Mediaboss Marketing

Russia is exerting control of the media in occupied parts of Ukraine as regional military administrations seek near-total domination of the information space.

The tactic has involved kidnapping journalists, taking over local newsrooms, blocking Ukrainian TV and the internet, while promoting Russian channels and websites.

NATO ups troops on high alert to 300,000 - live Ukraine updates

Analysis of topics covered by Russian media suggests a concerted effort to make Ukraine appear as a failed state. It may be designed to send a message to those in the occupied zone that Russian governance is preferable.

Russia's media narratives

A media monitor developed by Ukrainian publication Texty.UA shows the topics that Russian media has focused on and how they have changed since the war began:

The Russian media has consistently sought to justify the invasion by referring to Ukrainian forces and their leadership as ''Nazis''. Usage of the term in Russian media peaked at the start of the war.

But other narratives have become more prominent over time. Articles that refer to Ukraine as a ''failed state'' increased in mid-April.

This included articles such as the one below, which has been translated, accusing the Kyiv government of being completely corrupt.

News that supports the occupying regional administrations has also featured prominently. For example, articles that reference people in the occupied zones receiving Russian passports - something the military administration has promoted - have been common.

But other stories haven't been covered. In mid-March anti-Russian protests broke out in Melitopol yet there was little trace of the words ''Melitopol'' and ''protest'' appearing in Russian news articles.

It is clear that the Russian media now being broadcast in the occupied parts of Ukraine gives a particular view of the war.

How have the Russians controlled the media in occupied zones?

The first stage of Russian media control involved taking over the physical infrastructure used to broadcast TV.

On 4 March it was reported that Russian forces installed new equipment on two TV towers in Kherson and Melitopol, two of the largest cities in the southern occupied regions, in order to broadcast Russian TV channels.

Local newsrooms have also been taken over. Some have been repurposed to broadcast Russian channels, while others have faced the choice of collaborating or being shut down.

The NGO Detector Media said this month that 44 companies had ceased broadcasting due to the Russian attacks and their occupation.

Read more:Drones to space: 13 lessons the military is learningThe disappearing ships: Russia's great grain plunder

Russian forces have also been targeting individual journalists. Oleh Baturyn, for example, who works for the Kherson newspaper Novyi Den, was abducted in March and held captive for eight days, during which he was beaten, tied to a radiator, and interrogated about his work and knowledge of local protests.

And it's not just through traditional media formats that Russia is exerting control. On 30 May, Ukrainian internet services, which had been working intermittently since the occupation, ceased to function in the Kherson region. The internet has since been routed through Russian service providers based in Crimea, meaning Ukrainian websites are often blocked.

There have also been reports of the Russian backed administration handing out SIM cards that use a Russian dial code. The fear is these could be easily monitored by Russian forces.

It appears Russia is trying to gain total domination of the communications network.

What are the Russians trying to achieve?

The Russian media blitz is, according to Dr Ofer Fridman, the director of operations for King's Centre for Strategic Communications, "straight out of the manual" of information operations.

Control of the information space behind the front line of the kinetic war can better allow governance to be implemented in the occupied zone by repressing dissent.

Dr Fridman believes media messaging in the occupied areas will increasingly focus on stability and security.

"What does it mean to win the hearts and minds of 'Russian' people living in Ukraine?" he said. "You win them by telling them one thing: you can have stability in silence. You say we provided stability to Russia. We can also do it here."

Subscribe to the Ukraine War Diaries on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify and Spreaker

But Dr Joanna Szostek, a lecturer in political communication at the University of Glasgow, thinks any campaign to win over the population is unlikely to succeed.

"Based on surveys I've done and others who do them in Ukraine, the number of Ukrainians that were looking to rejoin Russia - that one might imagine somehow welcoming this occupying force - are just tiny numbers," she said.

That spirit of resistance can be seen in Oleksiy, a resident of Kherson who recently fled the region but who found a way to access Ukrainian news.

"Communication in occupation is just like air for a scuba diver," he said. "We woke up checking the news, and we fell asleep checking it. If there is a connection, there is hope. When the connection was down, it seemed that life had stopped."

Oleksiy's ability to still access Ukrainian news shows how difficult Russia's task will be in completely controlling the information flow in the occupied zones.

By using Virtual Private Networks - tools that mask the location of internet users - people have still been able to access blocked websites. Data from Google Trends shows that the highest proportion of searches for "VPN" over the past 90 days have occurred in the occupied zones in the south and east of Ukraine.

Many people in Ukraine also get their information via Telegram, a messaging and social media site, which isn't blocked by Russian internet service providers.

And even in controlling the TV networks, Russia appears to be having trouble. The Telegram channel of the Russian imposed administration in Kherson complained their broadcasts had gone off-air due to faulty equipment.

But they are not to be deterred. Earlier this month, they announced they would be recruiting a chief engineer and director to the radio and TV transmitting station of Kherson.

The Russian government didn't respond when asked by Sky News about media repression in occupied Ukraine.

The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.

Why data journalism matters to Sky News

Visit link:
Ukraine war: Russia takes TV and websites offline as part of media blackout in occupied territories - Sky News

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

During CNNs "The Lead with Jake Tapper" on Thursday, host Jake Tapper spoke with CNN senior political commentator and former senior Obama advisor David Axelrod, who echoed President Biden's critics, admitting that things in the country are "out of control" and that Biden is "not in command."

The discussion between the two centered on how Biden is handling many of the political setbacks that have befallen his party and other forces threatening the country under his watch, including 40-year-high inflation, especially amid criticism from his own party.

Tapper brought up Bidens recent declaration that he was pursuing legislation to end the Senate filibuster so that Democrats could codify Roe v. Wade into law. The Supreme Courts reversal of Roe v. Wade last week prompted the presidents urgency, though both Tapper and Axelrod acknowledged Biden has no power to make it happen.

Tapper stated, "Well hes not going to be able to get it done. Manchin and Sinema arent going to do it and those are just the two taking it on the chin for it. There are lots of Democratic senators very concerned less publicly so about changing the filibuster rules for the reason I explained."

CNN senior political commentator David Axelrod told Jake Tapper on Thursday that President Biden is in a "very fraught environment" politically. (Screenshot/CNN)

DEMOCRATS GRUMBLE OPENLY ABOUT BIDEN'S AGE, EFFECTIVENESS AS 2024 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION LOOMS

Axelrod acknowledged Tappers point. "Yes, yes," he said, adding, "and Manchin and Sinema provide a cover for them."

Axelrod claimed the impotence Biden has in ending the filibuster just reflects the unfortunate situation he is in as president right now. "I mean this is the lot that Biden finds himself in. There is this sense that things are kind of out of control and hes not in command. And this lends to that."

The commentator mentioned how high inflation and high gas prices are making Biden look weak. "Inflation, no one president can control inflation, but it is a gale force wind right now. It's effecting politics," Axelrod explained, adding,"You heard him on gas prices today. He talks about the gas tax holiday, but he is not going to get the gas tax holiday and there are a lot of Americans who are skeptical about whether that would help."

"So, you know, this is a very, very fraught environment for him right now," Axelrod asserted.

David Axelrod, former advisor to President Barack Obama, understands critics who claim that Biden is in over his head as leader of the country. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Later, Tapper brought up the recent AP-NORC poll which showed that 85% of Americans think that "things in this country are headed in the wrong direction." Tapper pressed Axelrod, saying, "That frankly points to disaster for Democrats in November."

BIDEN APPROVAL RATING TUMBLES TO LOWEST POINT OF HIS PRESIDENCY: POLL

Axelrod admitted, "If you were looking at the chart, youd say the vitals are not good. The Presidents approval ratings at 38%. His economic ratings are low. Consumer confidence is down. The number that you mentioned."

Though Axelrod claimed that the Supreme Courts Roe v. Wade reversal might have thrown a wrench into the system. "The one thing that I dont know is how this ruling by the Supreme Court last week is going to affect things." He mentioned hearing from polling teams and focus groups that the decision "does seem to have galvanized people, and not just about this issue, but concerns about Republicans and extremism."

"You know, If I were a Republican strategist, Id be a little bit worried about that right now," he said.

Abortion-rights protesters gather outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Friday, June 24, 2022. The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years, a decision by its conservative majority to overturn the court's landmark abortion cases. ((AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana))

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Gabriel Hays is an associate editor at Fox News. Follow him on Twitter at @gabrieljhays.

Visit link:
David Axelrod sees bad news for Biden: Things look 'out of control and he's not in command' - Fox News

The shooting at a Fourth of July parade in Highland Park that left at least six dead and 24 wounded has rocked the small, well-off community in suburban Chicago, and shocked the US as a whole.

It is the latest in a slew of mass killings that have recently included a shooting at a school in Texas and the racist massacre of Black shoppers at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.

But this latest mass murder has struck a particularly symbolic note as the shooter targeted a flag-waving parade celebrating the countrys national day and once again forced Americans to wrestle with how and why their nation is so often struck by such bloody attacks.

Highland Parks mayor, Nancy Rotering, said: This morning at 10.14, our community was terrorized by an act of violence that has shaken us to our core. Our hearts go out to the victims at this devastating time. On a day that we came together to celebrate community and freedom, we are instead mourning the tragic loss of life and struggling with the terror that was brought upon us.

Video capturing the parade showed members of a marching band fleeing as gunshots were heard nearby. The suspect, described as a white male with dark hair in his late teens or 20s, still has not been found.

The Highland Park police commander, Chris ONeill, called the shooting a horrific, senseless, random act of violence.

Giffords Courage, the gun control advocacy organization led by the former congresswoman Gabby Giffords, who was shot at a public event in Tuscon, Arizona, in 2011, responded to the shooting in Illinois: A mass shooting caused people to run for their lives at a Fourth of July parade in Highland Park, IL. Multiple people are reported dead or injured. This is not normal. We should be able to live free of the fear of being shot.

Shannon Watts, founder of gun reform group Moms Demand, said: Media reporting the gunman a white teen or young man had a rifle and was in a sniper position on a rooftop as he picked off people below at the Highland Park parade. This isnt freedom; its terrorism.

The US singer and 80s pop-rock icon Richard Marx, who is from Highland Park, tweeted: My heart is always broken by these constant mass shootings no matter where they occur but today Im extra heartbroken. And extra angry at the senselessness.

Local politicians also weighed in and vowed to take action to end gun violence in the US though such sentiments are often expressed in the wake of these tragedies and there is rarely any meaningful progress towards gun reform.

The Illinois governor, JB Pritzker, said: Grief will not bring the victims back and prayers alone will not put a stop to the terror of rampant gun violence in our country we must and we will end this plague of gun violence.

Shortly before the tragedy, the National Rifle Association gun lobby group shared a message on Twitter in honor of Independence Day: We are a country because of brave souls with guns who valued and fought for liberty and freedom.

A bald eagle was pictured in the video associated with the tweet, along with a voiceover: The only reason youre celebrating Independence Day is because citizens were armed. Happy Fourth of July from the National Rifle Association of America.

Follow this link:
This isnt freedom: Fourth of July shooting rocks Chicago and shocks US - The Guardian US

Nigerians would like to hear from the presidential candidates their definitive positions on issues of reform and decentralisation of policing, citizens involvement in security management, tackling terrorism, border security management, and youth unemployment. It is our duty as an electorate to demand these from the candidates. And cast our votes based on our conviction of who holds the best chance of making Nigeria great again.

Security, economy, and corruption were the most outstanding issues in the 2015 and 2019 elections. Of the triune matters, security has already placed itself as the most important and alarming issue for any credible campaign in 2022-23. Increased insurgency in the days ahead will make it more relevant and urgent. Unfortunately, Nigerians did not pay attention to what the presidential candidates were saying or glossed over it in the 2015 and 2019 elections. Candidates paid lip service to insecurity, and the rhetoric was the jaundiced promises of fighting insecurity from the frontline, which meant nothing as a security strategy. The result is that in the past seven years, insecurity has continued to be the bane of Nigeria. The situation has become hopeless because it has defied all government actions to at least ameliorate it, not to talk of completely eradicating it.

We are at the same place again on the eve of a general election, and this time we expect that candidates will provide comprehensive strategies for tackling insecurity to the electorate during the campaign, to allow the people make informed decision on who to vote for on the basis of their acceptance of a candidates security strategy that will be implemented when elected. This will assuage the peoples concerns and give them hope for the future.

For many reasons, addressing our internal security challenges should be the thematic thrust of our presidential campaigns. It is evident that the 2023 campaigns will be about how severe internal insecurity is threatening the existence of the nation. Insecurity has had ripple effects on our economy, starting from agriculture to manufacturing. Despite heavy investment by the Central Bank fo Nigeria (CBN) in agriculture in the past seven years, agricultural productivity has been suboptimal, going by available statistics. Besides, the massive destruction of lives and properties has created an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty. No severe and productive activity can flourish in such an environment. Foreign direct investment has dropped or stagnated as we continue to trail behind South Africa and Egypt, despite being Africas biggest economy. The lack of investment in productive industries has widened the gulf in youth unemployment, which has aggravated social vices.

As part of the medias role in the forthcoming electoral campaigns in Nigeria, they must challenge the candidates to present their plans for dealing with insecurity to the electorate. It is a public service that the traditional and online media must critically evaluate these plans and strategies by the candidates and educate the public on them to enable the electorate know what each candidate has to offer in tackling insecurity. They must organise dialogues, fora, and debates focusing on security, where the candidates would come forward with detailed, innovative, and practical ideas and solutions to the insecurity problems facing Nigeria.

The media must provide a level playing field and open fora for disseminating campaign information on how each candidate will tackle insecurity without bias toward any of the candidates based on political affiliations, ideology, and patrimony. The medias primary function is to educate the public and help shape public opinion. I suggest that all media houses should devote the necessary attention to covering presidential campaign issues on insecurity without discrimination. The concern around insecurity is central to the upcoming campaigns because you cannot have democracy without either free citizens or a secure sovereign national space.

The All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential candidate must go to work and develop novel and practical solutions to the issue of insecurity in the country, as he faces the danger of being viewed from the prism of the party platform. This is because it has been under the watch of the ruling party that insurgency has risen to the alarming heights were it is in recent times. Nigerians would rightly deserve to know what the candidate will do differently. This cannot be time for business as usual. The electorate needs more from any APC government, and the presidential candidate must convince them to trust him to tackle insecurity. Although it may be a hard sell, I am convinced that a good and innovative security strategy, with the passion and conviction of the presidential candidate, will go a long way in getting the buy-in of the electorate.

There is no gainsaying that policing has virtually collapsed in Nigeria today Critical questions for candidates are: How do they intend to restore the peoples confidence in the Police? How will they tackle the retraining, retooling, and general welfare of the Police? The pendent issue of state police deserves an intense conversation, and the people must draw commitment to its implementation.

On the other hand, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate needs a new narrative beyond the typical rhetoric on tackling security crises without any tangible and practical solution. The PDP security strategy needs to be germane to the changing context of Nigerias deplorable security crises. This strategy may be a hard sell, too, because PDP had its fair share of failings in tackling insecurity at the initial stages, allowing it to get out of hand during its time in power.

The new political forces led by Peter Obi of the Labour Party and Rabiu Kwankwaso of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), and the candidates of other parties, have their jobs cut out because they have the advantage of coming to Nigerian electorate with new thinking and of not carrying the baggage of failure in tackling insecurity, unlike APC and PDP. Their security strategy, if fresh, deep and well articulated, may enjoy the acceptance of mostly the youths, who are ready to try new things and experiment with their future.

Some pertinent questions suffice: What essential elements of insecurity must presidential candidates articulate and expose to the electorate, in terms of tackling the problem in Nigeria under their presidency? What ingredients should the insecurity solution soup have? What contextual underpinnings must he consider when dealing with Nigerias insecurity? These simple questions provide the analytical framework for evaluating and assessing the level of integrity and potency of the security strategies of these candidates. The media and the electorate must critically analyse the strategies and plans of candidates to ascertain their efficacy, albeit on paper.

Statutorily, many of the internal security challenges prevalent in Nigeria fall within the responsibilities and purview of the Police. The persistent neglect of the Police and its misuse have combined to debauch its capacity to meet the peoples security demands. The increasing viciousness of violence across the country further calls to question the capability of the Police to conduct its policing functions effectively.

There is no gainsaying that policing has virtually collapsed in Nigeria today. We presently deploy our military across 34 of the 36 states in the country, saddling them with tasks that the Police should perform. That many Nigerians have lost confidence in the Police is an understatement and a significant challenge. For the presidential candidates, a complete reform and decentralisation of the Police must be the prime agenda in the security strategy, and this must be a focal issue in the campaign. Critical questions for candidates are: How do they intend to restore the peoples confidence in the Police? How will they tackle the retraining, retooling, and general welfare of the Police? The pendent issue of state police deserves an intense conversation, and the people must draw commitment to its implementation.

Another critical issue is the porousness of our national borders, and this has exacerbated violence and criminalities because of the seamless access to sophisticated weapons across Nigerias borders and the unhindered movement of criminals into the country. Officially, Nigeria has about 84 approved land border control points but over 1,400 illegal border crossings. The stretch along the Northern boundaries with Benin Republic, Niger, Chad, and Cameroon are potential crossing points for illicit arms dealers, kidnappers, terrorists, and other criminals, due to the dry Sahel vegetation and open Savannah terrain.

Having a large mass of ungoverned areas in the hands of armed bandits is a precursor to becoming a failed state. Hence government, at all levels, must assert their authorities and firm control over all forests and rural areas. How will the candidates manage this problem of ungoverned spaces to stop Nigeria from becoming a failed state under their watch?

Security experts have continuously warned that unless we address the issue of border security, the success expected in the fight against banditry will remain a mirage. What will the presidential candidates do about our porous borders? The electorate must ask tough questions of the candidates on the issue of legal and illegal border control.

The next issue is how to deal with ungoverned spaces and huge forests that provide havens for bandits, terrorists, and criminals across the country. Recent attacks on the Kaduna airport, KadunaAbuja trains, and swathes of Borno, Zamfara, Katsina and Nasarawa States were logistically possible because of insurgents and bandits in the Sambisa Forest in Borno State, the Kuyambana and Ajja Forests in Zamfara, Birnin Kogo Forest in Katsina and Guma Forest in Nasarawa State. In Imo and Anambra states, secessionist agitators and the unknown gunmen have made the different forests in the States their hiding places.

Having a large mass of ungoverned areas in the hands of armed bandits is a precursor to becoming a failed state. Hence government, at all levels, must assert their authorities and firm control over all forests and rural areas. How will the candidates manage this problem of ungoverned spaces to stop Nigeria from becoming a failed state under their watch?

The last issue is our militarys capacity and combat efficiency in terms of workforce and equipment, to deal with kinetic and non-kinetic engagements. Given the asymmetrical nature of terrorism, banditry and insurgency, the Nigerian military needs all the support it can get, especially from a president. Compared with other armies in countries with similar terrorism and insurgency issues (like Pakistan and Egypt), our military personnel pales in number and defence spending as a percentage of GDP. Nigerias military personnel is about 190,000, whilst that of Pakistan is approximately 1,495,000; and our defence spending to GDP is 0.63 per cent, while that of Egypt is 1.2 per cent. The strategies of the presidential candidates must explain to the electorate how they will deal with these anomalies.

The debate on the cyclical nature of insecurity and unemployment is raging. Some argue that insecurity has helped push Nigerias unemployment levels to about 40 per cent, while others say that the high unemployment rate causes the youths to engage in all forms of criminality, insurgency, and terrorism. This chicken and egg conundrum of insecurity and unemployment is beyond the scope of this discourse; however, we assume that the presidential candidates must articulate a way of reducing both social menaces crippling our country. How they will do these should be the focal point of their campaign messages. Nigerians would like to hear from the presidential candidates their definitive positions on issues of reform and decentralisation of policing, citizens involvement in security management, tackling terrorism, border security management, and youth unemployment. It is our duty as an electorate to demand these from the candidates. And cast our votes based on our conviction of who holds the best chance of making Nigeria great again.

Dakuku Peterside is a policy and leadership expert.

Donate

TEXT AD: Call Willie - +2348098788999

Read the rest here:
Security and the 2023 campaigns, By Dakuku Peterside - Premium Times

Documenta is an exhibition renowned for the slow burn of its critical legacy, but the opening of its 15th edition earlier this month in Kassel (until 25 September) has elicited reactions from politicians and media more akin to a wildfire. In the most recent turn of events, an escalating row over alleged antisemitism and racism within the show, this year curated by the Indonesian collective ruangrupa, has spurred the German federal government to demand greater control of the state-funded quinquennial exhibition.

The latest scandal erupted last week, following the display of a 60ft banner work by the collective Taring Padi, also from Indonesia, that has been accused of containing an anti-Semitic caricature of a Jewish person as well as derogratory references to Mossad, the national intelligence agency in Israel. Peoples Justice (2002) has since been removed entirely from its prominent position on the Friederichsplatz and its content is now being re-examined by Documenta and a team of independent sensitivity consultants.

Formal apologies have since been issued from Documentas curators and artistic team. Its director general Sabine Schormann, who has avoided being ousted despite calls for her dismissal from a number of Jewish groups, said that she failed to keep a promise that there would be no anti-Semitic content at Documenta 15, which has no place in Germany. Meanwhile, ruangrupa have expressed regret for the pain and fear that the images caused, and said that, in consultation with Taring Padi, they support the decision to take down the work.

Germany's culture minister Claudia Roth, reportedly plans to reform Documenta Photo: DPA picture alliance/Alamy Stock Photo

But it seems the damage is already done. On Friday, it was reported by the German newspaper Zeit that Claudia Roth, the nations culture minister, has released a paper announcing plans to reform the governance and funding structure of the exhibition.

Currently, Roth said, "local responsibility" is disproportionate to the global importance of Documenta and that the federal government does not have the sufficient opportunity to participate, Zeit reports. She said that federal funds will be now be contingent on a mandatory greater influence from the government, as well as more international expertise, that will involve the "plurality of German society including the Central Council of Jews". Roth assured Der Spiegel that Documentas federal funding would continue for the foreseeable future. She is now in talks with the Hessian art minister Angela Dorn to effect these reforms, according to Zeit.

Roth, a Green party politician who was appointed last year during Germany's parliamentary elections, had initially remained more neutral around the accusations of anti-Semitism levelled at Documenta. When the exhibition came under fire from Jewish groups across Germany for giving a platform to a number of pro-Palestinian and pro-BDS artists, she defended Documenta's artistic license. She has since denounced the Taring Padi work as anti-Semitic and troubling in a statement released last week, adding that her trust in the exhibition has been betrayed.

At present, Documenta has a budget of over 40mthe largest of any exhibition in Germany. Besides ticket sales, it is funded by the following stakeholders: the city of Kassel, the state of Hesse, and the German Federal Cultural Foundation. The latter, which is under the purview of the Ministry of Culture and Media, accounts for 4.5m. Its oversight is split between these bodies and the exhibitions artistic team. However, the balance of power between all four parties has been in flux since Documentas inception in 1955.

In fact, Roths plan is not unprecedented and will take Documenta closer to its pre-2018 structure, when the federal government had more control of the show. Four years ago, the former federal government decided to withdraw from the Documentas supervisory board while still partially funding the exhibition. This decision was a mistake, Roth tells Der Spiegel, and must be reverted.

Documenta commands a colossal budget. This may be both a blessing and a curse, the institutional funding expert Shwetal Patel tells The Art Newspaper. He has co-organised a now highly topical talk in Kassel on 29 Junewhich was planned well before Roths most recent announcementthat will address the dual necessity and complications of state funding in the arts.

The financial crises of the previous decade, Covid and current recession fears mean that sustained public funding for the arts is more precarious than ever. In this context it is natural that the new government in Berlin (and its agencies) want to review how they fund the arts, Patel says. At this stage it is also about the optics. Documenta is an important soft power tool for Germany and I imagine that its new government is keen to take a stance against any hint of intolerance."

While Patel, who is one of the founding members of the Kochi Biennale, is reluctant to speculate as to whether the current row could have been avoided with greater federal government control, he says that it is clear from other biennial-type events that government agencies and bureaucrats should not manage arts organisations; this job has to be left to a passionate and dedicated team that is embedded in, and invested in, Kassel.

Read the original post:
Documenta will now come under greater government control in light of fresh antisemitism accusations, Germany's culture minister says - Art Newspaper