It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 7
138
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Forwarded to RT. We'll see the headlines soon!





posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: mekhanics

I hope RT formally gets an account in keeping with T&C. It could be great fun!



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: mekhanics

ohh boy did you just open a can of worms ......







posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: funkadeliaaaa
My point is the people they're supposedly broadcasting to are open - minded westerners.

Let's hold on that thought for a moment.

"Russia Today" rebranded itself as "RT" in 2010 with their first US-based bureau in Washington, DC in 2010. (The english-language channel started in 2005 out of Moscow) The primary force behind the creation of Russia Today was Aleksei Gromov, Putin's press spokesperson with a goal to improve the image of Russia in the west, and chip away at westerner's perceptions of their own governments. Several reports place the RT.com english-language budget at $300 million a year, all provided by the Russian government.

Those "open minded westerners" you refer to, really aren't so open minded. They focused on the truther/birther/conspiracy culture by covering those types of stories just enough so as to be considered a reliable source by those predisposed to believe certain conspiracies and Internet scandals. These people aren't open minded, they're looking for confirmation of their beliefs… and they saw it in RT.com because that was the strategy. It's a brilliant, patient, and fruitful strategy.



It's like this… imagine a group of people love blue food, while another loves red food. Both groups dislike each other, and never eat food of the wrong color. But suddenly someone invents green food, and no one likes it because it has no nutritional value.

Through cunning research, someone discovers that people eating blue food are more likely to switch to green than the red food people. They also discover that people who only eat blue food also only ever wear black shoes, while the red food people only ever wear white shoes.

So the green food people (GT or Green Today) start only talking about how great black shoes are, and how terrible white shoes are. The bias of the blue-eaters have been confirmed by GT, black is best for the feet, white sucks. So it works, and GT gets a bit more aggressive about how great black shoes are, and how no civilized person would ever where a white shoe. The blue-eaters are completely theirs to control.

Next, after careful black-shoe information strategies, GT starts introducing stories about how crappy red food is. More confirmation bias for the blue-eaters. Then, suddenly, GT starts talking about their low-value green food. But since they've earned the trust of the blue-eaters, many switch to green.

And with the switch to green happening, GT starts introducing controversial stories about blue food, "raising questions" and even suggesting that some blue-eaters are wearing white shoes.


So the question is, how can you trust a news/information source that patiently and carefully obtained affinity with their audience through years of expertly crafted confirmation bias?






Someone asked in the thread which western media source I trust. I don't think any can be truly trusted. The inherent bias is the result of the need for subtle spin so as to maintain audience share. Not too long ago, we all thought the Internet would bring a new wave of trustworthy citizen journalism. How naive we all were. It's worse than ever before.

I just know that I would rather parse through the audience bias of five different western sources to form my opinion about a topic, rather than rely on anything from a source whose content is mandated by a government.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: LightningStrikesHere
I was inclined to agree, until I witnessed a shiny new account named RussiaToday reply in this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Page three about halfway down you will see the deleted post, followed by my amazed response.

I think you are correct in assuming that the ATS membership couldn't have tremendous influence on the political world. Apparently RT is monitoring the opinions here anyways, and likely interjecting on a regular basis.

Ask yourself: if RT tries to influence opinion on ATS, where else are they doing it?



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   
With legalized propaganda, and affirmation of lies in our media. One is not better than the other. Seek your news from all available sources, and remember every source has an agenda. Take it all with a grain of salt.

Please point out some clear lies from rt.com. I'd be curios to see what you come up with.
edit on 6-8-2014 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:21 PM
link   
Hillary Clinton admitted to losing the information war, and I believe this op to be a not so veiled attempt at regaining a foot hold in that war. The fact that you think Benghazi was much ado about nothing comes across as propagandish in it's own right. I don't care if a republican said as much, it's no secret that they serve the same master. Did Jay Carney get a job with ats or something, what gives?



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Forwarded to RT. We'll see the headlines soon!


Maybe The Russians will slap us with sanctions and move their trolls somewhere else.Sounds Like Skeptic has lost too many members and is in troll removal now, imo.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: OpenMindedRealist



I was inclined to agree, until I witnessed a shiny new account named RussiaToday reply in this thread:


Was that a valid RT account though or just a bogus one like happened with Jesse Ventura a while back.

Looks like the account is gone now.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Donkey_Dean
Please point out some clear lies from rt.com. I'd be curios to see what you come up with.


Russia’s media caught red-handed in another fabrication about Ukraine

Russia’s top 60 lies about Ukraine



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord



Those "open minded westerners" you refer to, really aren't so open minded. They focused on the truther/birther/conspiracy culture by covering those types of stories just enough so as to be considered a reliable source by those predisposed to believe certain conspiracies and Internet scandals. These people aren't open minded, they're looking for confirmation of their beliefs… and they saw it in RT.com because that was the strategy. It's a brilliant, patient, and fruitful strategy.


lol speak for yourself I consider myself to be a conspiracy debunker. I dont believe in most conspiracy stories.
You know why most people are looking at RT.com favourably? It is highlighting what most high IQ people are thinking. We know there is seriously something wrong with our economy in which we have to pillage another countries wealth to pay of a debt. RT also highlights the hypocrisy of Western Governments telling other countries that they cant do that or cant do this whilst doing the very same thing they are telling other countries that they cant do etc. etc. The stories covered by RT dont even get a showing on our own MSM so what does that tell you about our Governments using the media to not tell you the whole truth regarding the debt economy? Why is it everything that is done in terms of the debt economy is done in secret and run by private individuals and not run by the people in what is suppose to be a democracy? Oh wait America is not a democracy its an oligarchy just like the UK is becoming case in point fracking.....
edit on 6-8-2014 by Cantbebothered because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Hrmmm did Ole Edgar know something the rest of us didn't? hehe..

deusnexus.wordpress.com...

Through Russia, Cayce said

“comes the hope of the world. Not in respect to what is sometimes termed Communism or Bolshevism — no! But freedom — freedom! That each man will live for his fellow man. The principle has been born there. It will take years for it to be crystallized; yet out of Russia comes again the hope of the world.”

Cayce also predicted the possibility of a THIRD World War. He spoke of strifes arising…

”in Libya, and in Egypt, in Ankara, and in Syria; through the straits around those areas above the Persian Gulf.”

Happy Illusions!



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

ROFL i already pointed out that RT.com has none of those stories pointed out in examiner.com. Maybe you should check the facts before posting?



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: TDawg61

They'd annex the Off-topic forums





posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord



Those "open minded westerners" you refer to, really aren't so open minded. They focused on the truther/birther/conspiracy culture by covering those types of stories just enough so as to be considered a reliable source by those predisposed to believe certain conspiracies and Internet scandals. These people aren't open minded, they're looking for confirmation of their beliefs… and they saw it in RT.com because that was the strategy. It's a brilliant, patient, and fruitful strategy.


I think one of the reasons you're getting so much flak about this thread is that we all tend to consider ourselves to be enlightened, intelligent individuals that do not need someone to hold our hands when we venture out to find our news/sources. Most of us are skeptical towards all media outlets and don't need to be reminded that you have to be careful about whom you give credibility.

That being said, your post above was spot on. There are those people that have "blinders" on and do not keep that skeptical outlook if it confirms their own bias' or beliefs. Those people can be a detriment to a logical and truthful discussion on current events and such.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it was those people you were trying to reach with the OP and reminding them that you have to know whom you're dealing with when it comes to RT.

If that's the case, I give it a big



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
a reply to: LightningStrikesHere
I was inclined to agree, until I witnessed a shiny new account named RussiaToday reply in this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Page three about halfway down you will see the deleted post, followed by my amazed response.

I think you are correct in assuming that the ATS membership couldn't have tremendous influence on the political world. Apparently RT is monitoring the opinions here anyways, and likely interjecting on a regular basis.

Ask yourself: if RT tries to influence opinion on ATS, where else are they doing it?



not defending RT here , because i must rely on Fact when it comes to things like this.

but how do we know for certain that the ATS account RussiaToday was in FACT a representative of RT?

for all we know it could have been some pro RT member of ATS.

i just don't think that's enough to warrant that the Russian government is sending shills to ATS.

if you can provide more proof i will be more than willing to entertain the idea enough to look into it .

but i must remain a realist regrading this issue for now .

humbly

LSH



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: Donkey_Dean
Please point out some clear lies from rt.com. I'd be curios to see what you come up with.


Russia’s media caught red-handed in another fabrication about Ukraine

Russia’s top 60 lies about Ukraine


to be Fair SO a quick youtube search will yield many videos on the Lies and propaganda our very own MSM has been involved in....



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Cantbebothered

Items 52, 53, and 59 on that page.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: Donkey_Dean
Please point out some clear lies from rt.com. I'd be curios to see what you come up with.


Russia’s media caught red-handed in another fabrication about Ukraine

Russia’s top 60 lies about Ukraine


I think we all know Russia is involved in the Ukraine. If you recall the good ole days when anything anti Iraq war would get you a one way ticket to the unemployment line. I see no real difference, and if you recall none of our media outlets reported on the largest protests in world history, on the eve of the Iraq invasion. No mention of the Hersh children either. I would fully expect Russia to engage the western backed coup in Ukraine.

In my mind Russia is coming off as weak. Syria was an ally after all, and they do have a duty in Ukraine. Just as we would have if the roles were reversed and canada was toppled by a few hundred violent protestors etc etc. seems most of the major wars over the past decade are more in line with the us's desire to become the world largest energy exporter than an evil Russian empire desire to create a muti polar world.

One is not better than the other.
edit on 6-8-2014 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
i just don't think that's enough to warrant that the Russian government is sending shills to ATS.

We have had to terminate three accounts for deceptive activity related to the above.




top topics



 
138
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join