CoffeeZilla

So there's a temptation, a momentum to staying to that one side, whatever that side is.

The same with foreign journalism.

You can cover Putin critically.

There's a strong pull to being pro-Ukraine, pro-Zelensky, pro-basically really covering in a favorable way to the point of propaganda, to the point of PR, the Zelensky regime.

If you criticize the Zelensky regime, there's a strong pull

towards then being supportive of, not necessarily the Putin regime, but a very different perspective on it, which is like NATO is the one that created that war.

There's narratives that pull you.

And what I think a great journalist does is make enemies on both sides and walk through that fire and not get pulled in to the protection of anyone's side because they get so harshly attacked anytime they deviate from the center.

That's exactly right.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So any revealing any attacking any power center for the corruption, for the flaws they have.

And that's what I mean about sort of the war in Ukraine.

There's several key players, NATO, Russia, Ukraine, China, India.

I mean, there's several less important players, maybe some of the like Iran and like Israel and maybe Africa.

And what great journalism requires is basically revealing the flaws of each one of those players.

irrespective of the attacks you get.

And you're right that throughout any particular situation, there is some parties that are worse than others and you have to weigh your perspective accordingly.

But also it requires you to be fearless in certain things.

Like for example, I don't even know what it's like to be a journalist covering China now.