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.
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.
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.
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").
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.
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
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?
How is this so called "blatant propaganda" different from the blatant propaganda from every corporate or government news source in the US? Among Americans at least 50% think Snowden is one of the good guys and not a traitor and shouldn't be punished, but every major US news outlet consistently paints Snowden in the worst possible light doing their best to help the government out as much as possible with its blatant character assassinations and smears.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
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.
It's funny that RT takes direct pot shots at CNN/MSNBC, when Fox News has a lot more "pro-west" things to say that are critical of Russia (and foreigners in general). It's as if they know that taking pot shots at Fox would basically be two elephant hunters going after each other, instead of the elephant.
When using propaganda, you want to target more legitimate sources of information (CNN/MSNBC are terrible by European/UK/Australian standards but still a lot better than Fox) and paint them as inaccurate and unreliable because the people who use these sources tend to be more rational and capable of doubt.
Fox News is pretty much US (Republican) propaganda, so the people who trust this source have already made a decision about what they think and are merely looking for a source to confim their pre-existing world veiw. It makes no sense to target Fox News (except for comic releif) with propaganda as the bias and ignorance of the audience makes them largely immune to it.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.