A Graham Newsletter (#35) Misinformation, Disinformation, and how to fight all that.

Recent weeks have seen many developments, including the blocking of my YouTube channel, for 2 weeks, for a video from Donbass, from 2014, of which I’ve written about here – https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/09/07/fighting-censorship-and-the-future-of-my-18-videos/

The actions of YouTube have forced me to remove all 18+ video material – from the war in Donbass, from my YouTube channel – I’ve written about that here, and will be posting the material here.

In removing this material, I removed an archive of over 100 videos, much of it documenting Ukrainian war crimes in Donbass. Millions of views, new views every day. Of course, people need to know this, to see this. I’ll be using this site, the Truth Speaker, where there’s no censor at all, to present these videos in the correct format. This video, result of Ukrainian shelling of Lugansk, August 2014 –

And here, information about, and context of this video – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/09/09/18-donbass-war-when-ukrainian-shelling-hit-lugansk-august-2014/

Not able to use YouTube, which holds an effective monopoly for videos, means we need to try that bit harder to get the word, the truth, out. Please, share, repost, like, do what you can – we need to be together in this goal, of more people knowing the truth! 

This was the video which started the problems with YouTube, with them removing this, then content featured in the video (already on YouTube for years)

I’ve now taken the necessary steps to bring my account in line with ‘YouTube Community Standards’, but the problem is that the ‘standards’ have changed – a video that was approved by them in 2014, and on the site for years, is now a ‘violation’. That video, my first to pass 2 million views, and rising all the time, one which had a real impact in showing people the realities of war in Donbass

Of course, it can be hard, emotionally, for me to remember these thing. I’ve written about that here. 

Censorship is just one of the issues facing journalists. There are the dangers inherent with the profession, for which some journalists have made the ultimate sacrifice. Here, I’ve written about US journalist Christopher Allen, killed while covering conflict in Sudan –

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/09/07/christopher-allen-kia-a-journalist-is-a-journalist/

And Kim Wall, recently killed while reporting on a homemade submarine, off Denmark. 

May they both rest in peace, and be remembered for their work. 

I’ve written about them both here, and about the role of a journalist, to go to where there is either the least information, or the most misinformation – https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/09/14/the-role-of-a-journalist-to-go-to-where-there-is-the-most-disinformation-or-no-information/

The world has several current key epicentres of mis, and disinformation. North Korea is certainly one of them. I was very pleased to present an exclusive interview, on the Truth Speaker, with the guys who made this indie documentary, The Haircut, well worth a watch:

And the exclusive interview, with Alex and Aleksa – here! 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/09/15/exclusive-interview-with-the-haircut-north-korea-documentary-guys/

As for me, I’ve written here, about moving on from Donbass, but staying with Donbass, when I’ll return there, and more. 

For now, I’m in another of one of the world’s disinformation capitals, Crimea!!

That began with, a simple, but effective, tackling of the constant rhetoric from Ukraine that the beaches in Crimea are ’empty’, ‘everything is bad’ etc... How better to do that, than to let Ukrainians in Crimea themselves, speak for themselves –

Full interviews here! 

And look out for much more reportage to come! Fighting information, and disinformation, on the beaches and on! 

How the Western Press Got, and Get, it So, So Wrong on Crimea (A Brief Guide)

Where to begin? Well, where they began, with the BBC blasting in March 2014 –

Why is Crimea so dangerous?

Here’s a couple of my videos from Simferopol in March of 2014, where it was less dangerous, and more just friendly, and optimistic.

And the famous, ‘little green men’, of which we’ve read so much about in western press – here, of the time, March 2014 – 

“Little green men” or “Russian invaders”?BBC

Selfskies from the frontline: People of the Crimea pose up with the masked Russian invaders – Daily Mail

The Mail headline even by western press standards a mis-step, given that even the Telegraph of the time was writing (while rather amusingly referring to the city of Sevastopol as ‘Sebastopol’ throughout) – Ukraine crisis: ‘Polite people’ leading the silent invasion of the Crimea

Patrolling the streets with the leisurely but deliberate pace of British police constables on the beat, the men with machine guns in Ukraine appear to be there to show their presence − not to fight.

And in case you’re thinking the author of that, Roland Oliphant may have been partisan or something, his subsequent work shows all the standard western media memes on Crimea in place – from March of 2014 –

March 2014 – Ukraine crisis: On Crimea’s new border the Russian Army waits

Ukraine crisis: This is the de-facto annexation of Crimea

Since 2014, there has been a deliberate, and repeated conflation in western media of the ‘little green men’, and ‘self-defence forces’, with the aim being to make out that Crimea was ‘taken’ by ‘Russian forces’, and there was no such thing as ‘self-defence forces’.

The Daily Beast, from 2017 even –

LITTLE GREEN MEN

Putin’s Hidden Insurgency Tore Up Ukraine. Now It’s Coming for Your Inbox.

(Pictured, standard western portrayal of ‘little green men’ – here, BBC). 

Putin claimed ‘little green men’ in Crimea were pro-Russian locals. They were actually Russian forces laying groundwork for invasion—a playbook that’s taking over American media.

However, those of us who were here, know the difference. There were ‘little green men’, and this my GIF here, Crimea, March 2014 – 


They were clearly regular Russian troops, and with their black sea base, Russia was allowed to have 25,000 troops on Crimea. It was never a secret that these guys had been mobilised, so it’s a surprise when the west makes out it’s all surprised they’re Russian – Simon Ostrovsky of Vice, a key exponent of this. 

Yet, a couple of key points here. There were also local self-defence forces, clearly local, clearly not regular Russian military – my video here –

Both groups were perfectly approachable, filmable. And neither of them in any way played any kind of role in ‘forcing people to vote’ in 2014, as the west has led you to believe.

Ukraine crisis: David Cameron attacks Crimea vote ‘under barrel of a Kalashnikov

Britain warns Putin after ‘Kalashnikov referendum’ in Crimea

And on…

The subject of Crimean Tatars and the western press is so voluminous as to warrent its own entry, which will be. This touches on it, the Telegraph, October 2014 – 

Despair and euphoria in Crimea six months after Russian annexationDispatch: Tatars face campaign of repression after opposing annexation, while ethnic Russians rejoice at joining motherland

Other favourite themes in the western press are that building a bridge from one part of Russia to another is some sort of sinister and ominous act:

Two years after annexation, Putin seeks to bind Crimea by bridge to Russia – Reuters, 2015

Focus on the cost of the bridge, linking Russia’s mainland and Crimea:

Russia spends ‘fortune’ on bridge to Crimea –BBC, 2017

Predictions of doom –

PUTIN’S BRIDGE TO CRIMEA IS DOOMED TO COLLAPSE – Newsweek, 2017

Why Kerch May Prove a Bridge Too Far for Russia – Moscow Times, 2016

And the metaphors do go on, and on. 

A favourite new meme of the media is that someone things ‘aren’t going to plan’ with Crimea, it’s ‘not working out for Russia’, etc.

The Annexation of Crimea isn’t going as Planned – Foreign Policy, 2017 – in which there is a beyond tenuous linking of the trial of a Crimean Tatar extremist, and Crimea itself. A real stretch.

Lily Hyde: The annexation of Crimea isn’t going as planned

Another favourite, that Crimea is somehow, ‘hard to access’, is also a theme, see the BBC here, from 2017.

Do a search for flights to Crimea, from anywhere, on any search engine, see for yourself how many hundreds there are…

That Crimea is somehow ‘dangerous’, also a favourite Crimea-meme – even the UK’s official travel advice warns against visiting to Crimea and that ‘tensions remain high’…

Here we have leading New Zealand travel website Stuff.co.nz – in 2017 – telling us that active war is going in Crimea,

Fighting between Ukrainian armed forces and Russian-backed armed separatists is common in both the eastern and southeastern regions of the Ukraine, more specifically, the regions of Donetsk oblast, Luhansk oblast, and Crimea. Civilians continue to get caught up in the fighting.

No kind of war ever took place in Crimea as it rejoined Russia in 2014. I’m in Crimea just now, and don’t take my word for how calm Crimea is just now – listen to some Ukrainains here:

However, one thing’s for sure, the information war wages around, and on Crimea, and the west have chosen their weapon – lies. 

World Cup 2018: Information War against Russia, Game ON!!

In less than a year, Russia will host the 21st FIFA World Cup. The eyes of the world will be upon Russia.

So, what’s the western media of the world doing? Of course, long before the first whistle is even blown, they’re sticking the boot right into Russia:

July of 2017 has the New York Post blaring:  FIFA’s rewarding bad actors by letting Russia and Qatar host World Cups, in an article which goes on to tear into Russia from every conceivable angle.

Screenshot (2714)The same month has the Economist blasting: The cost overruns on Russia’s World Cup stadiums are staggering – They have become a symbol of corruption under Putin’s rule

That article goes on to similarly rip into Russia, including the line ‘Western newspapers report that the builders made extensive use of forced labour by North Korean workers.’ Well, that’s authoritive then, ‘western newspapers’.

March had the Sun coming out withTHUG ARMY  Russian footie hooligan ringleaders warn England fans could be KILLED at Russia 2018 World Cup after Euro 2016 violence

One gang leader reportedly warned: “You think it was bad in France – wait until Russia. This is our home fixture”

The Daily Mail joined the offensive with‘If you thought France was bad, wait until the World Cup’: Russian football ultras warn England fans they could be KILLED at 2018 tournament in a repeat of Marseille violence last summer.

Screenshot (1302)What’s the UK government’s position on the World Cup 2018, by the way? Well, we can discern that by looking at the documentary the BBC came out with in February about the ‘secret world of Russia football hooligans‘, and all the predictable ‘scary men in masks’ that went with that, and a raft of other articles on the theme. The Sun carry the party line forward with their article of the other day based on a convenient ‘freedom of information request, to the Foreign Office’. HARD SELL – Chiefs at the Foreign Office believe the 2018 Russian World Cup will flop because of the country’s football yobs

There’s always doping to fall back on, of course, as in June we read: The drug squad: The Mail on Sunday reveals every member of Russia’s World Cup team is under investigation in a doping probe that shames football

That this claim was actually branded as ‘nonsense’ is something the western media weren’t quite so keen to impart.

But if, piercing this wall of negativity, some positive perceptions about Russia, or Russia western mediaRussia’s hosting of the World Cup 2018 may penetrate, there’s to stamp that out is the fall-back (Daily Mail, June 2017): Russia is ready for the World Cup that it desperately can’t afford – £20bn has been spent but there are still pitfalls

Ie, a western journalist goes to Russia, takes a few photos of things in a poor state, and frames it all in the context of ‘so, ok, the World Cup may be ok, but all the money spent on the stadiums means the rest of the country’s in ‘crisis’.

In the western media, the result of the World Cup in Russia, 2018, has already been decided – a home loss. And they’re going to do everything possible to make sure that comes to pass…

The Sunday Times today: How they Faked News: Exclusive

A little while ago, I was contacted by the Sunday Times to give comments on my involvement in the Anna Ziuzina / Barry Pring case. I don’t trust the Sunday Times, or their ‘journalist’ James Gillespie – just a standard western prostitute of the press, and it was clear they had already decided the narrative of their article.

I was sure that Gillespie (pictured) would simply take the parts of my answers which suited his pre-set script, so this is how I replied – we’ll have a look at it, then the Sunday Times fake news.

My reply in full: 

Thanks James, sorry I was just busy and didn’t get around to it, am out of the country now in any case. Let me answer these for you – please either publish my answers to all your questions, in full, or do not include or mention me in your article at all. If you edit or abridge any of my answers below, you will accept a claim of £100,000 damages against the Sunday Times for misrepresentation, and defamation of character. I will donate this all to a children’s home in Lutugino, Donbass.

Just to be clear, James – your publishing anything apart from everything I have written to you below accepts liability from Sunday Times to pay £100,000 to a children’s home in Lutugino, Donbass – of which I will give you full details. I will not benefit from this transaction in any way, the funds will be transferred directly to the children’s home.

All my answers are below. If you misrepresent me, I will publish them in full, for public record, in addition to the above damages.

On 27 July 2017 at 22:51, Gillespie, James;james.gillespie@sunday-times.co.uk>

Hi Graham,

Sorry we haven’t been able to speak, I guess you’re busy.
I’m writing a piece for the paper on Sunday about the Barry Pring inquest, specifically focussing on how flawed the hearing was. As you know the verdict was quashed in the High Court and a new inquest ordered.

It’s a bit strange you’re writing this six months after the event. And you are leading with a deliberately biased narrative. Who has paid you to write this? It sounds a lot like the narrative the Ziuzina family pay their lawyers and representatives to circulate…

Part of the reason for this finding was that the coroner had allowed “hearsay evidence” including your written and verbal accounts.
I just wanted to give you the chance to have your say about those findings.
Do you accept that the material you gave was “hearsay” and not based on proven facts?

My evidence was absolutely based on proven facts. The coroner’s ‘quashing’ of the verdict itself contained several significant errors and untruths, which I set out in a letter of the time. The ‘quashing’ shows that the British justice system is entirely flawed – this case was quashed because it was inconvenient for UK-Ukraine relations. And you can call my evidence ‘hearsay’, but not one part of it was disproved, whereas I disproved the entire basis for the ‘quashing’, in my document of the time.

What evidence do you have for your claims that Ganna Ziuzina was involved in her husband’s death?

The evidence presented in my 58-page report, fulsomely praised by the coroner at the time, after she had been in possession of it for around 4 years, and studied it extensively in that time. Yet in one month, something suddenly happened to change that, and then it was ‘hearsay’. The coroner’s verdict, concrete at the time, was clearly compromised by external UK ‘interests’.

Why has your book on the case been withdrawn from sale?

Because Amazon do withdraw books when they are aggressively threatened by expensive lawyers, as Ziuzina did here.

Do you maintain that the evidence you gave to the inquest was true and accurate?

You’re repeating yourself here, all answered above. In any case, absolutely true and accurate.

Do you accept that you are known as an opponent of the Ukrainian government?

I’m an opponent of anyone who tells lies.

Will you seek to give evidence at any future inquest into Mr Pring’s death?
What kind of facile, wantonly (trying to be) provocative questions are these? If I’m asked by the coroner, I’l (sic) give evidence. If not, then I won’t. There isn’t an ‘open questions’ part of an inquest…
The Anna Ziuzina / Barry Pring inquest verdict was overturned because it was inconvenient for the UK government’s position on Ukraine. Look out for my further videos and reportage on the theme, all entirely factual, truthful, accurate, as all my work.
 

Best, Graham

Sunday Times today: (my comments in bold)

Crucially, the coroner admitted she had not realised there was an alleged commercial interest of a “witness who provided hearsay evidence”, a reference to Graham Phillips, 38, a vlogger — video blogger — who described himself at the inquest as an “investigative journalist” and who had written a book on the case.

So the Sunday Times have clearly just picked a term to belittle me ‘vlogger’, and the second is just a lie – I didn’t describe myself as an ‘investigative journalist’ at the inquest, the coroner herself did. (I describe myself as always, a journalist.)

The book has been withdrawn from sale after legal warnings of defamation but the material formed a central part of the evidence at the inquest.

There is also another element to Phillips’s work. He often reports on the Russian-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine and is known for his pro-Russian views and opposition to Ukrainian authorities.

The BBC reported last week that from 2014 to 2015 Phillips was employed by Zvezda, a media channel run by the Russian defence ministry, and freelanced for the state-operated television network RT.

Again, the Sunday Times just selecting perceived negative aspects of my work to attack me. Any chance of something neutral to form a balanced picture? Of course not – this is a hit piece, just like the BBC’s was. 

In May 2014 Phillips was banned from entering Ukraine for three years on the grounds of “national security”. The Ukrainian government even took the unusual step of issuing an open letter to the UK condemning Phillips’s actions.

Just more negative about me, just in case you may have entertained any other notion, going into the ‘business part’. 

Apart from her lack of knowledge about Phillips’s activities, Earland also admitted she did not realise that hailing private cars in Ukraine rather than booking a taxi was a regular sight in the location where Pring was killed.

“Both strands of evidence are material and relevant and raise the potential of a different inquest conclusion being reached,” court documents record.

So you mean the coroner has claimed, or the Sunday Times are claiming, that in the 9 years the coroner had to work on this case, she didn’t do one Google search about me? A Google search would have thrown up all of the above negatives of the Sunday Times, because that’s what the western press do – write negative things about me, to attempt to discredit my work, because it doesn’t fit their narrative.

However, the coroner would have also found some ‘non-negative’ information – that I’m the journalist who has reported on the Ukraine crisis, then war in Donbass from the start. Thousands of videos, real reportage from the scene, first to the scene, risking my life to bring the truth, showing both sides.

And there are entire parts of my work which have nothing to do with ‘Ukraine’, for example my extensive Brexit reportage.

As for the nonsense about ‘hailing private cars’ I wrote of that yesterday even.Ziuzina with her new husband Ivan Lister, a Briton. She is now living in Spain

Which is exactly what Ziuzina wants. She is now living with a new husband, British businessman Ivan Lister, 48, in Spain and uses the name Julianne Moore.

“Despite the fact that I was the only witness to what happened, I was not told about the hearing,” she said in a Ukrainian newspaper. She also said reports that she had refused to give evidence were a lie and “the main witness of my ‘accusation’ was the famous pro-Russian propagandist and blogger Graham Phillips”.

She added: “For me, the death of my husband was a tremendous shock. Twice I went to a psychiatric hospital. Then there was a long way to rehabilitation, including being on antidepressants.”

Asked if she knew what had happened, she replied: “Whether he had enemies, I do not know. I can only say one thing: I am not involved in the death of Barry.”

All of this, of course Ziuzina’s side, sympathetic photo of her (but a key detail, see below), and having a go at me again. 

Phillips is still convinced she was involved. Approached by The Sunday Times, he accused the newspaper of being biased and said: “Who has paid you to write this?” He demanded £100,000 if all his answers to questions were not published in full, saying he would donate the money to a children’s home in Ukraine.

As above, I did indeed ‘demand’ £100,000, as above, to help the children’s home in Lutugino, Donbass, which I have been helping for a long time. I knew the Sunday Times would lie, as they indeed did, so wanted to give the opportunity that something good may come from their deceit. 

“My evidence was absolutely based on proven facts. The . . . ‘quashing’ of the verdict itself contained several significant errors and untruths . . . The ‘quashing’ shows that the British justice system is entirely flawed — this case was quashed because it was inconvenient for UK-Ukraine relations.”

Ok, so here’s what they’ve missed out from my answers, in bold: 

It’s a bit strange you’re writing this six months after the event. And you are leading with a deliberately biased narrative. Who has paid you to write this? It sounds a lot like the narrative the Ziuzina family pay their lawyers and representatives to circulate…

My evidence was absolutely based on proven facts. The coroner’s ‘quashing’ of the verdict itself contained several significant errors and untruths, which I set out in a letter of the time. The ‘quashing’ shows that the British justice system is entirely flawed – this case was quashed because it was inconvenient for UK-Ukraine relations. And you can call my evidence ‘hearsay’, but not one part of it was disproved, whereas I disproved the entire basis for the ‘quashing’, in my document of the time.

He said his book had been withdrawn for sale on Amazon because the website had been “aggressively threatened by expensive lawyers” and accused this newspaper of asking “facile, wantonly (trying to be) provocative questions”.

And so what else been missed out? A lot. It was a Sunday Times ‘pick n’ mix’ of what suited them. Nowhere to be seen, my answer to the question about my being an ‘opponent of the Ukrainian government’ –

I’m an opponent of anyone who tells lies.

Other answers, they’ve picked and chosen from, but they’ve completely ommitted all of this –

The evidence presented in my 58-page report, fulsomely praised by the coroner at the time, after she had been in possession of it for around 4 years, and studied it extensively in that time. Yet in one month, something suddenly happened to change that, and then it was ‘hearsay’. The coroner’s verdict, concrete at the time, was clearly compromised by external UK ‘interests’. 

When told The Sunday Times could not agree to his demand for £100,000 Phillips said he withdrew his comments.

The Sunday Times lawyer, Kirsty Howarth, had contacted me:

Your email exchanges with James Gillespie have been passed on to me. Your comments will be taken into account and fairly represented in any article.  They will not be published in full and there is no basis for any suggestion that The Sunday Times would then have to pay £100,000.

And I’d replied: 

I gave my comments exclusively on the basis they would be published in full. If not, I revoke all permission to use them, and the Sunday Times will therefore accept my claim for liability, defamation, misrepresentation, as previously stated, if they use part of them, incurring the stated amount, a charitable donation for Donbass.

Graham

And we go from there. Lies, fake news, misrepresentation from the Sunday Times, as I knew it would be. I wrote on the theme yesterday here. 


And an absolutely key point here: 
A spokesman for the chief coroner said: “The High Court has ordered that the chief coroner should arrange for the fresh inquest to be heard by a different coroner.” Earland and Ziuzina declined to comment.

So they didn’t even have an interview with Ziuzina?? They just republished her remarks from a months-old interview in Ukrainian media?? All her comments are taken from this interview, April 1st… 

So, a months-old interview with Ziuzina dug up, dressed up as ‘journalism’ in the Sunday Times, to further aid the UK government’s position (that it all just goes away so as not to cause problems), and adds to the recent attacks on me by UK media…. welcome to the world of our ‘great British press’…

I’ll look at the legal options to see if this time, something good may come out of more Sunday Times lies and fake news.

A Graham Newsletter (#31) Russophobes at Cambridge – Fake Research, Buzzfeed – Fake News – Mariupol Adventures, and More!

Ever wonder why the mood, on an official level, from the UK is so entrenched, endemic anti-Russian? Could it be that public figures in the UK are being conditioned, from a young age? Have a look at my new video!

And here on the Truth Speaker – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/03/cambridge-university-fake-research-rory-finnin-anti-russia-propaganda/

But it’s not all bad news from the UK, British photographer Dean O-Brien recently visited the city of Mariupol, and did a good job of work there – read more about that here –

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/07/the-adventures-of-a-british-freelance-photographer-in-mariupol/

Mariupol still shows signs of anti pro-Ukrainian feelings amongst the population

A post shared by Dean O'Brien (@deanobeano1) on

Speaking of visits, a French delegation recently visited Donetsk, I covered that, here – 

And here – 

With more, plus encore, to come, on that!

I was pleased to present my new film from Donbass, with full English subtitles!

And having earlier had a look at fake research, from Cambridge, here a look at fake news, from Buzzfeed –

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/04/mariupol-myself-and-buzzfeed-fake-news/

To real news, I brought you breaking updates from Donbass, with video – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/07/terrorist-attacks-strike-lugansk-today-full-details/

And special reportage from the war-torn village of Nikishino – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/03/nikishino-special-reportage-from-a-donbass-forgotten-village/

And more real news, debunking of fake news, coming up soon! Thanks for being with me, Graham

Mariupol, Myself and Buzzfeed Fake News

In May of 2014, Buzzfeed wrote an article about me – https://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/how-a-british-blogger-became-an-unlikely-star-of-the-ukraine?utm_term=.fcpgVZ7AD#.myRGd7Yyk – I wrote about my reaction to it here, in early 2015 – because basically, I’d been done over.

However, there were a few factors to take into account at the time – I was extremely busy working, on the scene, in Donbass, and the article was just ‘one of these things’, one of a number of articles written to try to take me down.

Also, a strong reaction from my side would have simply seen Buzzfeed go for me more, and I actually felt that the long phone calls I’d had with Max Seddon has somewhat taken the edge off what Buzzfeed really wanted to do – a full takedown. (Photo from article, here)

However, it’s an article people, who want to have a go at me, bring up even now as a first offering to ‘slap me down’. It shows up high in the google rankings. So, here, in a few points, I’ll go through what was clear fake news by Buzzfeed, before people even really used that term.

Mariupol, May 2014 (after shooting on May 9th)

Buzzfeed fake: But how many people were killed? Local news reported two deaths. Ukraine’s interior minister said 21 people died in the fighting. Human Rights Watch could only confirm seven deaths after visiting all four hospitals where the wounded were taken.

None of that seemed right to Graham Phillips, a roving Ukraine-based British blogger who films guerrilla field reports from the conflict’s hot spots for his own YouTube channel and has become a growing star on Kremlin-owned media. So he set out to investigate in the way that has made him a cult micro-celebrity in east Ukraine’s crisis: by interviewing angry people on the street for 90 seconds at a time.

Some people told him that more than 100 people had died in the fighting.

Reality: Actually, I was committed to finding out how many people had really been killed on May 9th. Indeed, I interviewed some locals who told me that the figure was 100 – and I put those interviews up unedited, as with all my interviews –

And what issue do Buzzfeed have with putting up unedited interviews with locals, from the scene? In any case, this was just a part of my Mariupol reportage, I wanted to cover every side, even interviewing Ukrainian soldiers about what happened –

I explored all over the police station, at the centre of events on May 9th, just 2 of those videos here –

I interviewed people on the scene there – 

More, from a local I obtained real, first-hand events on May 9th – just some of those videos here – 

More, I visited city morgues, several times, to confirm the number – 

I questioned those who had told me the figure of ‘100’ – 

So, to another, Buzzfeed fake:  In Phillips’ version of events, Ukraine’s army was eager to cover up the massacre and so it bypassed morgues and hospitals and hid the bodies in the woods. Relatives of the dead were too terrified of reprisals to claim them missing, he said. Phillips’ interlocutors, whom he described as “well-informed local sources,” provided no evidence for these claims. He has yet to corroborate them. Nonetheless, Phillips soon appeared on Russian television promoting the unverified figure of 100 dead.

Reality: This was never my ‘version of events’. I simply uploaded videos of what people on the scene had said. And as for my ‘going on Russian television to promote the unverified figure‘, that’s just an outright lie. Here you can see me on RT at the time – 

From 1:27, I say ‘The official figure killed is 9, the Ukrainian figure is 21, some say much more.’

What happened next? I continued going to Mariupol to confirm figures – here, just one morgue confirmed 11 dead –

I carried on investigating in Mariupol until Ukrainian forces seized me, and deported me from there, on May 20th, 2014 –

And that’s reality for you, versus Buzzfeed fake news.