• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Russian (genocidal) internal propaganda and goals about Ukraine

I'm sure the fellas are very embarrassed that they've brought down the credibility of NAFO with that error.
 
gnome said:
It's very simple actually. RT is state-controlled. They must, and will, print whatever the Russian government wants them to. If they deviated from the officially decided line of information to release, they would face direct enforcement.

The BBC is independent of direct state control. They may have their own bias, but that is not government propaganda. Not the same ballpark, league, or sport.

There is no reason to trust RT to be accurate. You can take their content as just official announcements from the government, which will be true or false as they see fit.
Click to expand...


Indeed.

Media Bias Fact Check said:
RT News (RT.Com)

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence. Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis.

Overall, we rate RT Questionable based on promoting pro-Russian propaganda, conspiracy theories, numerous failed fact checks, and a lack of author transparency.

Reasoning: Russian Propaganda, Conspiracy, Lack of Transparency, Some Fake News
Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER
Factual Reporting: VERY LOW
Country: Russia
Press Freedom Rank: LIMITED FREEDOM
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
Click to expand...
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/rt-news/

Basically, rt.com is a hack site and a mouthpiece for the Russian government. It's accurate the extent that it reflects what the propagandists and possibly some officials in the upper echelons of the Russian government are thinking. Otherwise it's not worth the bandwidth to download their bilge.
 
Oystein said:
Did Scotland hold a referendum, or did the UK hold a referendum in Scotland?
I think you will agree, without qualification, that Scotland, not the UK, held a referendum on independence some years ago.

Was this a legitimate refereendum? If the outcome had gone for Scottish independence, would you have accepted it as legit?
Click to expand...
Scotland's situation with regards to the United Kingdom is quite different from Crimea's situation with regards to Ukraine. Scotland is a (kinda sorta) independent country within the United Kingdom, with its own parliament, chief minister, courts and laws. Crimea is an oblast of Ukraine - analogous to a state or a province. Thus Scotland has the authority to conduct a referendum in Scotland, where the same may not be true of Crimea.
 
gnome said:
It's very simple actually. RT is state-controlled. They must, and will, print whatever the Russian government wants them to. If they deviated from the officially decided line of information to release, they would face direct enforcement.

The BBC is independent of direct state control. They may have their own bias, but that is not government propaganda. Not the same ballpark, league, or sport.

There is no reason to trust RT to be accurate. You can take their content as just official announcements from the government, which will be true or false as they see fit.
Click to expand...
This is an excerpt from one of their articles, currently posted on RT.com:
Soviet pop icon condemns Russia’s actions in Ukraine
Alla Pugacheva spoke out against the military operation after her husband was labeled a “foreign agent”
Click to expand...
(https://www.rt.com/russia/563056-pop-icon-foreign-agent/)

Then you can find some details similar to what you would see on a Western news outlet.

This shows you that, in a spirit of objectivity, they are not afraid to post stories which might be considered as embarrassing for the Kremlin.
 
A better question is whether that story is available on the Russian version of the site.

Propaganda rags will post stuff like that for foreign consumption to give themselves credibility outside of their home country but the same story won't be available inside it.
 
Wildy said:
A better question is whether that story is available on the Russian version of the site.

Propaganda rags will post stuff like that for foreign consumption to give themselves credibility outside of their home country but the same story won't be available inside it.
Click to expand...
The website RT in Russian (https://russian.rt.com/) is completely different.

Here is one of their current stories there:
Documents of the American army: how HIMARS hit the target and civilian objects
September 18, 2022, 14:09 Ivan Erofeev

On September 14, a HIMARS projectile hit a college building with orphans in Perevalsk in the LPR. An 18-year-old student died, many children were injured. HIMARS ammunition regularly arrives not at military, but at civilian targets. An RT correspondent studied the studies of the US military and found out: the Pentagon admits that the old shells of the complex are not reliable enough and cause "collateral damage."
Click to expand...
(https://russian.rt.com/ussr/article/1049054-ukraina-oruzhie-postavka-himars)

It sounds a little bit like Childlike Empress.
 
Exactly. The regular Russian won't see the story that criticises Putin, that story is for people like you who want to see stories like that because it adds legitimacy to their outlet.
 
Michel H said:
This is an excerpt from one of their articles, currently posted on RT.com:

(https://www.rt.com/russia/563056-pop-icon-foreign-agent/)

Then you can find some details similar to what you would see on a Western news outlet.

This shows you that, in a spirit of objectivity, they are not afraid to post stories which might be considered as embarrassing for the Kremlin.
Click to expand...

But RT is for genocide apologists. It's not a source for people with a sense of morality or decency. A decent person wouldn't debase themselves by citing a source from their kind.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
I note that this story about HIMARS hitting an orphanage was presented without a shred of evidence.
What steps did you take to verify this claim, Michel H?
Click to expand...
It is normal for a news outlet to not show its sources to ordinary readers (people's republics authorities, Russian Ministry of Defence and so on).

I assume the story is authentic because I do have some trust for RT, like I do have some trust in the BBC.

It seems unlikely they just made up this report, this wouldn't be good for their reputation in Russia.

Another (current) report on RT in Russian (which is even worse, in term of casualties):
The consequences of the shelling of Donetsk by the Armed Forces of Ukraine - video
In Donetsk, as a result of the strike of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the square of the Baku Commissars in the Kuibyshev region, according to preliminary data, 13 people were killed. The number of wounded is being specified. Earlier, the Ukrainian military fired at the Donetsk penal colony, one person was injured.
Click to expand...
(https://russian.rt.com/ussr/video/1050553-doneck-posledstviya-obstrela-vsu)

This report is corroborated by the BBC:
Deadly Donetsk blasts hit separatist-run city in Ukraine
Thirteen people have been killed and others wounded in a series of explosions in the separatist-run city of Donetsk in eastern Ukraine, according to its Russian-backed mayor.
Click to expand...
(https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62952641).

Apparently, the Ukrainian regime, which has decided to ignore democracy in Crimea and Donbass (and to try to join a proven criminal organization - NATO), is so confident about fanatical support by the West (which seems to have learnt nothing in Afghanistan and Iraq), that they are now routinely resorting to war crimes (targeting of civilian, and civilian infrastructure).

For fairness, Russia has also been targeting civilian and civilian infrastructure, perhaps in a more extensive way.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Are you aware that your posts are very reminiscent of Goebbels in 1944 complaining about Germany being attacked?
Click to expand...
This doesn't annoy me, because I believe Nazi propaganda was right when it criticized the massive bombing of German cities by the Allies at the end of WWII.

Basically, the Allies adopted Nazi tactics (persecution of innocent civilians and invasion of other countries), and claimed that, when it was them who were doing it, it was acceptable.
 
Michel H said:
This doesn't annoy me, because I believe Nazi propaganda was right when it criticized the massive bombing of German cities by the Allies at the end of WWII.

Basically, the Allies adopted Nazi tactics (persecution of innocent civilians and invasion of other countries), and claimed that, when it was them who were doing it, it was acceptable.
Click to expand...

NVM
 
Last edited:
Michel H said:
This doesn't annoy me, because I believe Nazi propaganda was right when it criticized the massive bombing of German cities by the Allies at the end of WWII.
Click to expand...
That goes without saying no matter the context.

Basically, the Allies adopted Nazi tactics (persecution of innocent civilians and invasion of other countries), and claimed that, when it was them who were doing it, it was acceptable.
Click to expand...
As someone once said, don't be surprised when you get what you give.
 
Michel H said:
It is normal for a news outlet to not show its sources to ordinary readers (people's republics authorities, Russian Ministry of Defence and so on).

I assume the story is authentic because I do have some trust for RT, like I do have some trust in the BBC.

It seems unlikely they just made up this report, this wouldn't be good for their reputation in Russia.

Another (current) report on RT in Russian (which is even worse, in term of casualties):

(https://russian.rt.com/ussr/video/1050553-doneck-posledstviya-obstrela-vsu)

This report is corroborated by the BBC:

(https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62952641).

Apparently, the Ukrainian regime, which has decided to ignore democracy in Crimea and Donbass (and to try to join a proven criminal organization - NATO), is so confident about fanatical support by the West (which seems to have learnt nothing in Afghanistan and Iraq), that they are now routinely resorting to war crimes (targeting of civilian, and civilian infrastructure).

For fairness, Russia has also been targeting civilian and civilian infrastructure, perhaps in a more extensive way.
Click to expand...


Wow, you dove right into 1984 doublespeak there.
Oh well, it's amusing to see that, like CE, you enjoy the horrors of the evil west so much you keep living there, even when you could move to the freedom loving USSR Russian Republic at any time.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Wow, you dove right into 1984 doublespeak there.
Oh well, it's amusing to see that, like CE, you enjoy the horrors of the evil west so much you keep living there, even when you could move to the freedom loving USSR Russian Republic at any time.
Click to expand...
I am not claiming that the Russian Federation is better than the West, or than my country (Belgium).

I believe that, in this instance, both Russia and the West are wrong, and that, like often, the truth is somewhere in the middle, in respect for democracy and peace.

I find it curious that, often, very bright people stop being bright when discussing political isssues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom