Pilger the anti-journalist

Anti-US campaigner John Pilger has written yet another feature in the New Statesman on Latin America in which he presents his somewhat simplistic leftwing political opinions as fact. His stance is pretty predictable but being a staunch critic of US foreign policy, I feel like something of a Judas to criticise him too harshly. In essence Pilger is mostly right to criticise his chosen targets, but he doesn't seem to be fond of tackling complicated issues. I wonder what his opinion is of Robert Mugabe, for instance.

But what really gets my goat is not the nature of his opinions, but the fact that despite his shameless one-sidedness and blatant bias, he is still afforded the title of "journalist".

How can this be? He does not present fact, and does not even pretend to. He investigates areas in search of evidence to support his very blinkered opinions. I have not once read a balanced article of his and find his writing tiresome because he is so entrenched in the same dogmatic view, ie US/UK/Colombia/Israel/Bush/Blair/Uribe/white men = Bad, Palestine/Chavez/Morales/Ortega/indigenous/dark people = Good.