Im sure I can find countless cases of crony capitalism being ignored or under reported in the US mainstream, and not just because of a focus on entertainment and ad revenue. You think MSNBC is honest about GE's arms deals? Try to follow: I'm not saying RT is perfect, only that it is better than the garbage I smell wafting from the south. And I'm willing to bet Sy Hersh has had more air time on RT than CNN since RT went international.
Im sure I can find countless cases of crony capitalism being ignored or under reported in the US mainstream, and not just because of a focus on entertainment and ad revenue. You think MSNBC is honest about GE's arms deals? Try to follow: I'm not saying RT is perfect, only that it is better than the garbage I smell wafting from the south. And I'm willing to bet Sy Hersh has had more air time on RT than CNN since RT went international.
GE's arms deals? Aren't those government contracts? And if they aren't, what's preventing CNN, WashPo, Vanity, NY Times, Alt News, NRO, and 50 others from reporting on them? There's no conflict there. See we actually have multiple options and resources, unlike the government arm operating as RT. And can you imagine Obama putting Eric Schmidt or Bill Gates in jail and dissolving their business interests for criticizing him? Well we can in Russia.
or CBC or BBC? Again, it's easy to be honest when the opposing side gives you all the fodder you need. Doesn't mean they don't gloss over Russian atrocities. Duh. I don't dismiss or accept any news source at face...I'm not an idiot. can you say the same? Something tells me you will would reject RT broadcasts regardless of who was talking, purely out of spite.
Talking international news...what does having a bazillion sources have to do with the credibility of the reporting of one of those options? Does vanity fair keep CNN honest? No. There is no correlation. When RT and the Atlantic or vanity fair publish similar opinions critical of US policy, where does that leave you? Does that discredit those publications or validate RT?
As always you are trying to turn this into a discussion of how evil the big bad bear is.
or CBC or BBC? Again, it's easy to be honest when the opposing side gives you all the fodder you need. Doesn't mean they don't gloss over Russian atrocities. Duh. I don't dismiss or accept any news source at face...I'm not an idiot. can you say the same? Something tells me you will would reject RT broadcasts regardless of who was talking, purely out of spite.
Talking international news...what does having a bazillion sources have to do with the credibility of the reporting of one of those options? Does vanity fair keep CNN honest? No. There is no correlation. When RT and the Atlantic or vanity fair publish similar opinions critical of US policy, where does that leave you? Does that discredit those publications or validate RT?
As always you are trying to turn this into a discussion of how evil the big bad bear is.
Douche bag sentence in bold.
A bazillion sources means options and a higher likelihood of finding the truth, vs. single source news that is an arm of the Russian gov't.
The US government deserves criticism.. often. And guess what? We get to do it over here. Go take a look at the RT op ed page this evening... Let's see what they have to say... Hmmm:
1. Trump would beat Obama in third term 2. Iran deal a success "no thanks to Kerry" 3. Putin gives presser that makes Obama's look like "shoebox" 4. "It's Putin the Peacemaker" at annual Moscow conference 5. US and Japan are imperialist countries guided by special interests 6. Person of the year 2016: Russian Hacker 7.. this one's the kicker: NY Times admits Euromaiden was a mistake. Well the article did not such fucking thing. Avangarde lost half of its agricultural capacity when Russia invaded Crimea. But RT neglects to mention that little point. And it focuses only on the agricultural piece, neglecting the benefits to Ukraine in other economic sectors that the NYT article points out.
I never said anything good about Pravda. RT is not Pravda. They are no more polar opposites than CNN and FOX. At least as it pertains to international news, RT is way ahead. It has actual informed guests on each side of a debate their talk shows....US stations like to parade out establishment speakers and phony terrorism experts. But again...this is because of the current state of affairs. It's easy for RT to have honest reporting because honest criticism of the US is all they need to support their position.
RT and honest reporting. Ha. What a fucking joke. I agree that CNN and all of the 24 news stations are shit. But it's not because they are controlled by the government, it's because their raison d'etre is capitalism so they are focused on ratings and entertainment ahead of actual news. When those two meet, then yeah.. great. But RT is an arm of the Kremlin. How about this...
Yes, the Vanity Fair.. the same magazine in which Seymour Hersh wrote for..and exposed My Lai, illegal Cambodian bombings, Abu Gharib, etc. Do you think Vanity Fair gets to exist in Mother Russia? No fucking way.
I never said anything good about Pravda. RT is not Pravda. They are no more polar opposites than CNN and FOX. At least as it pertains to international news, RT is way ahead. It has actual informed guests on each side of a debate their talk shows....US stations like to parade out establishment speakers and phony terrorism experts. But again...this is because of the current state of affairs. It's easy for RT to have honest reporting because honest criticism of the US is all they need to support their position.
RT and honest reporting. Ha. What a fucking joke. I agree that CNN and all of the 24 news stations are shit. But it's not because they are controlled by the government, it's because their raison d'etre is capitalism so they are focused on ratings and entertainment ahead of actual news. When those two meet, then yeah.. great. But RT is an arm of the Kremlin. How about this...
Yes, the Vanity Fair.. the same magazine in which Seymour Hersh wrote for..and exposed My Lai, illegal Cambodian bombings, Abu Gharib, etc. Do you think Vanity Fair gets to exist in Mother Russia? No fucking way.
Hahaha....MSM not controlled by government!
Yes you're right. The Russian government does control RT. But if the US gov't controlled Vanity Fair, why oh why did they let the Abu story get published? Can you answer that little bitty question?
No fucking shit. None of this is news. But you are very confused between a free press that does serve as a willing and sometimes stupidly naive press (see run up to Iraq war) with state controlled media. Let me type this really big...THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING. One is much worse than the other.
A bazillion sources means options and a higher likelihood of finding the truth, vs. single source news that is an arm of the Russian gov't.
The US government deserves criticism.. often. And guess what? We get to do it over here. Go take a look at the RT op ed page this evening... Let's see what they have to say... Hmmm:
1. Trump would beat Obama in third term 2. Iran deal a success "no thanks to Kerry" 3. Putin gives presser that makes Obama's look like "shoebox" 4. "It's Putin the Peacemaker" at annual Moscow conference 5. US and Japan are imperialist countries guided by special interests 6. Person of the year 2016: Russian Hacker 7.. this one's the kicker: NY Times admits Euromaiden was a mistake. Well the article did not such fucking thing. Avangarde lost half of its agricultural capacity when Russia invaded Crimea. But RT neglects to mention that little point. And it focuses only on the agricultural piece, neglecting the benefits to Ukraine in other economic sectors that the NYT article points out.
It's full blown, Russian government propaganda.
Hey, your tone is not exactly anti-douche there bud. For the record, I was not saying I think you're an idiot...but I do question your ability to be impartial about anything to do with Russia.
I'll say it once more, then I need to go shovel some snow, eh...
RT is not perfect. It glosses over Russian misdeeds. I will admit it is often used as state propaganda...(would be an idiot not to). But it is no worse than mainstream media in the US on that front, and it is better when it comes to international reporting for the simple fact it is easier for them to report it. They are hyper critical of the US, which is easy to do, especially in instances Russia is not involved in the story.
Go to CNN's world news page and tell me how many headlines you see that are critical of US policy? And how many critical of Russia?
To be honest I don't really 'watch' any news stations...I follow certain reporters, some Indy publications/conglomerates, and catch the odd RT talk show...all thru social media. and they always seem to be much more in-depth and informative than the ones I catch from their US counterparts.
A bazillion sources means options and a higher likelihood of finding the truth, vs. single source news that is an arm of the Russian gov't.
The US government deserves criticism.. often. And guess what? We get to do it over here. Go take a look at the RT op ed page this evening... Let's see what they have to say... Hmmm:
1. Trump would beat Obama in third term 2. Iran deal a success "no thanks to Kerry" 3. Putin gives presser that makes Obama's look like "shoebox" 4. "It's Putin the Peacemaker" at annual Moscow conference 5. US and Japan are imperialist countries guided by special interests 6. Person of the year 2016: Russian Hacker 7.. this one's the kicker: NY Times admits Euromaiden was a mistake. Well the article did not such fucking thing. Avangarde lost half of its agricultural capacity when Russia invaded Crimea. But RT neglects to mention that little point. And it focuses only on the agricultural piece, neglecting the benefits to Ukraine in other economic sectors that the NYT article points out.
It's full blown, Russian government propaganda.
Hey, your tone is not exactly anti-douche there bud. For the record, I was not saying I think you're an idiot...but I do question your ability to be impartial about anything to do with Russia.
I'll say it once more, then I need to go shovel some snow, eh...
RT is not perfect. It glosses over Russian misdeeds. I will admit it is often used as state propaganda...(would be an idiot not to). But it is no worse than mainstream media in the US on that front, and it is better when it comes to international reporting for the simple fact it is easier for them to report it. They are hyper critical of the US, which is easy to do, especially in instances Russia is not involved in the story.
Go to CNN's world news page and tell me how many headlines you see that are critical of US policy? And how many critical of Russia?
To be honest I don't really 'watch' any news stations...I follow certain reporters, some Indy publications/conglomerates, and catch the odd RT talk show...all thru social media. and they always seem to be much more in-depth and informative than the ones I catch from their US counterparts.
I'm sure RT is fine for learning about natural disasters in India or an airline crash (as long as Russian backed Ukrainian rebels didn't shoot it down) somewhere. But when it comes to information about Syria, Aleppo and Russian involvement, it is absolutely biased to Russian policy and propaganda. And that's what the discussion started with... JC posting some bizarre quote from a Russian officer saying they found US munitions. Again.. no shit. We provided them. Did they not find any Russian munitions over there?? Pretty sure there's a few.
Is there US-era propaganda? I'll take RT over CNN, FOX, or MSNBC any day.
Right... State controlled media is always the way to go. That's a good lesson. You think Watergate gets exposed in Russia? My Lai? Iran Contra?
Please. The same corps that own US media own the US govt. what's the difference? I'd also take the BBC or CBC over the US stations I mentioned. Is there US propaganda?
Oh...and do you think the oligarchs in Russia are independent from the govt? The government is 100% controlling of business interests. Is that better to you? Is it better that if you run afoul of Putin he jails you and breaks up your company to himself and the other oligarchs?
You're moving the goal posts. As per. But no, it's not better.
Classic mrussel! Moving goal posts mid convo and my personal favorite from him, condescension. I will admit thou, he is thought provoking, he picks his spots well, I missed this stuff during his post election sabbatical.
Getting news from RT about Syria and Russia is akin to getting your information on Vietnam from Robert McNamara or Iraq from Paul Wolfowitz.
then why did people like rosario dawson and shailene woodley appear on their channel during the presidential primaries and democratic nominations? ...
i think the thing here is no one is saying RT is independent and not biased ... it goes back to what we've been discussing all this while - people need to get their information from all different sources and think critically about it ...
if people want to believe the narrative the US gov't is putting out there on syria - so, be it ... all we ask is that you don't just arbitrarily accept everything cnn, fox or the new york times tells you ... many independent journalists such as seymour hersh who has been right about a lot of stuff historically also shares our views on syria ...
Getting news from RT about Syria and Russia is akin to getting your information on Vietnam from Robert McNamara or Iraq from Paul Wolfowitz.
then why did people like rosario dawson and shailene woodley appear on their channel during the presidential primaries and democratic nominations? ...
i think the thing here is no one is saying RT is independent and not biased ... it goes back to what we've been discussing all this while - people need to get their information from all different sources and think critically about it ...
if people want to believe the narrative the US gov't is putting out there on syria - so, be it ... all we ask is that you don't just arbitrarily accept everything cnn, fox or the new york times tells you ... many independent journalists such as seymour hersh who has been right about a lot of stuff historically also shares our views on syria ...
And how about the women journalists: Abby Martin, Sarah Abdullah, Rania Khalek
Why couldn't it be? The dude in the hard hat on the left could have been the guy climbing through the rubble. He extracts the child and hands her off to the dude in the yellow outfit who runs her over to the triage area, where the dude on the right attends to her. I don't see why it is a big deal that she was helped by three different rescuers.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
^^^ That's why I was asking. At first it kind of seems like what JC is saying about the pic is true but the more you look at the pic w/ your context seems more plausible.
^^^ That's why I was asking. At first it kind of seems like what JC is saying about the pic is true but the more you look at the pic w/ your context seems more plausible.
Yeah, I'm not sure what JC was getting at. Perhaps a "fake news" example. If, instead of this meme, there were 3 different links to articles posted on CNN of 3 different events in different parts of the world using the same child I'd be convinced. But these 3 images in the meme could have been shot during a single event and wouldn't raise any flags with me.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
^^^ That's why I was asking. At first it kind of seems like what JC is saying about the pic is true but the more you look at the pic w/ your context seems more plausible.
Couldn't find specifics on where it was filmed, but it looks like a set to me. It's a music video for a Lebanese singer from the French 'the voice'...2014. My point? Furthering my pro-Assad, pro-Putin agenda, of course Seriously tho, this wasn't meant to further our conversation about mainstream media. Just an example of propaganda....was reminded of it after seeing JC's post and the ensuing comments.
Since celebs are the current rage...George Clooney remember the $327k per seat fundraiser they did for Hilliary and the down ballot democrats? Ignoring how that worked out for down ballot Ds, I would think being married to Amal he would have some idea of what is really going on in Syria and with the White Helmets...or am I giving Amal too much credit?
Comments
And I'm willing to bet Sy Hersh has had more air time on RT than CNN since RT went international.
Talking international news...what does having a bazillion sources have to do with the credibility of the reporting of one of those options? Does vanity fair keep CNN honest? No. There is no correlation. When RT and the Atlantic or vanity fair publish similar opinions critical of US policy, where does that leave you? Does that discredit those publications or validate RT?
As always you are trying to turn this into a discussion of how evil the big bad bear is.
A bazillion sources means options and a higher likelihood of finding the truth, vs. single source news that is an arm of the Russian gov't.
The US government deserves criticism.. often. And guess what? We get to do it over here. Go take a look at the RT op ed page this evening... Let's see what they have to say... Hmmm:
1. Trump would beat Obama in third term
2. Iran deal a success "no thanks to Kerry"
3. Putin gives presser that makes Obama's look like "shoebox"
4. "It's Putin the Peacemaker" at annual Moscow conference
5. US and Japan are imperialist countries guided by special interests
6. Person of the year 2016: Russian Hacker
7.. this one's the kicker: NY Times admits Euromaiden was a mistake. Well the article did not such fucking thing. Avangarde lost half of its agricultural capacity when Russia invaded Crimea. But RT neglects to mention that little point. And it focuses only on the agricultural piece, neglecting the benefits to Ukraine in other economic sectors that the NYT article points out.
It's full blown, Russian government propaganda.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/1975-video-cia-admits-to-congress-the-agency-uses-mainstream-media-to-distribute-disinformation/5424860
http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/world-class-journalist-admits-mainstream-media-completely-fake-we-lie-cia/
I'll say it once more, then I need to go shovel some snow, eh...
RT is not perfect. It glosses over Russian misdeeds. I will admit it is often used as state propaganda...(would be an idiot not to). But it is no worse than mainstream media in the US on that front, and it is better when it comes to international reporting for the simple fact it is easier for them to report it. They are hyper critical of the US, which is easy to do, especially in instances Russia is not involved in the story.
Go to CNN's world news page and tell me how many headlines you see that are critical of US policy? And how many critical of Russia?
To be honest I don't really 'watch' any news stations...I follow certain reporters, some Indy publications/conglomerates, and catch the odd RT talk show...all thru social media. and they always seem to be much more in-depth and informative than the ones I catch from their US counterparts.
http://www.dw.com/en/russia-accuses-syria-rebels-of-using-chemical-weapons/a-36360974
http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/russia-syrias-rebels-clash-on-chemical-weapons-use-claims
http://www.mintpressnews.com/shocking-beheading-moderate-rebels-allegedly-unleash-chemical-weapons-syria/219168/
i think the thing here is no one is saying RT is independent and not biased ... it goes back to what we've been discussing all this while - people need to get their information from all different sources and think critically about it ...
if people want to believe the narrative the US gov't is putting out there on syria - so, be it ... all we ask is that you don't just arbitrarily accept everything cnn, fox or the new york times tells you ... many independent journalists such as seymour hersh who has been right about a lot of stuff historically also shares our views on syria ...
That's why I was asking. At first it kind of seems like what JC is saying about the pic is true but the more you look at the pic w/ your context seems more plausible.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Definitely not Aleppo 2016.
Anyway, if it wasn't on the MSM, what is your point? And whoever wrote the post, writes like a 3rd grader.
My point? Furthering my pro-Assad, pro-Putin agenda, of course
Seriously tho, this wasn't meant to further our conversation about mainstream media. Just an example of propaganda....was reminded of it after seeing JC's post and the ensuing comments.
http://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/syria-western-media-cheer-al-qaeda
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amalalamuddinstyle.wordpress.com/2017/01/09/amal-and-george-clooney-at-the-white-helmets-documentary-projection-in-london-09-01-2017/amp/