Facebook partners with notorious NATO / US pro-war propaganda think-tank to... 'identify and counter fake news and disinformation'

asus killer · May 18, 2018

12 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

What US or UK news comes close to the objectivity and all-sides analysis of RT? Certainly not CNN, Fox News, NYT, NBC, Washington Post, BBC...

Fox News is cancer, the difference is that you will not see (at least lets hope on it) no one defending Fox News unbiased views.

You're just wrong and dangerously naive if you think RT is a trustworthy source of news as any American defending Fox would be. Zero difference.

Nicnac · May 18, 2018

Cambridge Analytica just showed them something they weren't yet monetising ^^

Mihle · May 18, 2018

15 minutes ago, Sampsy said:

Seriously? RT is literally the mouthpiece of the Kremlin. It's as bad a news source as you can get.

Well, I would say it isn't the worst out there, but it is bad yes.

Delicieuxz · May 18, 2018

1 hour ago, Sampsy said:

Basically, what asus killer said. Fox news is indeed utter garbage. It's a mouthpiece for the US GOP and nothing more. And I can just fire your comment straight back at you. You're so conditioned by Russian propaganda to dogmatically reject anything else.

I read from dozens of news sites, most US and UK. I am able to discern what is of what level of trust-worthiness based on being aware of the various confirmed details of subject, and seeing which outlets say what in spite of them. US mainstream news is all-around the worst. It's hands-down utter fictional garbage. UK mainstream news is right on the heels of US mainstream news.

Quote

You are indeed extremely naive to think that a news agency owned by an authoritarian dictatorship with a long history of political repression is anything other than pure propaganda.

That's strictly your conditioning speaking. RT isn't own by the Russian government. Also, the people who work at RT US, RT UK, RT France, etc, are not Russian people. And many of them come from all the outlets that you claim to be better than RT - except that they also often testify that there is more freedom to report what they want to at RT than at the BBC, NYT, CNN, etc wherever they formerly hailed from.

People like:

Chris Hedges - formerly of New York Times

Larry King - formerly of CNN

Ed Schultz - formerly of NBC

Alex Salmond - formerly the Scottish First Minister

George Galloway - formerly a long-serving UK MP

Jesse Ventura - formerly governor of Minnesota

Afshin Rattansi - formerly at BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera...

And many others coming from well-known Western outlets.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/321082-larry-king-bbc-rt/

Quote

Evans: I think no one would have guessed that Larry King was going to come back on RT… You’re the all-American interviewer.

King: RT distributes our program… and we have a wonderful arrangement with RT. They’ve never interfered with anything I’ve ever done.

The BBC host was taken aback by the answer, unwilling to believe what he was hearing, and the humor of the moment was not lost on viewers.

Evans: Have they ever said, ‘Look, we don’t want that episode; we’ll take that one?’

Again, King disappointed Evans' assumption that there must be something more to the story.

"I’ve never had that happen," King said with a wry smile. "We’ve had Putin criticized frequently.”

Evans remained adamant: "You’ve never self-censored when you’re making a program, thinking ‘this would be a bit awkward.’"

King, who demonstrated his professionalism by remaining fully composed despite Evans' relentlessness, set the record straight once and for all: ‘I’ve never done that in my life. If the audience trusts me; if you trust me to ask good questions then I don’t come with any agenda. And you can watch me in complete comfort knowing that nobody is telling me what to ask or what to do or what not to do.

"I know a lot of people are saying ‘he did it for the money.’ Did you sell your program to RT for the money," Evans shamelessly asked King, a man who, we could surmise, has little financial concern at this stage in a long, successful career.

King didn't miss a beat: "I’ve never did anything for the money. I never got into this business for the money. Look at this: I have never, in 58 years, gone to work. I’ve gone to do a show, but never gone to work.

The television veteran could not resist a playful jab at the young BBC host.

"You’re not working now, Evan. We’re sitting here talking, and they pay you. Who are you kidding?"

Quote

Yes, the vast majority of western news sources are vastly more objective and honest than RT. Including all those you listed

They aren't, though. Not even close.

RT has its own spin - as does all mainstream news media. But RT at least starts with facts, and when it presenting the claims of other sides, tends to do so in the words of the other sides rather than misrepresenting and distorting them to make them sound pre-dismissed like all the Western outlets that I mentioned do... that is, when they even include a mention of other parties' claims, at all. They typically don't, and instead just start reviewing what their concluded stance means, without breathing recognition that there is other information out there. The fact that RT acknowledges the different claims, and stems their presented arguments from factual points, puts it head-and-shoulders above the stature others that I mentioned on a scale of honesty and objectivity.

Though, you are right that the bar is set low. And RT certainly isn't perfect, and perhaps are very far off from it. But RT is better than all the Western mainsteam "news" sources that I listed, and many more.

You're using sentiments that you were taught by Western propaganda media as confirmation bias that RT is what they're told you it is. It's based in little, if anything at all.

Here's a reminder of anti-Russia propaganda stories that were run by Western propaganda media in recent years, which all turned out to be false and were debunked:

A claim that Russia invaded Georgia in 2008
A claim that Russia invaded Crimea in 2014
A claim that Russia annexed Crimea
A claim that Russia invaded East Ukraine in 2014
A claim that Russia ran a state-sponsored doping ring
A claim that Russia hacked a US power plant
A claim that ’17 agencies agree’ that Russia interfered in the US election
A claim that Russia colluded with Trump to get him elected
A claim that Russia meddled in Brexit, Germany, France, and Catalonia’s elections
A claim that Russian bots are everywhere
A claim that Multiple ‘Assad used chemical weapons’ claims that Russia was blamed as responsible for due to supporting Assad (who most Syrians support)
The US narrative of the US / UK / France strike on Syria in April 2018 which denied that its missiles had been shot down and that Russia had captured some US missiles

Every one of the UK government's specific assertions about the Salisbury, UK chemical attack

They've all turned out to be baseless. Most recently, the claim of a Russian state doping ring was rejected at the highest sports court, and McLaren and Rodchenkov changing their stories in court, denying their previous claims including that they had ever witnessed any Russian athletes doping, and were unable to provide any evidence whatsoever - and so their case was ruled against, the Russian athletes unbanned, and the Olympic medals from the Sochi Winter Olympics returned to Russia's athletes - but no mention of it in Western news media.

Why do you think that is? They hyped the story as propaganda for months, and even got Russia barred from the 2018 Winter Olympics - but their story completely unravelled in court.

‘Rodchenkov's evidence is hearsay with limited probative value’ – CAS

Western media silent as Rodchenkov's Russian doping claims fail to stand up in court

If you had wanted to know the outcome and truth of the 'Russia doping' claims, you would have to be watching RT, because Western news media aren't reporting it. By the way, did you know that Rodchenkov is diagnosed with Schizophrenia and holds a grudge against the Russian government for imprisoning his sister after she along with Rodchenkov were caught by Russian authorities running a drug ring back in 2011? I wonder what the motivation for his claims of a Russian doping ring might have been. Hmmmmm.

By the way, here is WADA's official list of the top 5 cheating-by-doping countries in professional sport:

WADA reveals worst doping cheaters in 2016, Russia not even in top 5

1. Italy

2. France

3. USA

4. Australia

5. Belgium

As you can see by Facebook joining the US government and Atlantic Council's "Infowas NATO", Western propaganda media don't even hide that they're pushing false propaganda anymore because it's all piled up to the point that none of it is deniable anymore. They just keep churning the propaganda out to inundate people's senses with an impression that leads them to associate Russia with nefarious and scandalous things, and at a rate that ensures the next propaganda narrative is already circulating before the previous ones are resolved and found out to be not true. But the biggest scandal is Western media, that are creating this propaganda narratives for the purpose of biasing people's impressions.

And RT, despite being around for just 12 years, is already the 2nd most-watched news in the world (and has been for some years, I think), after the BBC, for a reason.

Interesting how the topic, though not about RT, is being made to be about RT despite all the details in the topic OP having been clarified as being factual in this post:

Which proves that what I wrote in this post is true:

2 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

Or, so you've been conditioned by Western propaganda to dogmatically think, so that you'll dismiss any information that that Western propaganda deems as unfavourable towards its propaganda.

Instead of discussing the topic, people are arguing against a source for what is verified information as though it is relevant to do so, while missing that the fact that the information is verified is credit to that source. It's an in-action demonstration of programming from Western, not Russian propaganda.

Mihle · May 18, 2018

@Delicieuxz if you really think all those are baseless you must be really naive.

There is proof that soldiers on crimea work for Russia.

In East Ukraine they possibly didn't start the attack or whatever, but it's proof that Russian soldiers have died in East Ukraine and that Russia have supplied them weapons.

They also didn't claim no missiles was shot down by Russia, there was missiles that was shot down but also ones that wasn't.

The election stuff, Russians citizens did, but I'd russian government is behind it I don't know but where else would they get the money to do it from?

Others I have not really followed

Morgan MLGman · May 18, 2018

Alright guys - this thread has gone nowhere and derailed almost immediately. I'm going to lock it because of that, political debate is not allowed on the forum, as specified in our Community Standards which are here: