PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   Russia Today (RT) (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/606561-russia-today-rt.html)

clareprop 14th Mar 2018 17:42

Russia Today (RT)
 
So, here is a Russian government backed TV station broadcasting news and current affairs based in Millbank, London. A product to put forward the reasonable views of Putin's Russia or a state sponsored propaganda tool? The British presenters and correspondents, Galloway, Partridge, Dodds, Owen et al... blinkered mouthpieces in it for the money or believers in the truth?

charliegolf 14th Mar 2018 18:27

The in-vogue term is, 'useful idiots', or similar.

CG

ORAC 14th Mar 2018 18:39

No, they are definitely getting paid......

strake 14th Mar 2018 18:46

Having heard about the station following the Salisbury incident, I tuned in for the first time yesterday. It is obviously a propaganda tool. In times of conflict or strained relationships, I would have thought the British presenters must surely feel uncomfortable.

racedo 14th Mar 2018 19:00


Originally Posted by clareprop (Post 10083620)
So, here is a Russian government backed TV station broadcasting news and current affairs based in Millbank, London.?

And what is BBC and who pays for its World Service ?

VP959 14th Mar 2018 19:02

It's interesting the way RT established itself as an apparently reputable news source here. The BBC was in turmoil, and in particular BBC news reporting had dropped to the just above the standard of the tabloid press, IMHO. I switched from looking at the BBC news online and considered RT to present a generally more balanced view, now I tend to view two or three news channels to try and get some idea as to where the truth may lie.

There's no doubt that RT has been managed very cleverly, and has been careful to appear to be, on the surface, presenting a balanced view of world affairs. They've allowed open criticism of Vladimir Putin, for example. They have attracted a considerable number of viewers, as have other news sources, like Al Jazeera.

The challenge for anyone viewing any news source it to try and determine the boundary between truth and propaganda, and with RT I'd have to say that is pretty damned difficult. They hide their state sponsorship well in their reporting, and don't appear to be a propaganda machine at all.

That then begs the question as to why they exist, and why the Russian state pays for them. Given the clear indications that Russia is moving ever closer to becoming a rogue state with every passing day, RT must have a subtle role to play in supporting the Russian government's aims, just as the BBC, and especially the World Service, plays a subtle role in supporting the aims of the British Government.

I see nothing wrong with viewing RT, as long as you also view a few other news outlets and form your own view on the balance of reporting by each, and as long as you bear in mind who is paying for these services...................

racedo 14th Mar 2018 19:15


Originally Posted by VP959 (Post 10083709)

Given the clear indications that Russia is moving ever closer to becoming a rogue state with every passing day, .

Based on whose interpretation ?

Western Govts with a pliable media who do as they are told ?
One only has to look at the UK Press fawning over Saudi visit last week while ignoring the genocide in Yemen by Saudi's.

or

The US Media who shilled for a single candidate in Presidential election and refused to accept the vote and have spent it since doing everything to blame everybody else.

Israel Mossad has 2700 hits abroad to suit its National interests but that is perfectly acceptable.

France destabilise Libya becasue they up to their neck in funding provided to elect Sarkozy and have kept like the UK billions in sequestrated Libyan funds.

So just who again is a "Rogue" state ?

VP959 14th Mar 2018 19:52


Originally Posted by racedo (Post 10083722)
Based on whose interpretation ?

Western Govts with a pliable media who do as they are told ?
One only has to look at the UK Press fawning over Saudi visit last week while ignoring the genocide in Yemen by Saudi's.

or

The US Media who shilled for a single candidate in Presidential election and refused to accept the vote and have spent it since doing everything to blame everybody else.

Israel Mossad has 2700 hits abroad to suit its National interests but that is perfectly acceptable.

France destabilise Libya becasue they up to their neck in funding provided to elect Sarkozy and have kept like the UK billions in sequestrated Libyan funds.

So just who again is a "Rogue" state ?

Passing a law making assignations on the territory of friends and allies seems a pretty good start, not to mention actually using that law to perform extrajudicial murders at will makes them good candidates, in my view.

Not saying that any country is blameless, but we learned the lesson over the Gibraltar executions many years ago, and, as far as I know haven't gone down the same path since.

I've no time for Israel as a state anyway, as they have always seemed a law unto themselves. Thankfully they don't have anywhere near the capability of Russia.

obgraham 14th Mar 2018 20:19


I've no time for Israel as a state anyway, as they have always seemed a law unto themselves. Thankfully they don't have anywhere near the capability of Russia.
This is a statement that has yet to be put to the test, thankfully. However, if it were a matter of odds, I'd be with the Israelis.

jindabyne 14th Mar 2018 20:47


as they have always seemed a law unto themselves
A statement of Fact!

Lonewolf_50 14th Mar 2018 20:54

racedo, your response is identical to how a Russian troll uses "whataboutism" and misdirection as a diversion tactic. Are you aware of that? The topic of this thread isn't your usual target of frustration or hatred, it is RT, a news organization.

Western Govts with a pliable media who do as they are told ?
Horsecrap. You can ask Nixon about pliable media, or Trump with the never ending attention paid to him (a great deal of it not complimentary) as he tries to do battle with this "pliable media" via his t.wi.tt.er account.

One only has to look at the UK Press fawning over Saudi visit last week while ignoring the genocide in Yemen by Saudi's.
Irrelevant to the topic at hand, and a complete red herring in the "ignoring genocide in Yemen by Saudis since the Western press does indeed cover that little mess. It (this imaginary "western media" that your propose as a single institution) seems to prefer to emphasize coverage about who in Hollywood looked good in the red carpet, since that gets more internet clicks. :p

vapilot2004 14th Mar 2018 20:55

To compare RT with the likes of the BBC, The Guardian, or the stateside NYT is playing into the hands of Putin and "fake news" and "Faux News" rabble rousers like him. There have been scads of examples of Fox News or RT broadcasting bold faced lies and half-truths. Not so with the other guys.

Mainstream media outlets, while often liberal minded in coverage, rarely, if ever, stoop to such overt tactics, and when they do stray into the RT/Faux News territory and it is caught (internally or externally) a correction is forthcoming - not always so with the former group. The relatively limited examples of inaccurate coverage in mainstream media comes from an overzealous editor making a bad decision based upon misinformed "unnamed" sources, or sources with an agenda that the news outlet failed to properly vet.

With the RT and their ilk, the cancer is at the top and trickles down, all with no apologies and no retractions as long as what they spew remains in lock step with their skewed beliefs of the world around them, and perceptions of legitimacy remains palatable to their intended audience.

Fact checking at news organizations like RT is practically nonexistent in today's post-fact check atmosphere. As long as the story fits their narrative and agenda, facts are optional and annoying, and their readership and audience, unfortunately, do not seem to care.


reasonable views of Putin's Russia
:applause: Good one!

vapilot2004 14th Mar 2018 21:12

Speaking of money, news organizations at the major television news networks in the states were never, ever intended to be centers of profits. Network news was considered a public trust, and networks operated their sprawling news organizations at a loss for many, many decades. Today, in the profit-driven corporate world of media madness, money is king and truth and integrity are all too often sacrificed on the altar of almighty profit.

Far too many cable news outlets will run with a story, because their coverage will bring up their rating shares, all the while in the guise of doing their public duty. CNN is an example of how money damages a news organization with good intentions. Fox News is an example of how questionable intentions coupled with an audience starved of 'their' point of view, can also lead to huge profits, and they quickly learned how a sullied man with the bullhorn with which to bludgeon reality can become a highly effective political tool.

jolihokistix 14th Mar 2018 21:40

RT used to be one of my stations to visit on the daily round, but like an overdose of Kryptonite, the political slant grew so strong that I stopped watching. I wanted genuine news from and about Russia and the world, but got constant snide not-so-subtle West-bashing instead. It's a pity, because Al Jazeera was pulled and that effectively removed two regular news sources from my TV.
Of the two, I would say that the English-language section of al-Jazeera makes a much more serious effort to be impartial, even as it shows things from another viewpoint. I still visit al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya on the net to get my balance. But not RT any more. RT is for sado-masochists.

racedo 14th Mar 2018 21:44


Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 (Post 10083820)
racedo, your response is identical to how a Russian troll uses "whataboutism" and misdirection as a diversion tactic. Are you aware of that? The topic of this thread isn't your usual target of frustration or hatred, it is RT, a news organization.

Horsecrap. You can ask Nixon about pliable media, or Trump with the never ending attention paid to him (a great deal of it not complimentary) as he tries to do battle with this "pliable media" via his t.wi.tt.er account.

Obama got a pliable media who refused to ask any hard questions and gave him pretty much a pass on anything he did.

They followed it up with shilling for HRC who got no tough questions asked of her and a pass on anything difficult.

Her Presidency would have followed suit and full scale war in Ukraine and Syria were a minimum to be expected.

I have mentioned US Presidential election 2016 where US Press shilled for HRC and have spent the time since doing everything they can to claim it wasn't the voters who made the decision.

If President Trump dies in office the Liberal media will celebrate.

Media is used to push people into a single viewpoint in support of something........... Iraq 2003 is a clear case in point where anybody who said Saddam was not a threat was a liar.

broadreach 14th Mar 2018 22:10

Racedo, pal, PULL UP! PULL UP!

vapilot2004 14th Mar 2018 22:13

"TERRAIN, TERRAIN!"



Obama got a pliable media who refused to ask any hard questions and gave him pretty much a pass on anything he did.
Despite the obvious love and admiration of the man, throughout his presidency, the mainstream press remained critical of Obama when it was called for. Unlike Faux News, where everything Obama touched or did was under constant derision.

racedo 14th Mar 2018 22:30


Originally Posted by vapilot2004 (Post 10083920)

Despite the obvious love and admiration of the man, throughout his presidency, the mainstream press remained critical of Obama when it was called for. Unlike Faux News, where everything Obama touched or did was under constant derision.

Really then list 8,1 for each year where he was pillored and abused as much as current White House incumbent.

Sallyann1234 14th Mar 2018 22:45

RT's main purpose is not to present a glowing picture of Russia, but to create and promote dissent within the West. That is why they are keen to give a platform to controversial Western figures, as well as giving a high profile to issues that show us in a bad light.

RT has been censured by Ofcom on a number of occasions for giving undue bias to stories, in contravention of its licence requirement for balanced reporting. It has been heading towards a more serious sanction, regardless of the current issue.

meadowrun 14th Mar 2018 23:12

I don't understand why they are not getting along with the west. There's no war, cold or hot, at least declared, do they really care about their differing dogmas that much?. There are so many worthy problems in the rest of the world they could work on together and maybe do some good, instead of playing schoolyard level games.


Putin bored?
Putin like discord?
Putin bore me?


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:48.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.