Stopping the use of RT news as a source

The irony of someone with a V for Victory avatar talking of banning a news outlet is stunning.

They are all liars, BBC, RT, CNN, FOX, SKY, all of them.
The stories are scripted and repeated, and not checked out.
The news outlets are the biggest source of propaganda in the west.
But hey, lets only ban those that we disagree with... .SIGH.

Why not ban them all?, why not ban discussion of mainstream news?
Hey heres an idea, it may be before its time but lets ban discussion full stop.
The world is full of liars, so lets stop any dissemination of the lies and ban speech.

a reply to: yuppa

It was asked once already but I will ask again, what lies had RT said that would make it a banned source like bin or trn?
Or was this just a hit and run thread that you didn't plan on participating in?

I'm sure this question was raised not so long ago?

And as I said at the time, RT can, in my experience, be a reliable news source for some types of story - weather events, some science stories, etc.

However on political/world affairs issues it displays a clear bias - as most news outlets do to varying degrees. This can still be a good thing though when it is used alongside other news outlets to show that their may be more than one side to a story (as almost always is that case).

So, IMO, it should not be excluded as a source of info, but equally, should not normally be used as a sole source of info.

When it comes to outlets, lies are usually mixed with a little truth. Thank God for the Internet review board.

See thru the veil.

originally posted by: SunnyDee
Isn't that exactly what CNN ABC CBS ABc Fox and all the rest of ours do? Seriously? How many news stations across our country run "Verbatim" news stories. I'd call that state sanctioned also.

I'm not absolutely convinced, even with Fox News.

Here's why…

My background in media, publishing, and advertising provides a bit of a unique, almost-insider, perspective. Most news organizations -- especially US-based organizations -- have modeled their efforts after entertainment organizations, with profit projections are based on increasing audience share. Where 10+ years ago, the news component of broadcast networks was accepted to be a "loss leader," and/or the cost of doing business while the entertainment side of the organization is where profits happen.

With that change in mind, news organizations have pretty much identified a target audience; conservative, liberal, moderate, ultra-conservative, ultra-liberal, millennial, baby-boomer, etc., and fashioned the delivery of "news" to best target the taste and predisposition of the target psychographic and demographic. The reason is that, once a well-defined and quantifiable audience is attained, advertising up-fronts are easier to obtain.

"Up-fronts" are seasonal commitments by major advertisers for specific shows, or block of shows. This has typically been reserved for broadcast entertainment, but in the past ten years, has seen more and more activity for news delivery… to the point now where it's critical for budgets and planning. And once that happens in broadcast "news," the delivery of content needs to continue to match the target audience in order to honor the commitment to the up-front advertising buys.

The result is most-certainly the appearance of scripted prefabricated infotainment in the form of a news program/website… and even the appearance of an agenda determined by sources outside the news organization. "Conspiracy theorists" often speculate those outside sources are government in nature -- and no doubt, there has been some collusion -- but in reality, those outside sources are primarily marketers and advertisers demanding a well-defined audience.

originally posted by: yuppa
RT has been caught in a lot o f lies recently. They have been proven and have demonstrated they are willing to deceivethe rest of th eworld and their own people. RT is no better than stormwatch now and other banned sources. I humbly ask that the ATS staff review its use as a reliable source of information.

Here's a great way to make sure everything ever posted on ATS is 100% truth: We'll make a new rule saying that members can not post anything (even personal ideas or opinions) that do not come directly from Fox, CNN, or The Government.

/s


No, I don't think we need any more censorship on ATS than we already have. I haven't seen the stories you speak of, but in some cases, i think I'd be more likely to trust RT than many of the other MSM sources.


I find it funny that on a conspiracy website, where many of us want to share information, and many of us don't trust the media, or what the "official sources" are saying... that there are still some people who if they had their way, would allow nothing but the biggest MSM news sources.


Perhaps you like other people to do your thinking for you, so you never have to use your critical faculties and judge material for yourself. But I'm the exact opposite. And I think many of the members here would agree.

Can't we just trust people to use their own judgements and take information from multiple sources and make up their own minds. Or do we need people to act as the thought police, protecting our delicate little brains from propaganda.

RT is funded by the Russian government. How is that any different from CBC in Canada or BBC in the UK? It's the same damn thing. I'm no fan of RT, but banning it on ATS flies in the face of the stated motto of this website.

ETA: Here's a thought: if you dislike RT (or any media source) don't read the thread. I prefer not to have ATS (or anyone for that matter) hold my hand and tell me what I should read or believe.

a reply to: yuppa

I find it suspicious thar ATS bans certain news sites as sources when outlets like Fox, CNN, and MSNBC have handed out more BS and lies than BeforeItsnews.com could ever compete with.

Oh, darn...

I forgot...

We aren't allowed to be suspicious of ATS.

It makes us "idiots".

My bad.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Can't we just trust people to use their own judgements and take information from multiple sources and make up their own minds. Or do we need people to act as the thought police, protecting our delicate little brains from propaganda.

EXACTLY!!!

People I don't even know (much less respect) are always making decisions on my behalf.

I am going to believe what I believe no matter how often nameless strangers filter the information.

a reply to: yuppa

RT being a self proclaimed Russian Government mouth piece speaks volumes about those who defend it with the usual

"But... But.... But... FOX, CNN, BBC are just as bad" They'll reject one sides propaganda but defend the other as if ANY of it is really worth while.

I agree they all suck, but at least "But... But.... But... FOX, CNN, BBC " seem to report, discuss and argue over contrary points of views on many subjects within and without. RT on the other hand *Yes I watch it* is obsessed with everything that is perceived wrong with the West and especially in the US.

If they would actually turn their efforts to turning up some dirt on their own task masters as much as they do the West/US I'd take them a bit more seriously.

But, who am I kidding, right?

originally posted by: applesthateatpeople
a reply to: yuppa

I find it suspicious thar ATS bans certain news sites as sources when outlets like Fox, CNN, and MSNBC have handed out more BS and lies than BeforeItsnews.com could ever compete with.

Oh, darn...

I forgot...

We aren't allowed to be suspicious of ATS.

It makes us "idiots".

My bad.

It's not necessarily suspicious, just disappointing.
ATS isn't impartial, user generated content as is 'oft repeated on here.... it's controlled and shaped discussions about topics that are "allowed" from sources that are "OK'd"

It's depressing to see the site owner actually trying to argue in favour of banning RT.... while defending US news outlets who do the EXACT SAME thing.
Even some UK news outlets have shown how biased US news is and how slanted it is... it showed several channels had sacked reporters for not towing the line and how before broadcasting a "script" comes out and that's what the news will be.
Certain documentaries and expose's are banned because they go against US interests in the middle east ETC.

It doesn't surprise me that an American site wants to ban sources that criticise America.... I'm sure the advertisers and sponsors of ATS are "American" companies too... I'm sure they'd like Russia Today erased from ATS.

Sad that someone even suggested it..... utterly unbelievable that a site owner is making a case for it.

I'm shocked, not surprised.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: yuppa

RT being a self proclaimed Russian Government mouth piece speaks volumes about those who defend it with the usual

"But... But.... But... FOX, CNN, BBC are just as bad" They'll reject one sides propaganda but defend the other as if ANY of it is really worth while.

I agree they all suck, but at least "But... But.... But... FOX, CNN, BBC " seem to report, discuss and argue over contrary points of views on many subjects within and without. RT on the other hand *Yes I watch it* is obsessed with everything that is perceived wrong with the West and especially in the US.

But we all KNOW that? Why ban it?
So they're biased? Who cares, all news is biased..... are we only allowed the biased stations that YOU and other Right-Wing Americans agree with?

Is that what ATS is now...? We're now censoring news because it doesn't fit a pro Amiercan agenda?

There's plenty of news outlets posting anti-Russian stuff, all you need to do is post that or any other counter argument if you don't like RT.

Banning it? Really?

If so, we would have to ban A LOT of so called "news sources", including all those other fringe/conspiracy sites and of course also Youtube.

The DECISION whether something is a lie should be with you.

When someone posts "news" from the Art Bell website that the Yeti has been found, does it mean it's real, undeniable news?
And so forth.

Having the FREEDOM of choice is important. Otherwise we could as well move to China or Cuba where information is pre-filtered.

>>
RT being a self proclaimed Russian Government mouth piece
>>

This may well be the case, however it can be beneficial to read news/get information that look at things from different point of views. I would not like to live in a society where others think for me and make the decision what news are "right", this is a decision I make.

a reply to: blupblup

Where have I agreed to or proclaimed we should Ban, Censor or do anything other than acknowledge RT is the official Russian Government mouth piece and should be understood as being such.

Right Winger eh?

After all these years, You obviously have little or no understanding of who I am.

a reply to: blupblup

Could you please tell me what sites that ATS has banned because they criticize the USA?


As far as im aware the only sites that are banned are ones that make it a point to hoax .....

It seems to me that what is happening here is that instead of being objective of why people might think RT needs to be banned, people are trying to deflect on to different sources......

That being said, im not for banning RT, because I think that people need to learn to find the truth for themselves , after all , half the problem with the world is people having information spoon fed to them, instead of actually searching for the truth themselves......that can work both ways....

To that end, I dont feel like ATS keeps its members from being "suspicious" either, as one person above seems to think.

I dont think its censorship either, theres a difference between trying to maintain a site under the constraint of civility and decorum, and a site thats absolute Chaos......

Would you really want to come and have a discussion on a site thats a free for all? How would that be conducive to the exchange of ideas or exploring opinions?

Honestly if you dont like how ATS runs their site, you dont have to be here, there are plenty of other places you can go.

I for one enjoy the dialog here and the freedom to express ideas and thoughts on the wide variety of topics that is ATS.

a reply to: SLAYER69

But, who am I kidding, right?

Only yourself from what I can tell...

a reply to: douglas5

I'm not doubting RT. I'm not really familiar with them.


My point was just that what they do after a mistake is made that counts. All organizations make mistakes, but all don't hold up for them.

Any thinking person watches Fox News bold face lie. CNN can't get away with that. That's a difference was my point.

My uneducated impression is that RT is Russia's Fox News. If that's the case then no we shouldn't trust them. You should have to find a second source.

originally posted by: Corruption Exposed
a reply to: SLAYER69

But, who am I kidding, right?

Only yourself from what I can tell...

Amen.

My thoughts exactly.