09) noted, Douthat’s compromise was: Allow states to criminalize abortion, and anti-abortion fanatics will stop murdering doctors. ‘A Little More State Regulation’ KFF (4/27/26) Ross Douthat (4/2/21) maintained that “abortion foes actually have good reason to feel unsettled and uncertain rather than triumphant” about the  6–3 majority Republicans had installed for them on the Supreme Court: It's extremely easy to imagine the end of Roe leading to a little more state regulation over all (mostly limitations in the second trimester, along the lines of many European countries), but then for the few states that go further to find themselves boycotted and besieged, leaving the goal of ending abortion nationwide as far away as ever. When Douthat wrote that, ten states had trigger laws that would ban abortion the moment Roe was overturned (FAIR.org, 5/19/21). As of 2026, 17 states have near-total bans on abortion. Homophobia Not a ‘Structural System of Oppression’ xkcd (10/8/14) In a column urging the courts to stay out of the “difficult and personal” decision as to whether or not to discriminate against gay couples, Douthat dismissed the obvious parallel to discrimination against interracial marriage (New York Times, 4/4/15): This isn't a structural system of oppression, a society-wide conspiracy like Jim Crow; we're talking about a handful of shops across the country. It seems possible, and reasonable, to live and let live. Not a “structural system of oppression”? Same-sex sexual activity was illegal in every state until 1962, and the Supreme Court upheld such bans in 1986 as reflecting “millennia of moral teaching.” When the Supreme Court struck down the criminalization of gay sexuality in 2003, 13 states still had anti-“sodomy” laws on the books. During the Cold War, the US government purged thousands of gay men and lesbians from the military and other government posts because, as a 1950 Senate report had it, “those who engage in overt acts of perversion lack the emotional stability of normal persons.” Only in 2011 could gays and lesbians begin to serve openly in the armed forces.This is what FAIR (4/6/15) described as “a concerted, structural, systemic effort going back generations to marginalize and punish homosexuality”—brushed aside by Douthat as “a handful of shops across the country.” Pope Benedict ‘Looking Good’ While Covering Up Child Abuse Pope Benedict Ross Douthat (4/11/10) cited the reporting of Jason Berry (National Catholic Reporter, 4/6/10), who criticized Pope John Paul II for his support of Marcial Maciel Degollado, a child molester who founded the influential Legion of Christ. But Douthat spun it as a positive story about John Paul’s successor: Only one churchman comes out of Berry's story looking good: Joseph Ratzinger. Berry recounts how Ratzinger lectured to a group of Legionary priests, and was subsequently handed an envelope of money “for his charitable use.” The cardinal “was tough as nails in a very cordial way,” a witness said, and turned the money down…. It was Ratzinger who re-opened the long-dormant investigation into Maciel's conduct in 2004, just days after John Paul II had honored the Legionaries in a Vatican ceremony. It was Ratzinger, as Pope Benedict, who banished Maciel to a monastery and ordered a comprehensive inquiry into his order. The problem with this testimonial is that Ratzinger was first informed about Maciel's pattern of abuse in 1994. The cardinal’s reported response: Maciel’s case was a “touchy problem” due to the “benefits” he had brought to the Vatican. “One can't put on trial such a close friend of the pope as Marcial Maciel,” Ratzinger was later quoted. “It was Ratzinger who persuaded John Paul, in 2001, to centralize the church's haphazard system for handling sex abuse allegations in his office,” Douthat wrote, offering this as evidence of Ratzinger’s zeal to persecute child-abusing priests. Unmentioned was the letter Ratzinger wrote in 2001 threatening to excommunicate any bishop who discussed abuse cases outside of the church's legal system (Extra!, 7–8/08; FAIR.org, 5/13/08). Nor did Douthat cite Ratzinger’s assertion that attention to clerical molestation amounted to a conspiracy against the Catholic Church (Zenit, 12/3/02): “I am personally convinced that the constant presence in the press of the sins of Catholic priests, especially in the United States, is a planned campaign.”

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260731.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). NPR (7/16/26) This week on CounterSpin: “In Primetime Speech, Trump Doesn’t Provide Evidence for Illegal Voting” was the temperate headline NPR put on a story about Trump's recent East Room speech that, they allowed, “included many baseless claims” about election integrity. They told us that “many of the documents the White House posted online during the speech did not appear to fully support sweeping claims the president made,” and even got to the point of calling his contention that he won the 2020 election “a lie.” What the story didn't do was show, with urgency, how voting in the upcoming midterms and beyond will be materially affected by the use of state power to promote ideas that they're saying are, yeah, for sure, not true. Obstacles to voting don't have to be valid to have impact. Black people know that better than anyone. And it isn't just Trump's lies, that media keep repeating, even as they call them lies; the Supreme Court's June decision in Louisiana v. Callais makes the terrain different, in ways people need to understand and confront. Vincent Southerland is associate professor at New York University School of Law, where he directs the Criminal Defense and Reentry Clinic. He's faculty director of NYU Law's Center on Race, Inequality and the Law, and co-editor of Race, Rights and Redemption: The Derrick Bell Lectures on the Law and Critical Race Theory. We talk with him this week on CounterSpin. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260731Southerland.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent press coverage of the Gaza genocide. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260731Banter.mp3 Featured image: San Francisco voting rights activists, 1956 (Frances Albrier Collection)

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260724.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Nine of the Prairieland protesters received sentences ranging from 30 to 100 years; one received a 30-year sentence for moving a box of zines. (Photo: DFW Support Committee) This week on CounterSpin: Are you upset about ICE agents using your tax dollars to detain and deport people because they have a quota to fill – and to kill anyone who doesn't “comply”? Are you bothered by women losing not just the right but the ability to access abortion for whatever reason they might have? Do you care that fossil fuel-created climate disruption is rearranging the planet?  Well, my friend, you might be a terrorist. Last September, Trump issued a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM-7) that added a whole lot of folks to a list of “domestic terrorists”. All of us are now officially, by challenging or questioning the Trump White House and their acolytes, “the enemy within.” When Trump pushed through NSPM 7 last fall, folks like Hina Shamsi at the ACLU told us: it's a scare tactic – “domestic terrorism organization” as applied to a wide range of groups that are, in the memo's language “anti-americanism, anti-capitalism, anti christianity” does not create new federal crimes or powers. The president, even if it's Trump, cannot rewrite the Constitution. Which, Shamsi explained, doesn't mean it isn't scary, despite being a “fever dream of conspiracies, outright falsehoods and the president's distorted equation of criticism of his policies by real or perceived political opponents with ‘criminal and terroristic conspiracies'. We have to stand up where we can, how we can, right now. And right now could have started years ago but it can at the least start with getting prison time for moving zines.  We'll talk about the Prairieland case and what it means for you, with Dorothee Benz, who wrote recently about it all for FAIR.org https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260724Benz.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260717.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Maine Monitor (7/15/26) This week on CounterSpin: Protests are ongoing in southern Maine, where Joan Sebastián Durán Guerrero was killed by an ICE agent on July 13. The Maine Monitor says folks are “expressing rage, fear and questions about what occurred.” Protestors also showed up at Houston City Hall, calling out ICE operations there that killed Lorenzo Salgado Araujo. Houston Public Media said: Each speech inside the council chambers was echoed by the raucous chants of dozens of protestors outside who stood for hours during the public comment session, making demands for accountability and transparency. Here in Manhattan's Foley Square, one protester told NY1: “I think it's gone past the point of we need to abolish ICE. I think we need a thorough investigation and, if appropriate, trials, prosecutions.” Said another: “For me, this past week is a reminder that we should all be out here.” Corporate media are narrating this nightmare, but do their, will their questions ever go deep enough to drive actual change? Right now, the focus seems heavy on the notion that we need to “humanize” the victims of racist state violence, rather than challenge the humanity of those who enact it. (Oh, but you'll be happy to know Snopes is on top of the question of whether Joan Sebastián Durán’s three-year-old daughter actually saw her father be shot to death by state agents. Don't want to get it twisted.) We talk about ICE murders, and the bigger system that encourages and absolves them, with Lauren Bonds, executive director of the National Police Accountability Project. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260717Bonds.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent press coverage of Lindsey Graham’s death and the war on Venezuela. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260717Banter.mp3

People worry the war on Iran has pushed the Gaza genocide out of corporate media's attention. But media outlets make their own choices about what to present.

Corporate news reporters whistle past a Trump administration directive advising states to ignore policies that integrate disabled people into communities.

Do you disagree with anything that the Trump administration is doing? Do you think you should use your voice to say something? Well, you might be a terrorist!

Is there an AI bubble? How would we know? A new project engages questions, not just about price-to-earnings ratios, but about the predictable impacts.

We'll have a conversation about what's happening at Delaney Hall, ICE's New Jersey detention center, and the bigger systems and structures in back of it.

Data centers are very much brick and mortar—despite press coverage that suggests that artificial intelligence all happens in the ether somewhere.

The New York Times‘ obituary (5/18/26) for former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman quotes him saying that “policemen never get the benefit of the doubt.” The racism of Mark Fuhrman, the Los Angeles police detective whose involvement in the O.J. Simpson murder investigation helped sink the prosecution's case, was so well-known comedian Dana Carvey once mocked him with a Nazi salute, calling him “Mark the Fuhrer-man.” Fuhrman's death this month (New York Times, 5/18/26) took middle-aged and older Americans back to 1995, when the televised trial of Simpson, accused of murdering his ex-wife and her friend, dominated media for much of the year. During the trial, audio recordings and witness testimony revealed Fuhrman's use of the n-word and other racist views, sinking his credibility as the cop responsible for recovering the “bloody glove,” the key piece of evidence tying Simpson to the killings. Because he had previously testified that he never used the word, it opened an opportunity for the defense to suggest he wasn't honest about other things—and had a motivation to frame a Black celebrity. Unrelenting racism In July 2017, CNN‘s Kyra Phillips played new excerpts from the Fuhrman tapes. The tapes portrayed hours of unrelenting racism. “All these n*****s in L.A. city government…all of them should be lined up against a wall and fucking shot,” he said. And often sexism as well: “What if I’ve just been raped by two buck n*****s, and a female shows up?” During the trial, witness Kathleen Bell testified that Fuhrman had said, “If I had my way, all the n*****s would be gathered together and burned.” Bell told the court, “When he sees a Black man with a white woman driving in a car, he pulls them over,” with no traffic violation needed (Washington Post, 9/5/95). Fuhrman became the national representation of the American racist cop. He invoked the Fifth Amendment when questioned about his handling of evidence (LA Times, 9/7/95), offering the shadow of a doubt the jury needed to acquit the former football and movie star. In his fiery closing argument, defense attorney Johnnie Cochran characterized Fuhrman as “this perjurer, this racist, this genocidal racist.” Fuhrman pleaded no contest to a perjury charge a year later (CNN, 10/2/96). But there was something bigger about Fuhrman, and it's something we can deeply feel in the media environment today. ‘Unwitting catalyst’ Mark Fuhrman interviewed in ESPN‘s OJ: Made in America (2016). The legal “dream team” Simpson assembled certainly focused on pushing the jury for an acquittal—that's a defense lawyer's job. But as outlined in both the dramatized The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story on FX and ESPN's OJ: Made in America, defense lead Cochran also built a larger case for a larger audience. (Side note: FAIR's Janine Jackson briefly appears in the ESPN documentary in a segment about media coverage of the trial.) Nicole Brown Simpson was killed at her Los Angeles home, along with Ron Goldman, on June 12, 1994, just two years after the city was engulfed in racial rioting as a result of an acquittal of police officers who had been videotaped brutally beating a Black man, Rodney King. For much of America, the rioting was a dividing moment. Civil rights activists saw it as the explosion of a powder keg under pressure of decades of tension between LA's Black community and the cops. A great deal of white America saw the rioting as an inexplicable overreaction. Press voices had their doubts too. Newsweek (5/10/92) called the looting “a manic fiesta, a TV game show with every looter a winner.” Cochran set out to change the narrative, to demonstrate to the white public that Black Los Angeles has systemically suffered from racist policing. Ben Ehrenreich (Guardian, 4/22/20): “The thousands of African Americans who migrated to Los Angeles from the Jim Crow south had found similar cruel realities awaiting them.” In Set the Night on Fire, Mike Davis and Jon Weiner outline the ongoing war against the Black community by LA cops in the 1960s, erupting in the 1965 Watts riots. From the Guardian‘s review (4/22/20): LA's police make dramatic appearances in almost every chapter, clubbing peaceful protesters, brutalizing activists and killing so many Black men, and with such absolute impunity, that Davis and Wiener's claim that “the Manson gang were bit players compared to the forces of law and order” ends up feeling more than fair. In the authors' telling, the wanton violence of the police acted as a consistent if unwitting catalyst to historical change: It was the chaos that followed a ferocious LAPD assault on anti-war protesters that added to Lyndon Johnson's decision not to run for re-election in 1968, and the LAPD's murder of a Black Muslim named Ronald Stokes—seven other Muslims were shot in the same incident—that pushed Malcolm X towards a broader vision of Black liberation. The shared experience of LAPD violence, Davis and Wiener write, forged a “common culture of resistance” among Black and Chicano youth, white hipsters and anti-war activists, and the city's gay community. This situation hardly improved with the economic turmoil of the 1970s, or the reactionary retreat of the 1980s. For many Black Angelenos, the 1992 riots weren't about one videotape, but about this entire history. Cochran had an opportunity to reveal the situation in the early ’90s to America. And with Fuhrman, who was called by the prosecution to bring the bloody glove into evidence, Cochran was able to show a feverishly racist man at the center of this investigation. ‘Kill somebody and go have some chicken’ Sean Hannity (Hannity, 1/10/23) interviewing Pam Bondi (then a former Florida attorney general) and Mark Fuhrman. In the end, Simpson was acquitted, and Fuhrman became a symbol of a divided America. It’s quite telling that the disgraced cop later found a landing place on Fox News. The Murdoch media empire created the news network the year after the Simpson trial as the antithesis to what it claimed was a liberal slant in corporate television news. Bringing on Fuhrman as a recurring guest—and, later, giving him his own show on Fox Nation—didn’t just promote his own public rehabilitation, it foretold a shift in “acceptable” discourse on right-wing TV. Fox‘s Greta van Susteren (5/19/05) defended having him on as a frequent guest: Mark happens to be a very, very, very smart detective—one of the best I have ever worked with and I have worked with many. He really thinks about the investigations we book him on the show to discuss. But Fox was attracted to Fuhrman not by his smarts, but by his hate. The racism that spilled out in the Simpson trial—Fuhrman's animosity toward the people who he was sworn to protect and serve—catered directly to the Fox audience. Another Fox star that routinely showcased Fuhrman was Sean Hannity (Extra!, 9/13). On Hannity & Colmes (11/16/06; cited by Media Matters, 11/20/06), Fuhrman asserted that the the type of “people” he “dealt with … for 20 years” will kill somebody and go have some chicken at KFC. You will catch them eating chicken and drinking a beer after they just murdered three people. He added that “these people are out there. They’re all over the place.” In another appearance, Hannity (Hannity, 7/16/13) brought the ex-cop on to speculate on whether Black people would riot if George Zimmerman were found not guilty of murdering an unarmed Trayvon Martin in Florida. “Mark, it seems to me like it's going to be a dangerous scenario for the cities where this is going to occur,” said Hannity. Fuhrman replied, “I think you're right, Sean,” and proceeded to fantasize about protesters “assaulting people, assaulting officers, so when you cross that line, it's pretty obvious, and, you know, this is completely drawn on racial lines now.” ‘They just take more and more’ “You can always find something that doesn’t look like justice was served one way or another,” Mark Fuhrman tells Megyn Kelly (and right-wing novelist Brad Thor) on Fox‘s Kelly File (7/8/16). Fuhrman had nothing but contempt for the Black Lives Matter movement erupting in Ferguson, Missouri. He told Fox News' Megyn Kelly (8/10/15): Stopping traffic is not a lawful demonstration. Stopping pedestrians is not a lawful demonstration.  Stopping regular traffic on sidewalks in front of buildings. That is not lawful demonstrations. And they should enforce it. And you know, when you allow some kind of, you know, leeway, they just take more and more. And now we have people that are not on the city council and they’re not on the police department, no matter how represented the Black community is. They are not there. You’re dealing with gang members and street drug dealers that are just hanging out. They’re armed and they’re taking advantage of a hesitant police department. How did Fuhrman respond to a video of “a white school police officer in a Columbia [South Carolina] classroom grabbing an African-American student by the neck, flipping her backward as she sat at her desk, then dragging and throwing her across the floor” (New York Times, 10/26/15)? He made the officer a saint on Fox. Media Matters (10/27/15) quoted Fuhrman: He requested her. He verbally did that. The next level is he put a hand on her. She escalated it from there. He used soft control. He threw her on the ground, he handcuffed her. He didn’t use mace. He didn’t use a Taser. He didn’t use a stick. He didn’t kick her. He didn’t hit her. He didn’t choke her. He used a minimal amount of force necessary to effect an arrest. In 2019, he attacked Democratic presidential hopefuls for their police reform rhetoric on the Ingraham Angle (8/2/19), saying those politicians were looking to win “that 18-to-25-year-old base that is involved in all these movements—these anti-government, anti-establishment, anti-republic, anti-Trump” movements. He eventually was given his own show on Fox News spinoff Fox Nation, the Fuhrman Diaries, which ran from 2018 to 2022. (Fox promoted him as “America's most controversial detective”—LA Times, 11/29/18.) ‘Total reputational annihilation’ Just because someone lied under oath about using racial slurs dozens of times doesn’t mean they should be canceled (Wall Street Journal, 5/20/26)—and by “canceled,” we mean given their own TV show. People can and do change over time. Fuhrman gave a somewhat nuanced view on Fox News (Ingraham Angle, 5/29/20) about the police killing of George Floyd, which resulted in widespread political unrest. He called Floyd's killing “a slow-motion homicide,” and said the video footage was “a slow and really painful thing to watch of somebody grinding somebody’s face into the pavement until they’re dead.” At the Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal, columnist Matthew Hennessey (5/20/26) christened Fuhrman a victim of cancel culture, admitting that he was a “bad cop,” but that he was among the first to suffer the total reputational annihilation that has become a hallmark of life in the digital era, where everything you say—or have ever said—will one day be used against you in the court of public opinion. It’s a strange sort of “reputational annihilation” that gets you regularly showcased on a national cable TV network, and then gives you your own show. Fuhrman’s afterlife as a commentator foretold a media conservatism that flips the narrative about racist policing on its head, where prejudice becomes a sign of expertise. It’s a legacy we live with today in MAGA America, even with Fuhrman having departed this world. Research assistance: Priyanka Bansal

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260529.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). New Republic (3/10/26) This week on CounterSpin: It's a safe bet that a majority of US citizens know that “we” are currently at “war” with Iran. I am equally confident that very few people could explain why. Or what “war” means. Or what it has to do with their day-to-day life, much less how it could possibly make it better. That's a problem of this boldly anti-intellectual administration, and the, let's say, incurious posture of so much of US corporate news media—the ones tasked with telling the truth and letting the chips fall where they may. We have alternative sources of information, that we need to seek out and support, perhaps no time more importantly than when “we” are “at war”—when not only US lives, if that's all you care about, are at risk, but also many other human lives, as well as the standing of the United States on the world stage (which evidently is super important to many supporters of this war.) Why is the US at war with Iran? What is the hoped-for outcome? Who is hoping for it? And will we hear from any of the millions who got something they didn't hope for? Annelle Sheline is research fellow for the Middle East at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. We hear from her this week on CounterSpin. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260529Sheline.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260522.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Texas Tribune (5/20/26) This week on CounterSpin: You may have seen videos of college commencement speakers telling students who've spent time and money learning how to read, write and think critically that that was dumb, cuz AI is going to be doing that from now on, so just get on the train or else—wait, why are you booing? That's far from the only disconnect between students and teachers who think higher education means engagement with a range of perspectives, and right-wing politicians and their administrative acolytes saying “not so fast.” We'll hear from Karma Chávez, professor at the University of Texas at Austin, at the center of this assault on academic freedoms. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260522Chavez.mp3 CEPR (3/10/26) Also on the show: There is a US State Department memo that calls for “a line of action which, while as adroit and inconspicuous as possible, makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.” Thing is: That memo is from 1960. So while Trump is making everything old, new—and ugly and violent—again, he isn't inventing it all. We try not to do media criticism by counterfactual, but consider: What if another country were cutting off resources to the US, in an explicit effort to cause us misery, in hopes that would make us overthrow our government? We'll talk about what sounds reasonable as long as it's about Cuba with Alex Main, director of international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260522Main.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260515.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). FIFA, the governing body of association football, concocted a “FIFA Peace Prize”—described as recognizing “individuals for exceptional contributions to peace and unity”—in order to award it to Donald Trump. Alongside revelations of deep-seated corruption—collusion, bribery—involving official bodies and executives, and now ticket prices for this year's World Cup being called not just excessive but “extortionate,” you might say more folks are “following” football (or soccer) these days, but not necessarily as fans. OR Books (2026) Sports has always been a big part of news media, but typically segregated into its own section on stats and personalities, ignoring the economic, social and environmental impacts sports have always had. Think about cities enticed into building new arenas with promises of jobs and commerce that never arrive. Or whole communities uprooted for temporary “Olympic Villages.” Jules Boykoff has been following the relationships of sport and society for years now; he's a former professional soccer player himself, as well as a critic and writer, now teaching political science at Pacific University. He's author of a number of books, including What Are the Olympics For? (Bristol University Press, 2024). He joins us to discuss his latest: Red Card: The 2026 World Cup, Sportswashing and the FIFA Greed Machine, out now from OR Books. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260515Boykoff.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look back at recent press. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260515Banter.mp3 Featured Image: Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260508.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Media Matters (11/16/23) This week on CounterSpin: In 2023, the group Media Matters reported that social media platform X was placing ads for major brands like Apple and IBM alongside content touting Hitler and the Nazi Party—despite the claim of X's CEO that brands are “protected from the risk of being next to” toxic posts on the platform. Musk threatened a “thermonuclear lawsuit” against Media Matters for reporting the truth, and many in state and federal government were happy to take that work on. Three years and several court cases later, Media Matters announced victory in what wound up being Media Matters v. Federal Trade Commission. The case and the victory are not just hopeful but instructive, offering what the group calls a “roadmap” for other newsgathering and nonprofit organizations facing, or at risk of, government retaliation. We hear about the case and the outcome from Media Matters president Angelo Carusone. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260508Carusone.mp3 Washington Post (4/19/23) Also on the show: Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the dominant method of abortion in the US has become mifepristone, particularly as it can be administered by telehealth, without the need for an in-office visit. But now Louisiana, which has a near-total abortion ban, sued the FDA over telehealth, and though it got support from a federal appeals court to block remote prescription, a visit by the drug's makers to the Supreme Court led to a temporary stay on that. As the debate continues, we revisit a conversation we had a few years ago with Rachel K. Jones, principal research scientist at the Guttmacher Institute, who knows more than most about mifepristone. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260508Jones.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260501.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Yahoo Finance (4/25/26) This week on CounterSpin: A CNN headline a few months back told us that Instacart—which used to call itself a company that delivers groceries, but now, as its CEO told investors, is the “leading technology and enablement partner for the grocery industry”—was now using AI to “Gauge Customer Price Sensitivity.” “Price sensitivity” apparently means whether or not you care that you pay more for the same can of beans as another person—or, to be more clear, whether or not you notice. While some states look into banning it, so-called algorithmic or “dynamic” pricing is being presented by the corporate press as a fait accompli, the only question remaining being how to make sure consumers understand that they have no choice. We'll hear more from investigative reporter Derek Kravitz, from Consumer Reports. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260501Kravitz.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look back at press coverage of the White House Correspondents Dinner attack. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260501Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260424.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). NHLC (3/24/26) This week on CounterSpin: From the federal level on down, many laws and policies that claim to be about “ending homelessness” seem to be clearly more about hurting homeless people than changing their circumstance. Even if you, or anyone you know, has never been unhoused: How hard is it to understand the difference between charging poor people monetary fines they obviously can't pay, and then throwing them in jail when they don't—and addressing homelessness with, oh I don't know, housing? That would be a commonsense conversation, about what resources we have and how we deploy them; but instead we see power actors, with the support of the White House and the Supreme Court, telling us that “ending homelessness” means tearing up people's tents, throwing away their belongings; a new law in Kentucky says officials can use “stand your ground” laws to shoot homeless people that don't “cooperate” with their eviction from private or public land. So: Is this really about addressing homelessness? Because we know how to do that. And if it's not: What is it about? And can we have an honest conversation about that? Jesse Rabinowitz is the campaign and communications director at the National Homelessness Law Center. We hear from him this week. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260424Rabinowitz.mp3 Marijuana Moment (12/18/25) Also on the show: You may think weed is “legal” because you see so many people smoking it on the street. Including your grandma and your next-door neighbor who just a few years back would've called the cops. But just as the criminalization of marijuana affected different communities very differently, the current supposed de-criminalization continues to comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted. Though that is not at all the understanding you would get from a casual view, or for that matter from media coverage that makes it seem like the debate over weed is all over, and now we're all just talking about which strain is the best. Maritza Perez Medina is director of federal affairs at the Drug Policy Alliance. She joins us to talk about what the “rescheduling” of marijuana does and doesn't do. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260424Medina.mp3 With both homelessness and drug policy, it's useful to see how many current legislative measures, with a cultural backwind from corporate media, are fooling people that things have changed, while actually things are still harming the people who have always been harmed. So these moves are not something to “tweak”; we need conversation and action based on a different understanding of why things are as they are, and of how things can be.

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260417.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Inequality.org (3/4/26) This week on CounterSpin:  Tesla reported $5.7 billion in US profits in 2025 and paid $0.0 in taxes. As Rebecca Crosby and Judd Legum at Popular Information report, there's little mystery to this miracle: Tesla used corporate tax breaks, proffered by Trump and co. in what reporters with straight faces call the “One Big Beautiful Bill”—including 100% bonus depreciation; and they exploited a long-standing deduction for executive stock options. At least 88 profitable corporations have reported paying $0 in federal income taxes last year, according to the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy. Citigroup, CVS, Walt Disney—they “made” billions but, weirdly it turns out, they somehow owe the federal government bupkis, whereas you and I are playing a chump's game, evidently. Cheaters cheat, grifters grift, but why do news media label companies “successful” when that success stems from cheating and grifting and, crucially, shafting their workers? Sarah Anderson directs the Global Economy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies and co-edits the site Inequality.org. She's written a new report that gets to the heart of America's “Low-Wage Employers and the Affordability Crisis.” We hear from her this week. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260417Anderson.mp3 Fight for the Future (4/13/26) Also on the show: The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine is a nonprofit digital library with the fundamental mission of preserving web pages. For example, a union organizer used it to look up old job listings and check how what the company says it offers has shifted over time. When police edited a press release after a journalist reported on it, and then said her report was false, she was able to prove that the department had changed their statement. It's kind of Information 101. But it's under threat. We hear about that from artist and activist Lia Holland, campaigns and communications director at the group Fight for the Future. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260417Holland.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260410.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). New York Times (4/8/26) When a president commits war crimes, including what the Nuremberg trials established as the “supreme international crime” of plotting and waging an aggressive war, as Trump has done, and then blithely threatens more war crimes, as Trump has done, you would hope major news outlets would do much more than type up reports, like one from the New York Times, on how Trump currently “faces new diplomatic tests.” It’s important to call out Trump and his enablers' particular hatefulness and weirdness, but we’re missing something if we don’t see how they've been pulling on pre-existing threads, making use of old narratives that have proven useful before and left unexamined. We'll hear about that from Sina Toossi, senior nonresident fellow at the Center for International Policy. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260410Toossi.mp3 Defending Rights & Dissent (4/6/26) Also on the show: What can you do about a president like Trump? No, really: What can you do? Impeachment is often talked about in the press as a mean thing that partisan officials threaten each other with, but it was intended as a genuine response to presidents who were deemed unfit for public office. More and more people are saying unto shouting that about Trump now; so what next? We'll hear from activist/author Chip Gibbons, policy director at Defending Rights and Dissent. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260410Gibbons.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260403.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). USA Today (4/1/26) This week on CounterSpin: In Chiles vs. Salazar, the Supreme Court ruled that Colorado's law prohibiting health practitioners from employing the widely discredited practice of trying to “convert” young people from their sexual orientation or gender identity violates healthcare workers' First Amendment rights.  We'll hear about what the ruling does and doesn't do, and how news media might better explain it, from Shannon Minter, legal director at the National Center for LGBTQ Rights. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260403Minter.mp3 Local News Day Also on the show: April 9 is Local News Day, a new project aimed at lifting up the value of truly local news outlets in an increasingly consolidated media landscape. Alex Frandsen helps lead a group, the Media Power Collaborative, that's looking to forge a way forward that draws on the particular value of local news, to communities and those representing them, and that doesn't involve revisiting an imagined past age of benevolent media giants. We'll hear from him as well on the show. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260403Frandsen.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260327.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Good Jobs First (3/23/26) This week on CounterSpin: Sunshine Week, based on a popular statement from Louis Brandeis that “sunlight is the best disinfectant,” is an effort to spotlight open government and its importance to the public's right to know what's being done in our name. The Michigan Press Association usually honors a public official who advances open government, but this year they said they're giving no award because “this year's legislative and policy landscape does not reflect the progress or commitment to openness that the award is designed to celebrate.” Ooof. So Sunshine Week, introduced decades ago by the National Association of Newspaper Editors, is meant to be both a celebration and a call to arms. To information advocates—and to journalists who should be natural partners with anyone seeking to bring the actions of the powerful to light. We talk about it with a group that stays on top of government transparency; Arlene Martinez is deputy executive director and communications director at Good Jobs First. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260327Martinez.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at Washington Post prices, the actual cost of oil, the Cuba blockade and Breonna Taylor. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260327Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260320.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Truth Social (3/14/26) This week on CounterSpin: Those not in vigorous denial understand that we in the US are in the midst of not just “foreign” wars—today on, most prominently, Iran—but also a war against our ability to talk about it all, to dissent from it, to hear from people who have different ideas about ways forward. It doesn't seem too much to say: If we cut off our ability to have a widespread public debate, whatever “solutions” we're told “we” came up with have nothing to do with democracy. We'll hear from FAIR editor Jim Naureckas about what news media could call, if only they would, “the Trump administration vs. the First Amendment.” https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260320Naureckas.mp3 Just Security (3/17/26) Also on the show: US news media told us that the images of Iraqis tortured at the infamous “hard site” in Abu Ghraib have been “seared into the American consciousness.” That would imply that those US news media were genuinely interested in the horrors meted out at the Iraqi prison where the CIA and the Army committed what Wikipedia comfortably calls a “a series of human rights violations and war crimes against detainees.” Those media would surely want all of us “consciousness-seared” people to know what was being done to answer for it all, to bring people to account, to make sure it never, ever happened again. (That shouldn't sound like a joke.) The Center for Constitutional Rights has been in back of the last remaining lawsuit on behalf of victims of Abu Ghraib; and, though you might not have heard about it, they won. We'll get the update from Baher Azmy, legal director at the Center for Constitutional Rights. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260320Azmy.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260313.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). New York Times (3/10/26) This week on CounterSpin: House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Brian Mast declared of Iran: “This murderous regime has posed an imminent threat against every American both at home and abroad for the last 47 years”—leading many at home and abroad to reach for their dictionaries. The Trump White House's war on Iran is unpopular in the US: “Even the highest level of public support for this conflict falls far lower than that at the start of most other conflicts, including World War II, the Korean War and the Iraq War,” reports the New York Times. That may have something to do with the parade of rationales offered; Popular Information has a roundup of the 17 different reasons the Trump regime has given to date for why we went to war. All of it normalized by corporate media that allow recorded history to be put up for debate, that pretend we haven't seen what we've seen, leaving today's warmongers free to draw up a historical narrative, or several, that serve their present purpose. As we record on March 12, some 251 groups have sent a letter to Congress demanding they vote against any additional funding for the unconstitutional war, now costing an estimated $1 billion a day. Signers included Public Citizen, the ACLU, Greenpeace, J Street, Jewish Voice for Peace and National Nurses United. A supplemental worth $50 billion, the letter notes, would be enough to restore food assistance for 4 million Americans, establish universal pre-K education and pay for the annual construction of more than 100,000 units of housing. CounterSpin has been tracking US news media failings, omissions and propagandizing on Iran for decades. We revisit some of that conversation this week, hearing from Cyrus Safdari (2009), Vijay Prashad (2012), Murtaza Hussain (2017) and Trita Parsi (2018).

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260306.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Column (3/4/26) This week on CounterSpin: As a radio producer, you get pitches; to paraphrase one we got this week: Dear Janine, the United States and Israel launched attacks on Iranian military targets and leaders this weekend. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei was killed, as were key Iranian leaders.  President Trump is urging Iranians to rise up and overthrow the regime…. What will the impact be on the economy? On Wall Street?  What does this mean for markets and investors going forward? We were then offered a guest who will tell listeners that “concerns about the attacks causing economic chaos are overblown…. The markets will panic initially and then stabilize.” And, most importantly, “this ends the uncertainty that was impacting the markets over Iran…. If American and Israeli objectives are met, it could lead to dramatically reduced gas prices long-term.” No mention of parents in Minab, who dropped their daughters off at school March 3 and now have to bury them. What's losing a child when we’re talking about you maybe—or maybe not—paying less at the pump, amirite? It would be one thing if it were a guy at the end of the bar, but we have official “smart people” news media instructing us on how we should think and feel about attacks—paid for with our sometimes important “tax dollars”—raining horror on Iranians whose crime is that they didn't overthrow their disapproved leadership. Ask yourself if you want that to be the criterion for violent aggression around the world. It's hard to parse US corporate news coverage of the attacks on Iran if you aren't willing to let go of the idea that might does not, in fact, make right—along with your ideas about what a better world could look like. That's why we grow our critical faculties, and support media outlets that, whatever else they do, don't tell us that the US and Israel killing Iranian children is just something to consume with your breakfast cereal. Gregory Shupak is an academic and activist, as well as author of The Wrong Story: Palestine, Israel and the Media from OR Books. We talk with him about the US war on Iran this week on CounterSpin. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260306Shupak.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260227.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). American Prospect (2/23/26) This week on CounterSpin: US news media don't show a serious interest in history generally, as you can see from many outlets' pretense to offer “all you need to know” about current events in a matter of minutes. In the case of the Trump administration, presenting US history through media is important and relevant—as long as Trumpists are fully in charge of who defines what happened and what it means. So when Trump-appointed FCC chair Brendan Carr—he who attacks basic anti-discrimination measures in media, and overtly threatens the licenses of outlets determined insufficiently deferential to right-wing powers on the daily—says, “I believe in the greatness of our country,” you're of course right to beware. And all the more when he adds that he's “looking forward to broadcasters showcasing the country's inspiring history” by taking a pledge that he's drawn up, committing to do the right thing with regard to America's 250th birthday, for which the White House has big plans. But the man actively orchestrating interference-unto-cancellation of talk shows deemed guilty of “improper ideology” wants us to know that participation in the pledge, by the media outlets under his regulatory control, is “voluntary.” If you didn't already understand how vital is an understanding of US history, rooted in who's allowed to tell it, you would suspect it from this White House's ham-handed efforts to twist and erase and shout over it. There's a screaming void that journalists could be working to fill. Some are, some aren't. But as we look to encourage a rising up of people in response to the anti-democratic juggernaut, we can remember the words of Ida B. Wells: “The people must know before they can act, and there is no educator to compare with the press.” We talk about attacks on, and defenses of, our ability to learn and learn from this country's history with Naomi Bethune. She's the John Lewis Writing Fellow at the American Prospect. She’s featured this week on CounterSpin. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260227Bethune.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at coverage of Trump’s “Board of Peace.” https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260227Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260220.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Center for Independent Documentary This week on CounterSpin: CNBC, a news outlet, brought viewers the news that Cuba has suspended its annual cigar festival. The postponement, if you wondered, “comes as the island nation's Communist-run government endures its biggest test since the collapse of the Soviet Union.” Assured you've heard both “Communist” and “Soviet Union,” the “biggest test” bit has a link to another CNBC article, same writer, headed “What'sNext for Cuba? Trump Turns the Screws as the Island Runs Out of Jet Fuel.” Now take a breath: Why does Donald Trump get to punish Cuban people? Why is it cute to talk about “turning the screws”? Can other countries “turn the screws” on the United States if they don't like the US and its “capitalist-run” government? And above all: When did illegal actions carried out with the express intent of causing misery for other human beings living in other countries become blah blah blah? The Trump White House is openly trying to harm the Cuban people, and US media are openly trying to sell that to us as something to root for. Reed Lindsay has been reporting and making documentary film in and about Cuba for more than a decade. We hear from him on what you likely won't be hearing from corporate media. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260220Lindsay.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look back at press coverage of the Rev. Jesse Jackson. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260220Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260213.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Mother Jones (2/11/26) This week on CounterSpin: Trump and congressional Republicans are pushing for changes to the electoral process that would make it harder for millions of people to vote, and some media are still presenting it as a matter of “election integrity.” Voter advocates describe things like the Save America Act as aiming to make the US into a “show us your papers” dystopia. That bill likely won't make it out of the Senate, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be sounding the alarm, loudly, about the various multi-level efforts this White House is pursuing to take control of elections away from the people. We hear that worrisome and enraging story from Ari Berman, national voting rights correspondent for Mother Jones, and author of Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America, among other titles. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260213Berman.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent press commentary on Iran. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260213Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260206.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). The Nation (2/3/26) This week on CounterSpin: “What do you call a ceasefire agreement under which people keep dying? That is the question the people of Gaza have been asking themselves for the past few months.” And it's the question that kicks off a new issue of The Nation magazine, which they call “A Day for Gaza.” Since a “ceasefire” was declared four months ago, Israel has killed, very conservatively, 420 Palestinians. More than 70,000 overwhelmingly Palestinian people have been reported killed in Gaza since October 7, 2023, including more than 300 journalists and media workers. This is without mentioning the destruction of more than half of all religious and cultural sites in the Gaza Strip. The UN has reported Israeli soldiers recording videos in which they mock Palestinians and Palestinian education, before destroying schools and universities. If it ended today, the loss of life, and home, and culture, and history in Palestine would take countless years to reckon, if it could be reckoned at all. But here in the US, we're being told by media that the conflict is winding down, because there's a ceasefire in effect; and we are to interpret all events going forward in those terms. That pretense is mainly expressed through a simple drop in coverage, which by itself says, “Not so much to see here anymore, time to move on.” As an interrogation of and a pushback against the suggestion that because powerful people's words have changed, there is no longer a desperate, attention-worthy crisis in Gaza or for Palestinians, The Nation lifts up the voices of Palestinians themselves, as a kind of intervention into a media conversation that presents Palestinians as subjects—sympathetic or not, depending on the story—more often than as actors, who have the basic right to determine their own future. The issue was edited by writer and translator Rayan El Amine. We hear from him this week on CounterSpin. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260206El-Amine.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at the arrests of journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260206Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260130.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Free Press (1/26/26) This week on CounterSpin: There are reports that people out in the street opposing ICE abductions of their neighbors are chanting, “We're not cold, we're not afraid. Minnesota made us brave.” Around the country, people who never called themselves “political” are moving out of their comfort zone to register their opposition to violent, state-sanctioned power being unleashed on their communities in the service of racist authoritarianism. The spark is the murders by ICE of Keith Porter, Renee Good and Alex Pretti—that's just this year—but the resistance in Minneapolis isn't sprouting from nowhere; it has roots. Corporate news media evince little understanding of the kind of local, neighbor-to-neighbor communication and connection that has existed for decades, and that today is pulling people together across race, gender, age, class, religion lines in Minneapolis. That's just one way elite media remove themselves further every day from the conversations people want to have. But elite reporters could at least use their proximity to power to talk about what the state and corporate forces are doing to try and squelch the growing resistance, including basic rights you'd hope journalists would care about, like that of people to witness actions carried out with their money and in their name. Our guest put together a report on how “DHS Is Expanding Domestic Surveillance While Targeting Efforts to Document and Dissent.” Jenna Ruddock is Advocacy Director at the group Free Press. We hear from her this week on CounterSpin. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260130Ruddock.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at press coverage of the Minneapolis clampdown, and at the lack of recent coverage of Gaza. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260130Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260123.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies (1/19/26) This week on CounterSpin: In 1967, when Martin Luther King came out against the Vietnam War, and called the US the “greatest purveyor of violence in the world today,” corporate news had nothing but emphatic condemnation. Life magazine called that speech “demagogic slander that sounded like a script for Radio Hanoi.” And the New York Times sniffed in a way today's readers will recognize, writing that when King argued that the war on Vietnam is “a barrier to social progress in this country,” he fused “two public problems that are distinct and separate. By drawing them together, Dr. King has done a disservice to both.” The elite press corps that now pretend they honor King show that they never heard, much less understood, him or the totality of his vision—or that of those that share that vision today. That's the space that the coalition headed by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies is stepping into with their new report: State of the Dream 2026. We'll hear from Joint Center president Dedrick Asante-Muhammad. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260123Asante-Muhammad.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent press coverage of Kalaallit Nunaat. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260123Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260116.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Fox 9 (1/15/26) This week on CounterSpin:  Headlines today on January 15: “North Minneapolis ICE shooting: Children Hospitalized After Flash Bang, Tear Gas Hits Van.” And from the official Homeland Security website: “ICE Announced the Arrest of More Worst of the Worst Criminal Illegal Aliens From Across the Country, Including Those Convicted of First-Degree Rape of a Child, Homicide and Arson.” So did the hospitalized children commit the rapes, homicides and arson? Is that why they were attacked? Or are we supposed to just muddle it all together, so that we now think “immigration equals crime”? What happens if we do that? What would happen if we didn't? We'll hear from Setareh Ghandehari, advocacy director at Detention Watch Network. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260116Ghandehari.mp3 TNG-CWA (1/15/26) Also on the show: We see reporters being physically attacked by purported “law enforcement,” and criminalized and threatened by the federal government, as they just try to do their job of witnessing and reporting the actions of powerful state actors. At the same time, we see corporations telling us that journalists aren't really important; AI can do whatever it is that they do. And if a newspaper doesn’t make the quarterly profit that shareholders have said they want, well, what more evidence do you need? The closure of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette will mean a lot to people. But who will be brought on to speak on the meaning of the shutdown, and where it fits with other predations on our right to know what is happening around us? We'll hear from Jon Schleuss, president of the Newspaper Guild-CWA. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260116Schleuss.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260109.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). AP (1/6/26) This week on CounterSpin: For millions of people around the globe, the US under the administration of convicted felon Donald Trump has acted—it's beyond “illegal”; it's sort of “a-legal,” as if laws meant nothing—they've kidnapped the leader of a sovereign nation, and declared that Trump will henceforth “run” that nation. If you think flagrant bullying, Mafioso, might-makes-right behavior is what international law is created to combat, and basic human decency is designed to reject—you would be supported by the majority of the world's people. But alas, you live in the US and rely for your world view on US media, and thus you are fed authoritarian apologies disguised as disinterested analysis, like that from AP's headline on January 6: “Trump's Vague Claims of the US Running Venezuela Raise Questions About Planning for What Comes Next.” Because, you see, the problem about Trump's claim that his weirdo government will now run the country of Venezuela isn't that that is crazy with a capital K, but that Trump “has offered almost no details about how it will do so.” Nation of Change (1/5/26) Our conversation and understanding of our political power is so warped that even a thoughtful piece from Nation of Change says: “The White House has not explained how it intends to legally justify the detention of a foreign head of state, the reported civilian deaths, or the long-term scope of a military “quarantine” designed to coerce a sovereign nation.” When we really need to accept that they will just not justify it, and will simply declare that anyone who asks for justification is a terrorist. And news media will report that as one side of a two-sided argument. As a CounterSpin guest said recently: “The cavalry is not coming. You're it.” We'll talk about the Venezuela invasion, as neither a beginning nor an end, with Michelle Ellner, Latin America campaign coordinator of CODEPINK. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260109Ellner.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at media coverage of ICE’s murder of Renee Good. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260109Banter.mp3 Featured Image: January 4 rally in Caracas protesting the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro (photo by Rome Arrieche via Venezuelanalysis—1/5/26).

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin260102.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). The Best of CounterSpin for 2025 features Silky Shah on mass deportations, Gregory Shupak on the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, Paul Offit on RFK Jr.’s pro-virus policies, Karen Thompson on policing pregnancy, Erin Reed on anti-trans pseudo-science, Farrah Hassen on criminalizing homelessness, Mumia Abu-Jamal on unheard stories and Tom Morello on music as protest. We call it the “best of,” but, as always, we are deeply thankful to all of the activists, researchers, reporters and advocates who appear on the show. These are just a few of the void-filling conversations it's been our pleasure to host in the last year. 2025 was a rough one; we appreciate everyone who helps us stay informed, forward-looking and in communication. Featured Image: Top row: Silky Shah, Gregory Shupak, Paul Offit and Karen Thompson; second row: Erin Reed, Farrah Hassen, Mumia Abu-Jamal and Tom Morello

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251226.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). AAPF (10/25) This week on CounterSpin: After every police killing of a Black person, every announced policy singling out Black immigrants as the cause of crime and disorder, every declaration, like that from Arlington National Cemetery, that as of now materials on Black and female service people will be scrubbed from the website—we hear from corporate media about how, boy, this country is for sure “reckoning” with “racism.” But then: If we reckoned with racism every time elite media claimed this country was “reckoning” with racism, seems like we ought to be fully “reckoned” by now. US corporate media have a white supremacy problem (and you see how that term lands differently than “racism”): They decide who they think, and hence you should think, is worth talking to, based on an accepted conflation of power with worthiness. They decide whose ideas are taken for granted and whose deemed marginal, and they tell us how to define progress: Is it moving toward actual equity, or just things quietening down? Who needs to be reassured, and whose lives is it OK to disrupt, whose basic humanity is it OK to question, day after day after day? A new report titled Anti-Blackness Is the Point, from the African American Policy Forum, engages this age-old if ever-morphing narrative. Kimberle Crenshaw is a leading legal scholar and justice advocate, the force behind the transformative ideas of intersectionality and critical race theory. She's co-founder and executive director of the African American Policy Forum, as well as a professor of law at both Columbia and UCLA. We talk with Kimberle Crenshaw this week on CounterSpin. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251226Crenshaw.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at nonprofits and diversity, equity and inclusion. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251226Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251219.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Truthout (12/8/25) This week on CounterSpin: Forbes reports the Starbucks workers strike as you might expect: “The company claims it already offers the ‘best job in retail.’ … Yet the union is demanding….” “The company says, ‘We're ready to return to the bargaining table whenever the union is.’ But as of yet, the union is holding out for the company to present a contract that meets demands….” You get the idea: One party is generous, the other is ornery. But even Forbes has to acknowledge that even as the strike “drags” into a second month, “global support grows.” Derek Seidman has been following the strike. He's a writer, researcher and historian who contributes to Little Sis and to Truthout, where he recently reported on the Starbucks strike and…what Walmart has to do with it? https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251219Seidman.mp3 Politico (12/17/25) Also on the show: Sen. Bernie Sanders is the latest to join a broad group of more than 200 environmental and economic justice advocates that just sent a letter to Congress, calling for a moratorium on the construction of new data centers, the energy sources powering the boom (and, as some would say, predictable bust) of artificial intelligence, until, as Sanders says, democracy “has a chance to catch up.” Turns out as people learn more, opposition grows, and so, Politico notes, “The industry is taking out ads and funding campaigns to flip the narrative and put data centers in a positive light—spinning them as job creators and economic drivers rather than resource-hungry land hogs.” The letter to Congress was spearheaded by Food & Water Watch. We'll hear from the group's deputy director, Mitch Jones. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251219Jones.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at press coverage of Bondi Beach. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251219Banter.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251212.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). Popular Information (12/8/25) This week on CounterSpin: If you see no problem in news outlets reporting on desperately horrific conditions in Gaza, and what various political entities are doing or could do to address them, while a ticker at the bottom of the screen offers you an opportunity to gamble—for money—on whether or not “famine” in the region will be officially declared, this episode is not for you. We're learning about the deal just struck by “news” outlets CNN and CNBC with the “prediction market operator” (evidently what we're calling them now) Kalshi Inc. We'll hear from Judd Legum—founder and author at the newsletter Popular Information—and from author and analyst Adam Johnson, of Substack‘s the Column and the podcast Citations Needed. Judd Legum’s interview: https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251212Legum.mp3 Adam Johnson’s interview: https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251212Johnson.mp3

https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251205.mp3 Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”). CEPR (12/2/25) This week on CounterSpin: A militarized US Drug Enforcement Administration force declared they'd taken out drug traffickers in the Caribbean, killing some of them in what was sold as a successful operation. Locals on the ground reported differently, saying these people weren't drug traffickers, just human beings who happened to be on the river and got shot up by US forces who were not attacked, as they claimed, but just killed innocent people because they were given orders to kill them. It should sound familiar—but this isn't today in Venezuela; it's 2012 in Honduras. An inspector general review from the State Department and the Justice Department found that, no, this was not a Honduran operation, or a “joint operation” the DEA were helping with; it was a DEA operation, and it killed four innocent people and injured others in a remote, Afro-Indigenous part of Honduras. The story that the DEA pushed on Congress and the press corps was just a lie. But you’d hardly know that history reading current coverage of Honduras, where, as we record on December 4, the presidential election is still in question. Not in question: the US's long history of intervening—violently, dramatically, unaccountably—in Honduras. We'll talk about it with Alex Main, director of international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251205Main.mp3 Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at media coverage of the murder of Amber Czech. https://media.blubrry.com/counterspin/content.blubrry.com/counterspin/CounterSpin251205Banter.mp3

Focusing on what people, including those most harmed, are doing, along with what's being done to them, could help move debate off an outdated dime.

What if SNAP weren't a story about major political party back-and-forthing, and were instead a story about people who need food?

Housing and home ownership represent a critical vector in the project of a multi-racial democracy.

The argument is so specious a third grader could call it out. But if it comes from the Supreme Court majority, we are forced to consider it as serious.

News media need to locate the climate fight in the boardrooms of greedy people perversely trying to wring every last dime from our shared future.

Corporate reporters scratch their heads over how this bombing campaign might be legal, rather than discussing what tools can respond to wildly illegal actions.

We're in a fight for our right to speak up, and out—but it's not the first time.

Coverage of the conversion therapy case left out scientific and legal information necessary to understand what's at stake for LGBTQ youth.