Ukraine invasion

[Havok1]

Yeah, that sucks over there in Russia. However, that doesn’t mean that what is said by their media is automatically less truthfull, or that what is said by ours is automatically more truthful.

 

[General Zod]

Yeah, that sucks over there in Russia. However, that doesn’t mean that what is said by their media is automatically less truthfull, or that what is said by ours is automatically more truthful.

It has no bearing on ours, and it means theirs should not be trusted. I know a lot of people really, really want to believe the Russians are above board, but past experience and current events within Russia don't bear that out. Their media right now should be trusted about as much as we trusted their media in 1980.

 

[Havok1]

It has no bearing on ours, and it means theirs should not be trusted. I know a lot of people really, really want to believe the Russians are above board, but past experience and current events within Russia don't bear that out. Their media right now should be trusted about as much as we trusted their media in 1980.

You’re right that is has no bearing on ours. I didn’t say it did. What matters is that people want to be informed and know that they can’t count on our media for that, so they get information from as many sources as possible.

 

[leVieux]

Not even close... (yet anyway)

While much of our media has a STRONG alignment with the political left, they are free to be so aligned, they are not compelled.

If russian media publishes a story that is not the approved take on a story, its not that they get bad assignments or taken off the air by the execs at the company, they fucking get killed or put in prison in russia.

Despite the lockstep march so many in government and American media are doing, especially during covid, there were dissenting voices and none have yet had any odd accidents or fallen out of a window...

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

IMHO, that depends on who by & how they are “compelled”, no ?

 

[General Zod]

IMHO, that depends on who by & how they are “compelled”, no ?

When's the last time an American news anchor was jailed for going off script?

 

[General Zod]

You’re right that is has no bearing on ours. I didn’t say it did. What matters is that people want to be informed and know that they can’t count on our media for that, so they get information from as many sources as possible.

Maybe instead of trying to gather from as many sources as possible, you should try gathering from as many reliable sources as possible. Propaganda sources aren't good at conveying fact. You don't belive MSNBC, but your'e going to believe TASS? Or Pravda? That's a step beyond our most lockestep-with-the-DNC networks. That's beyond even Mother Jones as far as bias and dishonesty.

You might as well believe the dead carjacker's aunt who's been raising him since his mama OD'd and her babydaddy ran off when she tells the news crew he was trying to turn his life around and didn't deserve to be shot because he was just tryn'a get money. Or, you know, the sheriff's department press release when their deputy needlesly tries to murder a friendly dog.

 

[Havok1]

When's the last time an American news anchor was jailed for going off script?

You’re trying to argue Russia=bad. We get that. That doesn’t mean that everythjng reported by their media is a lie, or that what’s reported by ours is true. If you automatically dismiss anything that the Russians report, while accepting what comes from the same people who brought you the Russia hoax, hunters laptop being Russian disinformation, or that Benghazi was because of a YouTube video, then you’re probably not any better informed than anyone who reads Russian media but still knows it needs to be questioned.

 

[Havok1]

Maybe instead of trying to gather from as many sources as possible, you should try gathering from as many reliable sources as possible. Propaganda sources aren't good at conveying fact. You don't belive MSNBC, but your'e going to believe TASS? Or Pravda? That's a step beyond our most lockestep-with-the-DNC networks. That's beyond even Mother Jones as far as bias and dishonesty.

You might as well believe the dead carjacker's aunt who's been raising him since his mama OD'd and her babydaddy ran off when she tells the news crew he was trying to turn his life around and didn't deserve to be shot because he was just tryn'a get money. Or, you know, the sheriff's department press release when their deputy needlesly tries to murder a friendly dog.

It would be nice if we could just gather from reliable sources. Who would those be? How do you know that they are reliable and don’t have an agenda? What our media doesn’t say is just as important as what they do.

 

[General Zod]

You’re trying to argue Russia=bad. We get that. That doesn’t mean that everythjng reported by their media is a lie, or that what’s reported by ours is true. If you automatically dismiss anything that the Russians report, while accepting what comes from the same people who brought you the Russia hoax, hunters laptop being Russian disinformation, or that Benghazi was because of a YouTube video, then you’re probably not any better informed than anyone who reads Russian media but still knows it needs to be questioned.

I'm not trying to argue that Russia=bad (in this context).

I'm arguing that Russian news = propaganda produced directly by their government. And no, I'm not trusting the people who brought all of the anti-Trump propaganda. I go well beyond mainstream sources...just not so far that I'm willing to swallow propaganda.

It's very interesting that you dismiss any Ukrainian source - or any source that reports positively on Ukraine - but are willing to buy into what Russian media reports. With reporters who are literally at risk of arrest if they don't read what they're told. Russian media doesn't need to be 'questioned', it needs to be doubted and not believed unless multiple non-Russian sources (and non Russian-supporting sources) confirm what's said.

 

[General Zod]

It would be nice if we could just gather from reliable sources. Who would those be? How do you know that they are reliable and don’t have an agenda? What our media doesn’t say is just as important as what they do.

Be casting a wide net...and avoiding sources that get their reports directly from the media office at the Kremlin.

 

[Havok1]

I'm not trying to argue that Russia=bad (in this context).

I'm arguing that Russian news = propaganda produced directly by their government. And no, I'm not trusting the people who brought all of the anti-Trump propaganda. I go well beyond mainstream sources...just not so far that I'm willing to swallow propaganda.

It's very interesting that you dismiss any Ukrainian source - or any source that reports positively on Ukraine - but are willing to buy into what Russian media reports. With reporters who are literally at risk of arrest if they don't read what they're told. Russian media doesn't need to be 'questioned', it needs to be doubted and not believed unless multiple non-Russian sources (and non Russian-supporting sources) confirm what's said.

Except not everythjng is produced directly by their government. I also don’t believe all, or even most of what they say.

I don’t dismiss anything that reports positively on ukraine either.

 

[General Zod]

Except not everythjng is produced directly by their government. I also don’t believe all, or even most of what they say.

I don’t dismiss anything that reports positively on ukraine either.

If you say so. Look, believe what you want to but don't get all in a huff if nobody buys what you're posting when a Russian outlet is your source. What isn't produced by their government is scrutinized and approved for air by their government. Believe what you want, though.

 

[studenygreg]

I'm still trying to figure out who the reliable sources are. So far from what I can tell not pussian, cuckrain, or US.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[pronstar]

“Americans are the most propagandized people on earth…and they don’t even know it.”

- someone on the internet

 

[leVieux]

It would be nice if we could just gather from reliable sources. Who would those be? How do you know that they are reliable and don’t have an agenda? What our media doesn’t say is just as important as what they do.

<>

For many Americans, the end result is the same. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, etc. will LIE to cover the left, deep state, globalists, & democRATS; EVERY TIME.

Effectively, just like PRAVDA for whatever the causes.

Why quibble about the reason for their consistent predictable LIES ?

leVieux
.

 

[glenbo]

You’re right that is has no bearing on ours. I didn’t say it did. What matters is that people want to be informed and know that they can’t count on our media for that, so they get information from as many sources as possible.

Alex Jones, where are you?

 

[rotor]

I'm still trying to figure out who the reliable sources are. So far from what I can tell not pussian, cuckrain, or US.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

We tend to pick our sources by our personal philosophy. The left goes to CNN, NY Times and Washington Post. The Right goes to Fox and Epoch Times and WSJ. I don't know who is reliable. Was Tucker Carlson reliable? Maybe Babylon Bee is the most reliable.

 

[General Zod]

Maybe Babylon Bee is the most reliable.

You may be onto something there.

 

[Johnny Diamond]

We tend to pick our sources by our personal philosophy. The left goes to CNN, NY Times and Washington Post. The Right goes to Fox and Epoch Times and WSJ. I don't know who is reliable. Was Tucker Carlson reliable? Maybe Babylon Bee is the most reliable.

Haven't thought fox was worth a damn for years....Tucker sure as hell was pretty much asking questions, but on the whole....networks been crap for years.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

If you say so. Look, believe what you want to but don't get all in a huff if nobody buys what you're posting when a Russian outlet is your source. What isn't produced by their government is scrutinized and approved for air by their government. Believe what you want, though.

you say that like our government doesn’t have a history of canning stories they didn’t want told. And people don’t disagree with me because of my sources. They disagree because what I say doesn’t fit the desired narrative. I don’t think I’ve ever cited a Russian source, sort of with one exception, which is a couple references to a Naftali Bennett interview that was shown on Russian media, but was never broadcast on any of ours.