It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


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

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 08:51 PM

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
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.

This thread isn't about other western media sources, it's about Russia Today being a state-funded propaganda vessel of Russia.

So what you are saying, is that we need to believe that Russia propaganda is to be feared more than any other.

The inference you are making that corporations here, are not run by the same group(S) there.

Anyone can see the games being played, you are just saying, "PICK A SIDE".

Sorry, I do not have a side in this race, but I WILL win it.

posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 09:01 PM

originally posted by: misnomer68
a reply to: Drunkenparrot

I don't get how you think there is an organized social engineering plot to promote Russia.

Not one MSM outlet news story is bias towards the Russians. They all say Russia downed the Malaysian jet, they all promote sanctions against Russia, etc.
Where exactly are you seeing a pro-russia plot?

My apologies, I should have specified netcentric such the types of social engineering attempted by #occupy and Anonymous.

From my perspective the western MSM is biased and can can stride the line but there is a huge difference between catering to what your demographic wants to hear to keep viewership and blatantly fabricating the narrative you want told, regardless of the truth ( aka Joseph Goebbels)

Apologies as well for the etiquette violation citing Goodwin's law but I believe its an appropriate comparison.

Ask Dan Rather how not verifying your sources before running with a story with potential global consequences just once destroys a 40 year career in the Western media.

Granted, the same story in Russia would have resulted in a stent to the Gulag if not a .22 behind the ear like in the old days that Putin seems so keen to see return but that's a different story for a different thread.

posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 09:24 PM

originally posted by: FlyersFan
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I've asked this a dozen times elsewhere and I still haven't gotten a good answer. Would someone please tell me why I should trust Russia Today? Don't throw at me a bunch of 'western media sucks' type stuff. We already know that. I want to know why Russia Today is supposedly trustworthy. Anyone?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

I can think of one very good reason, that being the fact that during the 2012 election of the same corporate interests, the only media that covered our third party candidates was RT. They even had Larry King moderate the debate!!

The absurdity of this is a good thing to reflect upon when figuring out the propaganda game!!
edit on America/ChicagoWednesdayAmerica/Chicago08America/Chicago831pmWednesday10 by elementalgrove because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 10:22 PM

originally posted by: rigel4

originally posted by: mikeone718
I know a girl that works for RT. I'd like to hear her opinion on this thread

Is she Russian?


posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:08 PM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

your poor for throwing stones about the difference between bias and propaganda. I suggest you google the word and re acquaint yourself with it.

Political bias, professional bias. Either way Russia can use facts to further its job to damage western governments and their shortcomings.

If you don't like that that must mean you just hate RT on principal and that would be its own form of bias now wouldn't it.

Any media in the post snowden world should be scrutinized and researched there are too many fingers and too many one eye whiners in the world right now. Trust is at an all time low even among the goings on of this community as well. To qoute a wise woman. Close ones eyes tight or open ones own arms wide, ones a fool.

posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:22 PM

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Cantbebothered

The concern is that RT has weaponized the news. It is not merely false information, it is propaganda intended to impede the "West's" ability to respond to Russian military aggression.

That is actually similar to my assessment as well. RIA-Novosti created RT to bring the Russian viewpoint to the Western world. Why use nukes, threats of aggression or even sanctions when you can have a decided portion of the population within the target country listening to you? Public opinion is a very big deal, especially to those elected officials. Doesn't even have to be Russian military aggression. Think about Putin's article in the NY Times in regards to Syria when the US was looking to become involved. Between RT and Putin's op-ed amidst preexisting feelings of not wanting to get militarily involved again, well, that was a pretty effective machine.

Brilliant work really. Have to give the Russians credit. When I was in the USSR, I have to admit, I was really quite impressed with the sheer amount and quality of propaganda I witnessed while there. They're good at it.

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” Sun Tzu

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 12:23 AM
I don;t where I stand on this, to ban it (as already ruled out) would be absolute overkill.
Spin is Spin no matter who is doing it.
I'm sure many here actually believe the media run the planet not the actual Governments
when you take in to consideration Rupert Murdoch and others can can ruin anyone.

Another thing is, the talking heads on RT they are allowed to debate, it does not feel more controlled but actually less controlled.

Many on there I agree with, Abby Martin, George Galloway and Max Kieser to name a few, all take a pay check yet I've heard Galloway and Martin deplore certain Russian actions.

There is an old adage I once heard.

"You can't b*tch from the outside, you can only destroy the system from within,
so are you going to fight the system or are you just B*tching?"

I feel many talking heads that I've mentioned feel that way.

They are state run, BBC are too.
edit on 7-8-2014 by Taggart because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 12:40 AM
RT and other propaganda is given way too much credit, they aren`t to be feared that much anymore.

Reason :

Internet is what changed people(and still is)...because it`s full of crap, so everyone needs to make decisions (true or bs) all the time...and gets better of it doing it more and more...

Problem for both sides (the West and Russia), the more you lie the more people start to walk away form you.

RT simply can`t afford too much crap, just as any other "news" source.

If you haven`t figured out by now almost all "news" sources have an agenda, it`s too late for you.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:00 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord
I think if you have enough sense to look outside the MSM, chances are you see RT for what it is. Russia's opinion. RT in my opinion has some informative programming, I wouldn't use it for my sole source of info, but I wouldn't stop watching it because they have a biased view. If that was the case I would watch no news at all.

The news here in the US is basically state/banker run media. How many of our news outlets did a story on the FED renewing its charter? The majority of news seems to be propaganda and biased to a point. I personally like to hear everyone's opinion, especially those I do not agree with. Is RT trying to brainwash the American public? Sure, if you let them, just like most of the news outlets in the US.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:02 AM
RT has it's agendas just like any other news outlet, obviously its pro-Russian, it's in the name!
But Fox CNN or any other aren't all that innocent themselves.

My opinion is get your information from many sources and then fact check. Getting information from different sources and checking who's right who's wrong gives you a better understanding of the world as a whole and their agenda's to an extent.

Although to play devils advocate for a bit, that whole Liz Wahl stuff is some what interesting.
You know that Anchor from RT that Quit on air.

here's Abby Martins take on it ( if its not already fast forwarded, then fast forward to about 1:16:30)
here are some links to what she was talking about
some more food for thought
but this is weird.
how can some one sit there and say "i am censored at RT" but then say "Abby doesn't have as much censorship because she is outspoken" ?
and why does she seem so nervous or am i trippin?

and im guessing Ron Paul is a Putin propagandist as well...

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:25 AM
a reply to: FlyersFan

To answer your question - I think one of our former Presidents hit the nail on the head when he said -

"Trust, but verify."

- Ronald Reagan

I posted a recent article talking about the end of independent channels in Russia, with Putin shutting the last one down. I pointed out that Russian media reported there were no Russian soldiers located in Crimea during that part of the mess. A few months later Putin admitted the no insignia people were in fact Russian soldiers. Russian media carried that interview with Putin and posted his response.

What RT did not do was call Putin out / challenge him when he initially stated there were no troops. There are many examples within Russian media where this occurs. Russian media reports what they are told by the Kremlin, only to report the updated changes without noting the changes made.

The difference between RT and Western media -

[ méedee ə ]

1.television, newspapers, and radio collectively: the various means of mass communication considered as a whole, including television, radio, magazines, and newspapers, together with the people involved in their production.

what we see from Russian sources -

ste·nog·ra·pher noun stə-ˈnä-grə-fər

: a person whose job is to write down the words that someone says by using a special type of writing (called shorthand)

When a media outlet only reports what the government tells them, they are not a true "media" outlet. They are overpaid court stenographers whose only purpose is to repeat exactly what the government tells them to.

Putin gave a ton of differing and conflicting reasons for invading Ukraine / Crimea. A media outlet would have called Putin out and asked why. That never occurred with Russian media. They just kept changing the story as if the original explanations given were non existent.

There is a major difference between a media outlet reporting on government actions and a media outlet being told what to report by the government.

The second issue to note is the governments reaction to media reports. Journalists in Russia who have been critical of the Russian government / Putin have found themselves shut down or forcibly merged with other Russian outlets who report the government position. I don't see Foxnews being dragged into court or shutdown by the government for their reporting.

Foxnews can be counterbalanced by MSNBC which can be counter balanced by CNN which can be counterbalanced by BBC which can be counterbalanced by RT.

The same cannot be said in reverse for RT.

edit on 7-8-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:35 AM
RT provides the talking points to the anti-West crowd but more importantly than that they provide a Source to support their confirmation bias. One man has total control of this global web of deceit, Putin. It is a political and military weapon. In the West the news is always second guessing to downright opposing government policies and actions, Putin faces no such thing and must seriously find it odd and was groomed to calculate it as a weakness to exploit.

RT stories are either anti West or pro Putin, the only time they deviate is if they encapsulate both missions in one story.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:01 AM
I've just read through the thread and I'm very pleased to see most people giving the OP some stick.
It's heartwarming to see that we have some very switched on members and they are not swayed or bullied by threads like this.
The majority have pointed out the hypocrisy in the OP.
Well done ATS.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:44 AM

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:44 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Almost all mainstream media corporations are controlled and owned by a small group. The purpose is of course to spread disinformation and propaganda. This has become a worldwide phenomenon, especially with the growth and popularity of the Internet.

See the following article from Business Insider: -control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 03:46 AM
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

I agree with your sentiments on the Ukraine matter. I think people in the UK forget that our government has con -trolled exactly what we can read or hear about and exactly what slant to put on any news they choose. Its also clear that there is some kind of world committee - call it what you want - whose agenda is followed when we find that ministers from different country's give the same speech.

I find that RT often comments on UK news that our government or our own news channels chooses to ignore. If one lives outside London and isn't a news boff, its quite odd when a large rally for whatever reasons has occurred in the UK, especially London but our news says virtually nothing about it. I actually thank RT for a lot of news that I certainly wouldn' get to know about without that station.

I also congratulate RT on the very interesting documentaries and discussions they hold. In fact in truth I think its because our news channels are becoming so repetitive they are boring that many people are watching channels that give breaking news amalgamated into a set of programmes that are interesting and vibrant. I also don't always get the idea that the channel itself is especially pro Putin.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 03:56 AM

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
Through a relatively well conceived strategic plan, has covered news and issues that resonate well with a disenfranchised US millennial audience, as well as a broader US segment who identify better with global viewpoints than they do with provincial viewpoints. This strategy has resulted in a strong audience affinity, and a great many people never realized RussiaToday/ is state-run propaganda from Russia.

It's not "well conceived" at all. The entire world knows the American people are disenfranchised yet uneducated (mostly). We are lied to on such a level we crave any nugget or semblance of truth and RT provides a world view on topics, so long as it benefits Russia or hurts the western image.

Regardless of its point of origin and knowing it is officially propaganda, more time than not, it is less so than mainstream western media. Get the spooks at of the news agencies and we can talk, otherwise, hey what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Besides, those that know, know, others will learn the hard way.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 04:06 AM
ATS has changed a lot. I cannot even recognize it anymore.

A thread, from a site owner was made to let us know we shouldn't trust RT. He says they spread lies and propaganda.

My time here on ATS is done.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 04:19 AM

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: blupblup
Now we're being told which MSM outlets we should and shouldn't view.

Wait. You're saying a recently published video exposing the manipulation of news by a state run agency, because that state run agency owns and operates a news network, isn't valid information to share and discuss on ATS?

Really? That seems to be the tonality of your responses here.

If I ran across a similar exposé about CNN, FoxNews, or any other outlet, I'd certainly bring it up. But I do admit I have a special focus on Russia Today's rebranding as RT to run deceptive confirmation bias on the western online conspiracy-minded audience. We all should.

That's fair and appreciated. I am sure you are in a much better position to understand that then most of us. That being said, I personally would love to read a thread about how RT and/or the Russian government has infiltrated ATS instead of "RT is bad, mm'kay". I'd also be curious about the statistics of ban rates during major crisis. Any regular on here knows full well the craziness that ensued here after the start of Ukraine. In this regard SO has a very good point, and unlike the US's constant dribble of lie after lie, post Ukraine, Russia descended on this platform patting our backs and stoking our fears. We need to be cognizant of that also. Russia is NOT our savior!

As an aside, maybe this is SO only way of warning of a sophisticated assault on ATS without directly going to war with Russia's propaganda wing (which highly out rivals SO's finances I'm sure). Personally, I seen it and it was something to behold. Well spoken, if poorly typed comments reflecting our mindset sprinkled with pro-Russian ideology. As stated above Russia isn't exactly the model I wish America to become.
edit on 7-8-2014 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-8-2014 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 04:43 AM

originally posted by: Nikola014
ATS has changed a lot. I cannot even recognize it anymore.

A thread, from a site owner was made to let us know we shouldn't trust RT. He says they spread lies and propaganda.

My time here on ATS is done.

You are willing to leave a site where there is a difference of opinion? He is stating his position and explaining why / how he arrived there. It does not matter if he is the site owner or 3 days new to this site. His position is valid.

With all due respect I have noticed an interesting position by those who don't care much for the west / western media. You guys talk about differing positions but in reality your position comes across as "if you don't agree with my position then you should not be engaging in conversation in the thread".

Unless I misunderstood your post, you just stated you are leaving the site because the site owner has a different view than you do. RT is not banned, and he stated as much.

What is the justification for threatening to leave a site based solely on a person not sharing your viewpoint? People claim Russian media is fair and unbiased and yet those same people attack the op for having a different opinion.

how is that logical?

It is not freedom of the press when the media is controlled by one entity. It is not freedom of speech when you want to silence those who dont share your opinion.

Are you and the others that threatened by seeing both sides of the story? If so, why are you posting here and not on RT's websites?

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in