Living Marxism

From Vero - Wikipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Short description Template:Italic title Template:For Template:Redirect Template:Use British English Template:Use dmy dates Living Marxism was a British magazine originally launched in 1988 as the journal of the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP). The magazine attracted attention for denying both the Rwandan genocide and Bosnian genocide. Rebranded as LM in February 1997, it ceased publication in March 2000 following a successful libel lawsuit brought by ITN over Living Marxism's criticism of ITN's coverage of the Bosnian war.<ref name="BBC-15-March-2000">"ITN wins Bosnian war libel case". BBC News. 15 March 2000</ref><ref>Template:Cite news</ref> It was promptly resurrected as Spiked, an Internet magazine which has been called libertarian, with the majority of specialist academic sources identifying it as right-libertarian (some non-specialist sources identifying it as left-libertarian).<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref name="Knowles">Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="auto">Template:Cite web</ref>

History

It was published by Junius Publications Ltd until 1997, and then by Informinc Ltd.<ref name="the Guardian 1999">Template:Cite web</ref> Its editor, Mick Hume, an American Studies graduate from Manchester University then aged 29, said: "Our readers are young, angry, thinking people."<ref name="the Guardian 1999"/> At its peak in the 1990s, it had a circulation of between 10,000 and 15,000.<ref name="Hepworth 2022 pp. 591–621">Template:Cite journal</ref>

Aims

Living Marxism's introduction summarised its outlook as follows: Template:Blockquote

Views

Views expounded with regularity in LM included "fear culture", for example by questioning the then media coverage of AIDS as a predominantly homosexual disease in the West. Its critique covered media coverage in Africa and the developing world in the context of Western intervention, underdevelopment and poverty. It debated environmentalist claims that limiting consumption was a progressive view.Template:Citation needed

LM writers criticised the media portrayal of the civil wars in Rwanda and Bosnia and disputed that either Serb or Hutu forces committed genocide during those conflicts. In 1993, LM published an exhibition titled "Genocide against the Serbs" which juxtaposed images of Serbs killed in World War II-era crimes with Serbian soldiers killed in battle during the Yugoslav Wars.<ref name=Hoare>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite news</ref> In 1995, LM published an article by Fiona Fox arguing that:<ref>Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Chris McGreal, "Genocide? What genocide?", The Guardian, 20 March 2000</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Template:Blockquote

Historian Marko Attila Hoare criticised their genocide denial in relation to both the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides.<ref name=Hoare/>

It has been suggested by environmentalists such as George Monbiot<ref>Monbiot, George (9 December 2003). "Invasion of the entryists". The Guardian (London).</ref> and Peter Melchett that the group of writers associated with LM continue to constitute an LM network pursuing an ideologically motivated anti-environmentalist agenda under the guise of promoting humanism.<ref>Melchett, Peter (19 April 2007). "Clear intentions". The Guardian (London).</ref><ref>Profiles: Martin Durkin, LobbyWatch. Retrieved 17 April 2007.</ref> Writers who used to write for Living Marxism reject this as a "McCarthyite conspiracy theory".<ref>Template:Cite news</ref>

ITN vs. LM

Template:Further In February 1997, editor Mick Hume published an article by German journalist Thomas Deichmann which claimed that ITN had misrepresented the Bosnian war in its coverage in 1992. The publishers of LM, Informinc (LM) Ltd., were sued for libel by ITN. The case initially caused international condemnation of ITN as one of LMTemplate:'s critics, the journalist George Monbiot, who wrote in Prospect magazine: Template:Blockquote

However, Monbiot continued: Template:Blockquote

The article "The picture that fooled the world" argued that ITN's footage in which an emaciated Bosnian Muslim man stood behind a barbed wire fence was designed to portray a Nazi-style extermination camp while Deichmann claimed: "It was not a prison, and certainly not a 'concentration camp', but a collection centre for refugees, many of whom went there seeking safety and could leave again if they wished".<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> However, an examination of the substance of this case by a professor of cultural and political geography at Durham University argues that the key claims made by Deichmann and LM are "erroneous and flawed".<ref>Template:Cite web</ref>

The libel case went against LM and in March 2000 the magazine was forced to close.<ref>Template:Cite news</ref> Reporters Penny Marshall and Ian Williams were each awarded £150,000 over the LM story and the magazine was ordered to pay £75,000 for libelling ITN in a February 1997 article.<ref name="BBC-15-March-2000"/>

Looking back Hume commented in The Times: Template:Blockquote

In contrast, Professor Campbell of Durham University summarised his study of the case as follows:

[A]s strange as existing British libel law is, it had an important and surprisingly beneficial effect in the case of ITN vs LM. The LM defendants and Thomas Deichmann were properly represented at the trial and were able to lay out all the details of their claim that the ITN reporters had "deliberately misrepresented" the situation at Trnopolje. Having charged 'deliberate misrepresentation', they needed to prove 'deliberate misrepresentation'. To this end, the LM defendants were able to cross-examine Penny Marshall and Ian Williams, as well as every member of the ITN crews who were at the camps, along with other witnesses. (That they didn't take up the opportunity to cross-examine the Bosnian doctor imprisoned at Trnopolje, who featured in the ITN stories and was called to testify on the conditions he and others suffered, was perhaps the moment any remaining shred of credibility for LM's allegations evaporated). They were able to show the ITN reports to the court, including the rushes from which the final TV stories were edited, and conduct a forensic examination of the visuals they alleged were deceitful. And all of this took place in front of a jury of twelve citizens who they needed to convince about the truthfulness of their allegations. They failed. The jury found unanimously against LM and awarded the maximum possible damages. So it was not ITN that bankrupted LM. It was LM's lies about the ITN reports that bankrupted themselves, morally and financially. Despite their failure, those who lied about the ITN reports have had no trouble obtaining regular access to the mainstream media in Britain, where they continue to make their case as though the 2000 court verdict simply didn't exist. Their freedom of speech has thus not been permanently infringed.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref>

See also

References

Template:Reflist

Further reading

General
Press articles
Libel action

Template:RCP

Template:Authority control

Retrieved from "https://wiki.sarg.dev/index.php?title=Living_Marxism&oldid=340519"