Russia Today (RT.com) Is Russia's Propaganda Channel - "Truth is not the mission at RT"

Why is the OP just singling out RT?

This is the case with ALL msm networks is it not?

Something fishy with this thread. Just realised it by SO too.

What is your agenda SO, why just single out RT?

This is the case with ALL majour networks around the globe, each country has its propaganda machine, the US has many. We all know this. So why the thread?

and again, why RT?




And all these replies to a thread that is stating the obvious...I guess that can be put down to the SO groupies on here. Wish some of the more informative issues got as much attantion.

All countries have their own propaganda network, it’s nothing new and nothing unique to Russia.

At the end of the day, Russia is the evil empire, it always has been because it is the main obstacle to American hegemony. Check out the facts.

It was agreed that NATO would not go any further east than Germany, now they sit on Russia’s border.

Washington has abandoned the ABM treaty. Created a perceived ABM shield and changed its policy to permit US nuclear first strike.

Washington has gone from sovereign state to sovereign state, directly and indirectly, creating destabilisation and war, destroying those states. All states, with links to Russia and American ambition to pivot geopolitically to Eurasia as well states threatening the strength of the US dollar, either directly or indirectly. Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Russia even went along with weapons of mass destruction BS line with Iraq. It went along with a no fly zone over Libya, only to realise when it is too late that it was a prelude to NATO airstrikes.

Then countries started pulling Washington up on its ruthless agenda, with the chemical attack in Syria, which everyone knew was false flag, even our mob in the British parliament said BS and America was never able to produce a shred of proof regarding Assad being behind it.

Then it was Iran, another country with strong links to Russia. They’re making nuclear weapons! Get ‘em! Russia blocked that, got the IAEA to go in who found no evidence to suggest that there was diversion from legal energy program to a weapons program, at this point though and without clear evidence Washington still had 40 military bases and 2 naval fleets surrounding Iran and waiting for the order to attack. Again, more events that Washington wanted to be the trigger for all out war against more sovereign nations, foiled by Russia.

Look at everything Washington has accused such “rogue” states of doing, none of it has any evidence whatsoever. Much like they will never provide a shred of proof that Russia is behind the downing of a commercial airliner, because there is no evidence! Washington already had its propaganda PR machine in motion while the crash site was still smouldering and people can still tell me that they either partly or wholly weren’t behind it? There news networks were running 24/7 Russia! It was Russia, without a shred of evidence! Then when asked to produce evidence, they have none. Recently, once they realised that the blame Russia angle wasn’t really making progress, they’ve gone on to missiles launched in to Ukraine from Russia, the evidence a grainy cold war type satellite image showing two “craters”, with added arrows apparently showing trajectory of missiles. What a load of BS! Even that’s gone quiet.

Washington caused the Ukraine instability and unrest, 5 billion pumped in to Ukrainian NGOs to destabilize the pro Russian government, this from your assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, all the while Russians were asleep watching the Olympics. Washington is hell bent on creating a total divide between the EU and Russia, because if it doesn’t and they are drawn closer, it will wreck America’s ambitions to pivot in to Asia.

All you guys need to do is follow the Wolfowitz Doctrine, to see where America stands on foreign policy, to put it in one sentence – Washington’s sole goal is to keep America not only as the top superpower, but as the only superpower in the world, which is why their foreign policy is and always has been, ruthless.

There is only one aggressor in all of this and that is Washington. Russia has only ever reacted to provocative actions from puppet governments and Washington financed anarchists. However, this is then used as propaganda on American news networks to demonstrate how aggressive Russia is. How many countries has Russia invaded, either directly or by proxy in the last 50 years? How many governments have been ousted either directly or by proxy by Russian Intelligence?

So what if RT is the propaganda network for Russia, Washington demonstrates its aggression for all to see and none of us need a propaganda network to show us that anyway.

Apologies if this upsets Americans on here, I have nothing against you hence why I have tried to state Washington, but your government is perhaps leading us all down a dark path of annihilation. No amount of propaganda is going to change that.

a reply to: pennydrops

RT draws it's funding, sanction and support directly from the central Government of the Russian Federation.

Very few media outlets in the world can say the same for official and direct Government sanction. Far fewer have it and then do everything to make it an "open secret". It is obvious, but takes enough effort to see the actual names and lines of evidence so most don't have the time to pursue it.

RT stands a bit a part from even a station like the infamous Voice of America. The VOA has never made pretense about who and what they are, is what puts RT ahead of even those guys. Watch RT television sometime. What is just a subtle theme to everything online is outright propaganda in the open for the broadcast side.

originally posted by: MrCynic
a reply to: pennydrops

RT draws it's funding, sanction and support directly from the central Government of the Russian Federation.

Very few media outlets in the world can say the same for official and direct Government sanction. Far fewer have it and then do everything to make it an "open secret". It is obvious, but takes enough effort to see the actual names and lines of evidence so most don't have the time to pursue it.

RT stands a bit a part from even a station like the infamous Voice of America. The VOA has never made pretense about who and what they are, is what puts RT ahead of even those guys. Watch RT television sometime. What is just a subtle theme to everything online is outright propaganda in the open for the broadcast side.

The BBC gets most from the taxpayer ie. govt fundinhg.

I watch RT, If im watching MSM, RT it is. At least we get more truth about OUR govts from then than we do from the likes of the BBC.

I think the subjects and reporting far outclass the US networks. I understand they are state sponsoured (many around the world are), but can use discernment as with any news programme.

a reply to: pennydrops

Is the BBC doing anything whatsoever to conceal the fact the "British" in British Broadcasting Corp is actually a literal reference to the Crown? I've never gotten the impression otherwise and I've never seen them suggest anything different.

RT seems to play games with suggesting they are just as unbiased as any private news organization when the only thing private in the RT organization is the company catering their lunch and stocking vending machines, if even that much is.

originally posted by: MrCynic
a reply to: pennydrops

Is the BBC doing anything whatsoever to conceal the fact the "British" in British Broadcasting Corp is actually a literal reference to the Crown? I've never gotten the impression otherwise and I've never seen them suggest anything different.

RT seems to play games with suggesting they are just as unbiased as any private news organization when the only thing private in the RT organization is the company catering their lunch and stocking vending machines, if even that much is.

Not sure what point you are getting at. We know the BBC is supposed to be impartial but arent....ever. They have been fined multiple times each year for false reporting and using old footage for current conflicts ( a fact I never learned while living in the UK). Not sure what this has to do with the crown.

All networks are the same yet you seem to suggest its just RT. It is not.




I have yet so see ANY unbiased news organisation. There are not even any unbiased alternative news. That is becoming just as bad as the MSN networks.

a reply to: pennydrops

The fact you proudly proclaim to single source your news stream is all I really needed to know about your taste and discernment in factual information. Single sourcing anything for news is accepting the fact you are learning as a group of editors around a table has decided you will learn it.

RT is a source I look at and read. It is among many sources I look at and read together. It is because they are among one source in international news and state run outlets that I can say to my own degree of certainty, RT is a mouth piece for the Kremlin and to my viewing eyes? They almost declare it outright at times. Just one step shy of that.

Please, let me share also some propaganda, about the BBC:

"Israeli soldier twists an ankle in Gaza"?

originally posted by: MrCynic
a reply to: pennydrops

The fact you proudly proclaim to single source your news stream is all I really needed to know about your taste and discernment in factual information. Single sourcing anything for news is accepting the fact you are learning as a group of editors around a table has decided you will learn it.

RT is a source I look at and read. It is among many sources I look at and read together. It is because they are among one source in international news and state run outlets that I can say to my own degree of certainty, RT is a mouth piece for the Kremlin and to my viewing eyes? They almost declare it outright at times. Just one step shy of that.

Then you need to read my post again. I said if watching MSN, I watch RT. I barely watch MSN. If I do, its usually RT. The others are just too bad. RT is not much better. My point being if you read my posts again, they are just as bad as each other. That is why I dont understand this topic. Didn't people on ATS know this? Also I wanted to know why single out RT as they are all bad. RT is just better for us to see news from the other side...you should try that sometime, broaden your views. I also watch press tv sometimes too. Is that a problem for you. You claim RT are so much worse yet you still admit to watching it. I dont understand you.

WHat is your problem, you seem quite aggressive. I have not read the rest of your post yet as the first paragraph was just a rant.

Not anti Russian. See alot of bad in ISIS and all its US trucks and weaponry, and again, not anti Russian, and their anti GMO stance is good.

There is a thing called, the tree bears fruit. Thats important. VERY.

Don't give a hoot at what media is considered propaganda. OURS IS REALLY BAD TOO!

a reply to: pennydrops

I read your post. 'If you are getting news from MSM, RT is it!'

That would be single sourcing your MSM stream of news, when "RT is it", as in, the ONE, you use when using Mainstream Media sources for topical information.

This, as opposed to looking at Iran, Syria, America, Britain, China and Japanese state or private news sources in a combination for the best range of perception to an event they are all reporting together on. Each will lie. Each will spin. Each will follow the orders of their editors and producers. Every last one of them. RT included.

Not every one has a chain ending in an elected Government official how RT literally does. Not every one will openly ridicule other news outlets as a general "us against them" nonsense theme, as RT does often enough in broadcast to destroy their own credibility by default for many things. Not every news outlet in the world is almost exclusively dedicated to the promotion of one nation to the harm of another by very obvious cherry picking of stories, all day and every day. RT makes their entire success by it.

We won't change each others mind though. You absolutely will not change mine. I can see I won't change yours. I have noticed other people agreeing to disagree here and I will try that here since we have almost exhausted the points.

I'm glad this is being put out there. Why do some people assume that whatever RT says is gold, but if Xinhua News Agency states something to be true it gets the proverbial "fine tooth comb" treatment.

Any State ran organization is designed to benefit the state. It doesn't matter if its FEMA helping out Americans in a disaster (Thus showing that the government cares) or its a news organization covering an international event (RT showing that a genocide is occurring in Ukraine).

I think it's kind of funny how people like to bad mouth the US News corps, but then so highly praise a State ran media source. Shouldn't all news reports get the same magnifying glass treatment to reveal the truth of a story? Isn't that what we do here, or do we just look in the mirror and talk to the other bird we see?

originally posted by: voyger2
Please, let me share also some propaganda, about the BBC:

"Israeli soldier twists an ankle in Gaza"?

History of a Fake BBC News 24 "Breaking News" image

With the Israeli flag in the background, and the facetious crawl text "Israeli solider twists ankle in Gaza" it should be fairly obvious that it's just satire aimed at characterizing the BBC coverage of Gaza as being very one sided.

Some people, unfortunately, will take such an image at face value. So it's still worth pointing out how fake it is.

a reply to: JAK

History of a Fake BBC News 24 "Breaking News" image

I have to hand it to Mick and metabunk they do know how to get to the bottom of things.

Good catch.

a reply to: JAK

Well sorry for that didn't know.
this was the source
Thanks for the info

Really makes me wonder if the 'owner' of this site was able to 'over-ride' ATS and spam flags and stars to make this topic top headline. If so, that's f'ed up.

This article made top headline with only a few posts when it first came out..

originally posted by: SecretFace
All countries have their own propaganda network, it’s nothing new and nothing unique to Russia.

At the end of the day, Russia is the evil empire, it always has been because it is the main obstacle to American hegemony. Check out the facts.
...

I'm only responding to part of your long post, you write many legitimately critical arguments later plus some other things I don't agree with. (You might want to separate issues and post in different threads... just a thought).

Well, so: yes, maybe they all have propaganda. This straight channel is rather crude though, especially recently.
I still read them and occasionally watch videos because I do want to be aware of the Russian state side or view, plus as with all MSM channels, there is sometimes truth in it, sometimes an obvious attempt to shape the reality of others.

I haven't personally visited the MH17 test site or other stuff, as most readers here, I compare pieces of communication - and some of us convince others on these boards that they are experts in radiation or aviation. (My professional field is communication and linguistics).

Now if it's propaganda so well crafted that you won't ever notice it, you won't have counter-arguments, how willl you notice it isn't true?

I surely won't, but I can certainly judge the integrity of the surface.
I can compare the various reactions around the world in a few languages.
Plus there is a size factor. English is a language spoken by many non-natives all over the world and thereby anything published in English will invite criticism and feedback.

Compare: Iran has one official news channel in English. Naturally it highlights the Persian POV, some facts, more interpretation, obvious taking sides, but not much you can bring up as lies against proven facts. Sometimes mistakes creep in.

Now, Iran has approx. 80 million people, Russia 140-something-million, the UK has less than Iran and the US has perhaps twice as many people as Russia does...

Judging by the popularity of truth-seeking on the sites and TV stations and the media of the so-called "Anglo-Saxon" world, Russia should have at least five competing TV channels (with some foreign language broadcast too), several major newspapers in opposing camps, who test each other's truths and facts, plus about five million people signed up on alternative news forums and conspiracy sites - people who can and will any time debate news - and they can do so freely even if they fantasize that their own president Putin had a false birth certificate etc.

You have two news agencies - RIA Novost and ITAR TASS (which already existed in Soviet times).
Russia recently closed its last opposition news channel.

Are reactions encouraged, suppressed, are facts checked?
Are there whistleblowers? Is funding changed or balanced or is it a problem if it is revealed?
Do you find people in Russia supporting the Ukrainian side, as dissident Israelis sometimes criticise their government and Zionism? Not much evidence I venture.

If there aren't dissidents in Russia, and even within RT, it sounds like...

a child that somehow always eats his/her lunch.
A child that never gets dirty.
A child that is always in agreement with the parents.
An angel, not a human being.

originally posted by: nOraKat
Really makes me wonder if the 'owner' of this site was able to 'over-ride' ATS and spam flags and stars to make this topic top headline. If so, that's f'ed up.

This article made top headline with only a few posts when it first came out..

I know that I, for one, flagged and starred this subject so I can with great confidence say that some are legitimate. Not everybody loves RT on these boards. Been a few discussions on the subject of RT that I've looked at and commented on over the last few years that I've been here.

I daresay that one of the reasons why SkepticOverlord is discussing this now is because a couple weeks ago RT made it plainly clear that they are watching the site and/or its twitter by using it as a point of reference in one of its articles here:

rt.com...

While that was considered to be "neat" by many on this site, not everybody thought as much. Having a state-funded propaganda news site--a Russian one in particular--skimming your stuff for whatever purpose might not always be viewed as "awesome", particularly to the older crowd. A lot of people remember the Cold War quite well and through those experiences, learned to have a heavy distrust for Russian media/sources. Knowing that you have those very people quite potentially on your site and if you're old enough to remember, is enough for a site owner to do things that do not curb free speech but adds their thoughts and opinions to it. Like charging shills particularly for journalistic entities--regardless of who--per post fees to cut that activity down and stating one's opinion on the source.

SkepticOverlord has done nothing wrong here. It's his site really. He could've just as easily banned linking to RT altogether. He didn't.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: DJW001
If you were an intelligence agency who wanted to sway a segment of your enemy's population against their own government, or wanted to float memes that supported the lies you have been telling through official propaganda, where would the best place to disseminate your subversive material be?

Back in early 2002, there was a lot of research going on that was connecting the notorious "Frenchman" with Mikhail Lesin, minister of Mass Media in Russia at the time, and ultimate chief architect of RT western focus. For those who don't recall, the "Frenchman" was the first to postulate that the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon was actually a missile… some time around November of 2001. He did so with a big budget and slick computer graphics through off-primetime TV commercials on cable channels. Based on the number of commercials and print ads that were run, his total budget was estimated at over $4 million. After the ads stopped, he disappeared, and a conspiracy culture was given a significant kick-start.

Today, many of his 3D renders are still used in conspiracy theories about 9/11, without people realizing the potential poison of their source.

A "Frenchman" is being perpetrated every day by RT. Budget, graphics, interviews, and never held accountable.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

US (and other western) news media exhibits bias, with RT represents propaganda.

See, that's where I disagree. It's only my opinion, but I strongly believe that US media outlets are given specific directorates on what to cover, and more importantly, what not to cover. Which is exactly why I've shifted completely to a small handful of news sources over the past couple of years.

Also, to touch on what you said earlier about Russia Today switching to the dark side at the start of the crisis in the Ukraine; I've read plenty of stories on there way before the Ukraine crisis that demonstrated its use as a propaganda tool. It's not anything new.