Slashdot Mirror
Russia Today: Vladimir Putin's Weapon In 'The War of Images'
dryriver sends in a story at Der Spiegel Online about news network Russia Today, and how it is becoming a powerful propaganda tool for Vladimir Putin to use against Western audiences. Quoting:
"Since 2005, the Russian government has increased the channel's annual budget more than tenfold, from $30 million (€22.6 million) to over $300 million. Russia Today's budget covers the salaries of 2,500 employees and contractors worldwide, 100 in Washington alone. And the channel has no budget cuts to fear now that Putin has issued a decree forbidding his finance minister from taking any such steps. The Moscow leadership views the funds going to the channel as money 'well invested,' says Natalya Timakova, the press attaché to Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. 'In addition, Russia Today is — and I hope the Germans will forgive me for this remark — significantly more modern than Deutsche Welle, for example, and it also has more money.' ... Russia Today sees itself as a champion of a global audience critical of the West. But it is also meant to amplify the self-doubts of Europeans and Americans who have been forced by recent events to wonder if their own countries — like Russia and China — are corrupt and in the grip of a pervasive intelligence apparatus. In any case, the station has a rare knack for propaganda. ... To spice up the news, directors sometimes use Hollywood-like special effects, such as a computer-animated tank that looks like it is rolling over the newscaster's feet or Israeli fighter jets that fly a virtual loop through the studio before dropping their bombs over a map of Syria."
In 10 or 15 years, Edward Snowden will be remembered as a defector in the New Cold War during Putin's reign. Once enough Russians become unhappy with the puppet show, they will push Putin and Medvedev out.
Does "the West" have a patent on this methodology?
They did lots of early stories on the NSA I thought were tinfoil hat stuff until recently.
Fut ist gut wenn stinken tut - Fut besser, wenn gresser.
Big hair, pasty make-up, loud ties and announcer voices which grab your attention and slap you around a bit, no matter how banal the news item.
In Soviet Russia the news watches YOU!
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I skim RT daily. But you know what? An *awful* lot of their content is blatant and clumsy propaganda.
It's truly the "National Enquirer" of the news sites I visit on a daily basis. The only reason I don't go anywhere else for a Russian perspective on the news is I haven't found any other english-translated Russian sites. Given a choice, I'd never go to that trash-rag again.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
The station was even more triumphant when it signed Larry King
I know Larry King wasn't that bad (I found him insightful), but maybe if they take enough of our cable talking heads we might get actual journalists on the news.
The Russians have always been the best in the world at propaganda. A book that covers this really well from a former insider is the Sword and the Shield by Christopher Andrew (Author) and Vasili Mitrokhin.
In the US we fought back using abstract art. Back then great pains were taken to hide propaganda, nowadays the great pains to hide things are taken by advertising companies on behalf of multinationals...
At least RT is outwardly funded and influenced by the state so you can make your own determination as to the validity of any of their reporting. I would prefer to know there is a government backed bias instead of having secret influence on the media like there is in many US news outlets.
Russia Today has an edge simply because it has a big reporting staff. This is unusual in the US today. Only the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post have serious world reporting staffs any more.
RT is biased, but it's no worse than Fox News. The embarrassing thing for Americans is that RT doesn't have to make up bad stuff about the US. They just put the bad stuff at the top of their pages.
So, its like Fox News, but for Russians?
Go ahead and watch online: Two channels in English. Sad that there is a demand for news bent to the side of a human right abuser like Russia. But the Obama administration (like the Bush administration) before has been so corrupt that outside views are needed.
but i am glad the exist. There is simply no way to get impartial/objective news nowadays, almost everyone has an agenda. In the case of RT it is obvious, but sometimes it is also enlightening.
Therefore the best thing to do is look at a couple of very different news stations and use your common sense.
This is why I really did not like it when they took Press TV (Iranian International news station) of the satellite because of the economic sanctions. One interesting point of view gone.
What's with all the recent Russia smear stories?
Did somebody do something to embarrass the American government? Or is this just preparation for an invasion to get their oil? What's next? Weapons of mass destruction in Russia?
Just the way that this is written, has so many implications.
------------
Simonyan's mission is to prevent Russia from ever losing a war of images like the one it did in August 2008. At the time, Russian tanks were advancing into the southern Caucasus, stopping just short of Tbilisi, the capital of the small country of Georgia. The young Georgian president at the time, Mikheil Saakashvili -- eloquent and educated in the United States -- appeared on all channels to condemn Russia as an aggressor, even though he had provoked the war and was the first to order an invasion of the separatist republic of South Ossetia, which has close ties with Russia.
CNN showed images of destroyed buildings, allegedly taken after a Russian bomb strike on the Georgian provincial city of Gori. According to Russia Today, however, they were actually shots of the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali after a Georgian attack. "There is no objectivity," Simonyan says today, "only approximations of the truth by as many different voices as possible."
--------------------
Big hair, pasty make-up, loud ties and announcer voices which grab your attention and slap you around a bit, no matter how banal the news item.
Perhaps growing up with the BBC and the CBC has biased me but that sounds like American journalism to me.
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
When I was young, I used to listen to Radio Moscow, Radio Peking on shortwave radio, to get the perspective from the other side. Now I can just browse a website. Still, a lot of propaganda on all sides. The truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
Specifically, it sounds like Fox News, not just any American journalism. That's the point. RT is Putin's Fox News.
It's a rusky "news" outlet. Who in their right mind would consider it a pr weapon of any import? Unless you're one of them socialist euro zombines ... well never mind.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
I am a Greek - i mostly get my international info from the usual suspects (from BBC to the American mega-media) either directly or from the Greek media.
But as a Greek, knowing much more about my neighborhood (Greece and the Balkans or Middle East) i can not take seriously those Western media when they demonstrate such luck of knowledge or understanding about it (i don't even bother with their bias anymore). For example, in my country they constantly report about a far right nationalistic political party as neo-nazi (when is not - is anti-immigration only... their most respected figure from the past is the one that gone to war against fascists/nazis!) or in Syria they constantly ignore the horible violence of the Islamists against the secular Muslim Syrians and Christians (some of them Greeks).
Russia Today, despite their own share of bias, is much better in some issues... much better!
Big hair, pasty make-up, loud ties and announcer voices which grab your attention and slap you around a bit, no matter how banal the news item.
Perhaps growing up with the BBC and the CBC has biased me but that sounds like American journalism to me.
That's why I spend most of my news-listening time listening to the BBC, because I like to stay informed, not entertained.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Does "the West" have a patent on this methodology?
"To spice up the news, directors sometimes use Hollywood-like special effects, such as a computer-animated tank that looks like it is rolling over the newscaster's feet or Israeli fighter jets that fly a virtual loop through the studio before dropping their bombs over a map of Syria."
Based on the last election, I'd say CNN does.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Just don't get stuck into the trap of aiming for the middle simply because both sides have a bias. Then you are no better than the Americans.... who continually shift beyond Mussolini's Fascism without realizing it.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
No different than cspan
Not to be outdone, Obama has authorized Voice of America to broadcast to American audiences, in order to ensure that our country keeps the upper hand in using propaganda against western audiences.
</wishiwerejoking>
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Roger Ailes tried but the patent was rejected but there was too much prior art....
Really if anything "the West" should be credited with inventing modern journalism.
First Amendment to the Constitution was the first of its kind. No other citizens had ever had that level of official legal protection in history.
France gave us the idea of the press as the '4th Estate'...in a broad sense being an independent check on government.
England contributed mostly by abusing the press for colonialism purposes and using sex to sell tabloids...setting the stage for the 1st Amendment.
Thank you Dave Raggett
The modern Russian media is if anything worse than the old Pravda was. If you've recently had the pleasure of trying to have a political discussion with a Russian national, you'll notice quickly that they basically live in an entirely different universe than everyone else. Seriously, day-long Fox News viewers are well-grounded in reality compared to these folks.
In the Russian universe, the driving force behind everything is the USA. Literally everything, even stuff your typical American would claim to neither know nor give a shit about. The entire Arab Spring was started and driven by outside USA agitators. All those protestors you see on TV? All fakes (or paid US agents). They'll do the same in Russia too, given half the chance. You see, NGO's are also all CIA organizations acting to overthrow governments. Thus attacking NGO's is a patriot's duty.
It'll be fun when they start trying to seriously peddle this stuff in the West. I'd laugh it off as clearly unbelievable, but I used to do that with the 700 Club when it started on TV too. Some people bought it, and that made it important, no matter how clearly silly it all was.
For that reason I'd actually advocate taking in some Russian media, just so their behavior will start to make some sense to you. Syrians, wonder why Russia works so hard to keep your local tyrant in power? The answer's there. Americans, wonder what Russians seem to have against anything at all your country publicly seems to want? The answer's there too.
Most news media spews propoganda in some respect even if when that respect is apolitical in the form of human laziness, lack of knowledge or button pushing and invocation of hyperbole to attract interest/ratings.
As long as you understand context only real question does SNR of nonsense and propoganda to useful objective information make media x worth yer time 2 parse.
http://rt.com/usa/nsa-review-group-clapper-445/
When reality isn't aligned to their agenda, then they employ propaganda - and from what I've read so far it's not as moronic as what Fox News does.
RT is loads better than Fox News. Of course when it comes to reporting on the west, they don't need to try -- the west is screwing itself; they can just report honestly. I frankly have been surprised they got into topics with the USA that Russia has trouble with - you'd think they wouldn't want to bring up the whole topic... which was how old propaganda worked... It seems that PR people have learned how to work so well with hypocrisy they don't avoid it anymore.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
gay with delight over his reelection.
Indeed. The best news I have found in the English-speaking world are the various *BCs of the Commonwealth countries. BBC being the most well-known example, but the CBC (Canada) and ABC (Australia) are both excellent too. Public broadcasters, no ads, less political bias (not to say there is none - but they generally have much tougher editorial guidelines and charters of responsibility than corporate news organisations). All three have a good, free web presence. All three have good 24h news TV and radio channels ... the latter are freely available globally if you have the right equipment and can be streamed online/accessed via an app like TuneIn Radio). The TV channels are a bit trickier to get - BBC is available in the US if you have cable I think, the others stream online but would require a VPN.
Take a class, or read a textbook, on advertising.
"If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it."
"The engineering of consent is the very essence of the democratic process, the freedom to persuade and suggest."
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society."
"Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government."
-- Edward Bernays, aka, The Father of Public Relations
>Public broadcasters, no ads
CBC has commercials. Watching them right now. - dog food, cell phone, retirement plan, junk food. etc
Be fair. NPR, MSNBC, The Huffington Post, and The New York Times are Obama's Pravda.
You will rarely if ever hear one of those outlets cast a critical eye towards liberal policies. They are are just as biased left as fox is biased right. u mad that one outlet disagrees with the rest?
THL phish sticks
u mad that one outlet disagrees with the rest?
Personally, I'm a bit surprised at how many people fall for that whole faux adversarial relationship.
Substance-wise, all mainstream US news outlets are identical, in that they're completely lacking.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
But it is also meant to amplify the self-doubts of Europeans and Americans who have been forced by recent events to wonder if their own countries — like Russia and China — are corrupt
No, they aren't. Why would anyone with Internet access and a working brain wonder that?
Ezekiel 23:20
"There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth."
RT provides a nice counter-point to the Western propaganda machine.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
RT, or Russia Today, is an admission ticket for Russia into the global competition of culture. Much akin to a game of Civilization (thank god for Sid Meier) where a civ goes for a cultural victory. Also, the comparison's to Fox News in the US are a bit off. Fox News' focus of 'us vs. them' is the intra-national infighting of the dis-United States while Russia Today's 'us vs. them' is clearly international.
I tried to watch them...
I can't tell if they take themselves seriously or not?
Makes me ache for the days when the news was news and strictly separated from 'editorial' content...
... of course, I'm not sure those days ever really existed.
Honesty, between them, FOX, CNN and MSNBC... I actually watch the Daily Show
Bruce A. Knack
Silicon Surfers
yes, it's mostly propaganda - just like all the western "news outlets". The difference is that it's different propaganda and that's quite refreshing, it's one source of information which doesn't parrot the same garbage all the rest spew out.
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
The BBC frequently runs AP stories just like Fox. I think world wide they have more and better reporters, but those people are not often published.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
You know what's a more interesting site?
English Russia. Mostly photo-essay / slideshow style, but with really high quality, large images. Tons of urban exploration themed stories, for example. Very neat.
One of the reasons that I think the mainstream press has been biting it online is that many of them still think 300-pixel-wide images are acceptable for covering a story. I have a camera where I can shoot someone's photo from a block away and practically see their nosehairs, news photographers are shooting with the same or better, and they're posting crappy, overcompressed, over-contrasted, tiny garbage.
The Boston Globe's Big Picture posts images 990x660, and they're so much better it's astounding. They're standard newswire photos - just not compressed to hell and shrunk to the size of a postage stamp like they are almost everywhere else!
Please help metamoderate.
As a Russian living in USA, I have to admit that I have never watched RT.
So are we pretending now that the United States doesn't have it's own State Media propaganda outlets? And no I'm not talking about Fox news or MSNBC. They are basically extensions of their respective political parties but not directly run by the feds.
I'm talking about Voice of America: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_America
They broadcast US propaganda all over the world at the behest of the state department.
But wait you say? This is only directed at foreign audiences like the middle east to counteract the state run media there?
Ah, but no... Congress just repealed the decades old "propaganda ban" and directed Voice of America to start broadcasting inside the united states:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-propaganda-ban-repealed-freeing-state-dept-to-direct-its-broadcasting-arm-american-citizens.shtml
That's right, The United States of America, beacon of freedom, land of the free, home of the brave, will now have a State media organization dedicated to manipulating the American people into believing their government is Righteous and good.
greater than 1% of our population is in prison.
We have a never ending nebulous "War on Terror"
We have a secret domestic spy network that captures all of your communications
Our government now imprisons people indefinitely without warrant, cause or judicial oversight.
Our president now orders the death of foreigners AND American citizens without any oversight what-so-ever as long as he feels they are an imminent threat.
Welcome to the the Police state.
Russia's not looking so bad now is it?
RT is 100% legit news next to American comedy like Fox "news"..
BBC in US is available over the air on TV and radio - PBS/GBH.
You will rarely if ever hear one of those outlets cast a critical eye towards liberal policies. They are are just as biased left as fox is biased right.
You might try looking at the networks' coverage of Snowden to see how wrong this is. "Liberal" MSNBC and NPR (can't speak for the others) have actually been mostly neutral, sometimes supportive, toward him; Fox is the one insisting he's a traitor or bringing on Washington talking heads who do.
But no, don't do anything drastic like examine your beliefs. Just keep it up with the "both sides are equally bad" meme, but actually requires no critical thought whatsoever.
Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
Clearly there are conservative-military people in the US who want to restart the cold war. Russia is not our enemy anymore. All of this hate toward our Russian friends makes me sad. The smear campaign against Snowden has now extended to Russia. It really is embarrassing to be an American these days. We must look like such angry, violent idiots to the rest of the world. The dumb bully of the planet.
I like Russia. I like its culture. I like its language. It isn't the USSR anymore. I think I'd actually prefer living there to living here in the US. I think Snowden is going to be pleasantly surprised with much about that country. It may even be freer in some ways than the US. For instance apparently the Russians don't have to worry about gag orders when they refuse to comply with government surveillance agencies.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
False dichotomy. Because Fox News is so bad, the other rags MUST be liberal counterparts?
Grade A USDA certified bullshit. This is a coping mechanism that lets you hold on to your irrational beliefs when you really should know better. . Maybe, just maybe Fox news is off the fucking rocker insane, and everyone else is somewhat closer to reality?
All of those outlets say PLENTY critical of the Obama administration, particularly related to recent national security issues. Do you even listen to NPR? I do and they're not shy about reporting the news as it is.
And no, I don't watch fox news. It's disgusting and offensive to anyone who rubs two braincells together. Watching grown men smirk and sneer and make racists offhanded comments on FUCKING PUBLIC AIRWAVES IS NOT FUCKING NEWS. Fox news has fucking /musical cues/.
Pravda is not propaganda. Its comedy, its more like the enquirer.
UFOs, aliens and crazy conspiracy theories are frequent.
Simply put, RT is more interesting. Sure, you could argue that it is probably targeted towards my audience (in college), but then again... CNN is targeted towards housewives (so they can jump on demonized court cases), and FOX is targeted towards angry Christians (so they can pounce on related/demonized issues).
Speaking of demonized court cases, they'll put the Anthony/Zimmerman/etc trials on, yet paid little attention to the Bradley Manning case. RT does the exact opposite: I think that a man going to prison because he released secret documents is much, MUCH more interesting than someone killing another person. People die every day, secret documents are a rarity.
I could point out that the BBC is really just Britain's Russia Today, and go into details why, but it would be a distraction from the more fundamental issue.
Most news organisations operate in the same non-objective way whether they are government controlled or completely commercial. They report more favourably on their host country (and allies) than on enemies. For example, the BBC will report on Iranian police violence against protesters very harshly. It will be implied that the police violence is extreme and unwarranted and the unarmed and peaceful nature of the protesters will be emphasised (with protester violence even being ignored). In contrast, the same kind of violence perpetrated by UK police will be reported very differently. It will either be under-reported ("Police scuffled with protesters") or the focus will be on protester violence.
All you have to do to see this for yourself is do a search and replace on country/city names in articles. Suddenly that article damning Russia for the Seige of Grozny will be an article damning the US for the Seige of Fallujah. You will notice that sentences like "What right does the US have to order the citizens to leave." are quite jarring and do not seem like the kind of thing the news would normally say in this situation. This is your clue that something is very wrong with mainstream media reporting.
Truth is the best propaganda. American media should try it some time.
The reason why RT (along with the BBC, Al-Jazeera and others) are popular in the US is because they're not filled with the crap that CNN, FOX and (MS)NBC cover.
Rather than focusing on supposed "racism" about Oprah in a high-end fashion boutique they focus on the real issues, like the NSA spying scandal, Obama's drone wars, etc.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
You'll find RT on YouTube if you can't figure out where its hiding in your cable line up. In my market Comcast has it on two channels that are generically labeled "Leased Access" on all of the TV Listings. I've never seen anything listing channel RT on any published lineup. If you are flipping channels, RT will have a green logo and wire crawl. Its like CNN without commercials, but regular intervals of station ID breaks.
The Kaiser Report runs Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, but I still can't figure out what time, although it often repeats throughout the day. Their news has an ambivelant tone, and their agenda strike me as slightly libertarian with certain left and certain right leanings when it comes to social and political issues. In other words, they will not contradict the Putin anti-homosexual social stance, but are glad to elaborate on occupy wall street and the agony of austerity in Greece. In other words its a refreshing anti establishment voice, but in the end it is no less self serving than any other news organization that is subsidized in order to further a political agenda. Nevertheless, I'll take it rather than leave it, and I just LOVE to hear Max Keiser ( strangely an anagram of "I Seek Marx" ) mouth off on the impending economic Armageddon of the West. At the very least his view illustrates that no economic ideology is immune from the unethical behavior of greedy men. Greed and injustice is every bit as widespread in ANY system, institution, and political system. When you stop paying attention, or blindly think its an "us" and "them" then you may be deluding yourself of the facts. Thinking that your shit doesn't stink and that some people/cultures/nations are better than others, and more deserving of dominating others is a slippery slope. If instead, RT helps to bring us closer to the "Golden Rule" of "To each their own" and "Do unto others" then I think that its great! But we must diligently e x p a n d our perspective of this world and try not to be so quick at ethnocentric anachronistic hegemonic ideologies that are spoon fed to us like preachers to the choir in an echo chamber.
Simply put, its best to listen to unconventional views that challenge the status quo. Expand your horizons, and watch a little RT and Al Jazeera and Democracy Now, for a change... and if you already are, then turn on some Fox News and 60 minutes, now and then.
May the farce be with you.
Go ahead and jump on the next plane to Russia. If you are going to pimp their qualities you best get a first hand look at your shining city on the hill. Why you are there see if you can find out if they are publishing the body count from Syria. Russians don't have gag orders when speaking about the government they use a more effective and permanent technique usually referred to as murder by the more uppity countries in the world.
You might try looking at the networks' coverage of Snowden to see how wrong this is. "Liberal" MSNBC and NPR (can't speak for the others) have actually been mostly neutral, sometimes supportive, toward him; Fox is the one insisting he's a traitor or bringing on Washington talking heads who do.
I haven't noticed this neutrality you speak of in any US news outlet and I searched hard for an exception. It was depressing to think that every choice was anti-Snowden, pro surveillance state propaganda. To get neutrality you have to go to foreign news outlets. Pretty much any foreign news source actually seems to get you out of the everything-the-US-government-does-is-wonderful reality distortion field.
The Snowden story is actually the first time I've realized that the US media has gotten quite this bad. To the point of yellow journalism and outright obvious propaganda. I had thought that objectivity and neutrality was something that US news agencies at least aspired to. Now they don't even feel the need to pretend. I have to wonder at what other pro-government news stories I've been misled and manipulated by.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
I find RT to be a counter-weight to the massive loads of propaganda bullshit pouring from U.S news channels and other outlets. It's not until you get news and reports from all countries and the whole political spectrum that you can start to piece together the big picture.
If you watch U.S outlets and nothing else, then you get the skewed idea that the world is filled with terrorists and that the U.S alone champions peace and democracy for a better and balanced world. Which is quite the opposite of what they're doing.
Signature intentionally left blank.
The BBC frequently runs AP stories just like Fox. I think world wide they have more and better reporters, but those people are not often published.
Alas, with all the cuts to the BBC it is suffering a bit, but still far, far better than Fox.
Fox is the mouthpiece of Rupert Murdoch, same as The Sun (and former Sun on Sunday - News of the World) they're all rotten to the core and great friends with conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Uh, you do realize that your response only serves to reinforce OP's ideology, don't you?
Would have been better if you could have stated the same thing, minus all the foaming-at-the-mouth anger.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
How do you know all of this? Have you lived there? Also what does Syria have to do with anything? Does the fighting in Syria affect day to day life in Russia?
The US is just as bad or worse when it comes to unnecessary foreign wars as entertainment. As far as murder, ask Yemeni and Pakistani children who've lost friends and siblings to US missiles about murder. They may not agree with you that Russia is worse in that respect.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Different propaganda is not better propaganda, but it's always hard to see through our own delusions. The boards of the BBC answer to the same people Murdoch's companies do. One of those people gets paid to sit on her old wrinkled ass and collect 35 million pounds a year from her UK serfs. Her kids live in luxury too, though at least one of them tries to behave like a citizen.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Is this why you (and those who modded you up) are more comfortable with Fox News than with other outlets?
Their bias is, after all, more outright.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Russia TV specializes in driving wedges between Western countries.
The Western "journalists" who work for Putin's propaganda network are traitors to their own lands.
and die!
RT covered the US Occupy movement more than any Western news organization.
This is what media does. It's funny to point out Russia, there are three fingers aiming back at you. This is what media is: using Threat Narrative, misinformation and filtering to Manufacture Consent.
Do yourself a favor and watch the video I linked. Realize the truth: There are no absolutes, everything is multifaceted. You can deliver some good info while also furthering an agenda. This is the Information Age, and it will quickly become the Dark Age 2.0 if we are not wise about the information we accept.
General rule of thumb: If they hold the weather report for ransom, you're being network programmed.
Yes but not 24/7 (on the TV side, at least).
Russia Today sees itself as a champion of a global audience critical of the West. But it is also meant to amplify the self-doubts of Europeans and Americans who have been forced by recent events to wonder if their own countries â" like Russia and China â" are corrupt and in the grip of a pervasive intelligence apparatus.
I find it odd that this role is considered bad. Certainly it would be bad in an authoritarian regime. But in a democracy that is the precise role of the 4th estate - they shouldn't be telling us everything is fine when it isn't and frankly it is never fine, how does that saying go? The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
It certainly sounds like the US and Russia are preparing for a war-by-proxy in Syria. It's great - you get to show off your state-of-the-art war machines to your populace and your "adversary", without any threat of real repercussion - it's all somebody else's hometown that get's leveled, and both sides can deny that they intended the horrors of war. Meanwhile that good old patriotic drumbeat helps to rally the population around the leaders in the face of a "threatening adversary". Nobody wants a war on the homefront, but "increased tensions" are political gold all around.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
CBC TV has had ads since... I don't remember when, but I don't think it has always had them. A long time now, anyway.
CBC radio 1 is still ad free, though.
Sent from my PDP-11
Ok my mistake then. BBC and ABC are ad-free (in all mediums, radio, web and TV)
"Russia Today .. is also meant to amplify the self-doubts of Europeans and Americans who have been forced by recent events to wonder if their own countries -- like Russia and China -- are corrupt and in the grip of a pervasive intelligence apparatus".
..
Without the pretext of the Cold War, it is patently obvious that the US is continuing its war on Democracy
American Power and the New Mandarins
Imperial Ambitions
Vulture Fund Threat to Third World
AccountKiller
Not a damned thing about the NFL season or the Kardashians. I'm outta here!
Have gnu, will travel.
While the RT agenda is fairly obvious and I don't question that some of the info is skewed in some way, I find it a much more reliable outlet than CNN, MSNBC, FOX, or the plethora of other vacuous and blatantly false media outlets available here in the US.
I can find some decent reporting on the RT, and almost none of it is about Honey Boo Boo and Kim Kardashian, so..... .... It's a much better news source than most of the gheystream media.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
RT?
Not as transparently fake and manipulative as CNNBCFox.
Or NYT and WashPo.
American propaganda is shaped and manufactured by the mega-corporations that captured US government, decades ago.
Example:
GE. They bring you the "News" and the bombs dropped. And the planes that carried them. And the un-earned income for the former congressman who voted to both fund their development and purchase, as well as vote the extra-constitutional "authorization of force", by which they are expended.
Or you never saw the fake Scud feed? Or the "first gulf war" Charles Jaco, CNN fake?
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Actually I have been there 3 times for a total of 5 weeks primarily for work. The Russians are backing Assad in Syria with weapons large and small which means they also support Hezbolla and Iranian policies. Personally I don't really give a shit about Russia or any of the middle eastern states. The only thing I do tend to support is total withdrawal of the US military from that region and let all those countries settle their own problems. After a minimum of 5 years we should re-evaluate the situation and see if the absence of US involvement made things better or worse. If things are judged better then that's great the US can continue on its path while saving a shit load of money. If things are judged worse we can simply say "maybe US involvement wasn't really all that bad" and still continue a cheaper non-interventionist policy.
"Does the fighting in Syria affect day to day life in Russia"
Does the US drone strikes in Yemen or Pakistan affect daily life in the US?
RT is one of the most disgusting news outlets I've ever seen, kinda tabloid with golden print. It is amazing how much money Putin is dumping on it. Putin must realize that no amount of propaganda can fix reputation damage after a certain point. He must quit and stop wasting taxpayers money of his very poor country.
And if you want unbiased news just use diff on several news sources.
Same thought here ... I grew up watching CBC and the french "Le Journal" for news. When I see Fox/NBC/CNN news ads on American networks I don't even register them as 'news' but something akin to Entertainment Tonight (which has better journalism).
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
All media outlets have a bias. If you think there is an outlet that is unbiased, you're mistaken, but it probably shares your bias.
RT is one Russian version of the American VOA, Alhurra, Radio Farda and countless others. If you think the BBC is really a "service" for the benefit of humanity, you're a fool, the UK would be foolish not to use it as a propaganda arm and if you listen to it as often as i do (In English, French and Arabic), you'll detect certain biases (such as a lack of local British coverage over Assange and the London Riots). Although the English Arm is definitely of better quality.
I don't think it's possible for any media to be unbiased, they all have owners with opinions (who can at least set the tone). I'm glad RT freely admits it's agenda.Caveat emptor.
http://metabunk.org/threads/debunked-cnns-fake-news-broadcasts-charles-jaco-and-the-fake-live-gulf-war-reports.1140/
makes u 2 b da foo! foo!
VOA, BBC World, France24, Al Jazeera, PressTV, CCTV News, NHK World, DW-TV ... it's fashionable.
What sets RT apart is that they have a bunch of money and all the motion graphics/design/branding on the channel is all superfuturistic in that classically weird Russian kinda way.
"Who are you going to believe? Me? Or your damned lying eyes!"
Right.
Which is why Jaco REHEARSES the reaction, several times BEFORE the "event" "occurs".
Metabunk is just another socially-fed channel - subject to manipulation and organised disinformation, such as that the Airforce publicly declared it runs - many others covertly.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
If you don't see the difference between iranian protesters and england rioters, there is no hope for you. (hint: they were asking for something, and even had former presidents and candidates on their side)
That should be fun the Syrian government backed by Russia and Al Qaida backed by the USA, reminds me of the eighties.
It's brand "AMERICA" (tm). Just BEEELEEEVEEE!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Anybody who's watched RT knows it's about getting the Russian point of view out there and the associated propaganda. However there are quite a few shows they put on about the culture of Russia that are great. Now, get back to the news and it's hilarious to watch programs like the "Keiser Report" with that crack smoker Max Keiser. In essence they give him a form to rock back and forth in an uncontrollable rant against Western Capitalists. Watch this guy and then ask yourself "What is he on?" If Putin thinks that will sway public opinion to the Russian point of view, he's mistaken. Every time I travel to Europe I seek out their Cable Channel, it's great watching just don't take it too seriously.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI4EredF9D8
"What are you doing?!?"
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
There's another professional Russian news site worth checking out: en.rian.ru (I mainly check the defense section).
Most American mainstream media is shit.
RT is shit and propaganda.
They are not mutually exclusive.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
The BBC has a wonderful track record of criticising UK policing where it is due.
For example:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm -- Police officer shoots dead unarmed civilian
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22949861 -- Police act unlawfully at rally
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10728685 -- Police kill man unrelated to protest, apologise for unlawful force.
While I'm sure that some stories of less interest to, or with less immediate impact on, British audiences are glossed over, the BBC certainly will offer up stories critical of the British establishment, even if it tends not highlight them as harshly.
The problem that you do not get an awful lot of the Russian perspective outside of RT is, that it takes an awfully well-educated Russian to write in good English. An ordinary Russian who would like to share his perspective in English just hasn't read a few thousands English books that would allow him to write well (enough to be competitive as a writer and do not look like a moron because of his/her use of English). As the result, English authors and American/British perspective dominates in the English world. Breaking through the language barrier requires enormous effort, that is possible only for large structures, such as the Russian state.
Almost ad free, if you have the BBC News android app that is "ad supported" at least some of the time ( maybe the ads have been dropped) , also if you watch some of the international broadcasts not aimed at the UK adverts are there too.
The excuse for the license fee is that it avoids the BBC needing to fund via outside advertising, internal advertising is quite common. So the BBC tries to avoid advertising on its home markets but the rest of the world is fair game, after all the rest of the world generally doesn't pay for the BBC directly.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Seriously I am Australian, the ABC has massive political bias.
In Soviet Russia the news watches YOU!
This is so much more accurate than you may think when every click done online is being logged. Except it's not only done in Russia.
Eh, I listen to NPR a bit, and I havent heard anything positive out of them, and several very negative references. They are pretty solidly establishment. There might well be a bright ray that gets through here and there, but it doesnt characterise the institution as a whole I am afraid.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
American is propaganda. Merely reinforcement of official statement:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/12/michael-hayden-nsa-media-reverence
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
I'm Australian too (though living in the US). All sources have some bias (which is why it's a good idea to try and get your news from multiple sources). However compared to the News Ltd. and Fairfax newspaper alternatives, or the commercial TV channels, I feel that the ABC has less.
While it's traditionally thought to have a somewhat Labor-leaning bias, there was a period there during the Howard era where it was accused of having a Liberal one. But at least, as a public broadcaster, it has tighter controls/charters and operates more transparently than the alternatives.
And aside from the issue of bias, the ABCs online stuff is awesome (iView, apps etc.) They've always been way ahead of the curve compared to the other news sources in Australia when it comes to embracing new tech. So if nothing else, it's more convenient. The Australian has a pretty good app too, which I do use occasionally when I want a more conservative leaning source.
This is one of my most trusted sites.
I deeply respect most of its news anchors: @MaxKeiser, Abby Martin, @StacyHerbert, @EnglishPI, and the other i dont remember by name.
I find USA all mainstream news sources highly biased, except for TheYoungTurks, which i considered to be mainstream by now.
On Russia Today being a propaganda tool, I'd deeply disagree. Its quite the opposite, Russia Today its an anti-propaganda tool
After the Snowden issue I'm changing my views about Putin and I'm quite interested in all things Russia.
Big hair, pasty make-up, loud ties and announcer voices which grab your attention and slap you around a bit, no matter how banal the news item.
Perhaps growing up with the BBC and the CBC has biased me but that sounds like American journalism to me.
That's why I spend most of my news-listening time listening to the BBC, because I like to stay informed, not entertained.
Oh yeah the BBC is great - as long as you don't expect to hear any balance on topics like Scottish Independence, or the Gibraltar spat, or anything the current Government really doesn't want them to mention.
They're great for spreading the fear and misinformation aspects of these stories though - not only does please their 'sponsors' but it makes it look like they are covering the story even though it was nothing more than baseless propaganda.
Granted - to an American, this is like telling a man dying of thirst that the water you've got is a little harsh and not great for drinking. We've got it a bit better than you - but it's not really a laurel for us to rest on.