It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
SkepticOverlordv 2nd post: The difference between propaganda and bias is very important. US (and other western) news media exhibits bias, with RT represents propaganda. My posts in another thread outline my experience with such matters. www.abovetopsecret.com...
SkepticOverlord: Now, certainly there can be side-agendas. FoxNews, by it's hard-core right-lean, can push hard to get favor among conservative politicians and issue-drivers. MsNBC, with a left-lean, can earn favor with a Democratic administration. But that's the lucky-strike-extra benefit from picking an audience and tailoring biased newsertainment to that audience.
CNN's money (using CNN as an example) comes from advertisers, hence, it's beholding to the whim of the advertising market, which is defined by CNN's audience demographics. www.abovetopsecret.com...
originally posted by: Liberal1984
In my experience RT is closer to the truth than any outlet I’ve ever found.
Operation Mockingbird was a secret campaign by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to influence media. Begun in the 1950s, it was initially organized by Cord Meyer and Allen W. Dulles, it was later led by Frank Wisner after Dulles became the head of the CIA.
The organization recruited leading American journalists into a network to help present the CIA's views, and funded some student and cultural organizations, and magazines as fronts. As it developed, it also worked to influence foreign media and political campaigns, in addition to activities by other operating units of the CIA.
In addition to earlier exposés of CIA activities in foreign affairs, in 1966 Ramparts magazine published an article revealing that the National Student Association was funded by the CIA. The United States Congress investigated, and published its report in 1976…
originally posted by: Liberal1984
OtherSideOfTheCoin: ATS is only an anti-western propaganda weapon, if its members are also an anti-western propaganda weapon. Simple as.
Nobody knows all there is to know, but it could be in the ultimate, God known truth, (whatever that may be) it's only relatively an anti propaganda weapon. Certainly when I joined, this site was still (relatively) pro-war in Iraq.
But my reports on the plight of Georgians displaced from the breakaway region of Abkhazia never made it on air. When I quoted a diplomat as saying that Georgia's 2008 parliamentary election marked significant progress I almost got the sack. But the big test was the Georgia-Russia war of August 2008. Would RT try to be objective, and offer both sides of the story? Or would it see its main role as being a cheerleader for the Russian army?
I found out on the second day of hostilities when asked in a live interview what the situation was. Carefully loading my answer with phrases like "unconfirmed reports" and "too early to tell", I responded that we had just heard that Russian jets had bombed civilian buildings in the town of Gori. Although accurate, my answer did not go down well. I had been booked to do hourly updates via satellite. On my way to the studio, I was told they were cancelled. The frustration I felt at not being able to cover the biggest news story of my career was immense, and I was tempted to quit then and there.
The point I was making was/is/will-continue-to-be completely missed by you and other ATS members because Russia Today has fooled you into trusting it through an expert deployment of confirmation bias strategies. That's too bad. Sad really
originally posted by: Fr33domPoet
originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: FlyersFan
That is a very good question so i second it.
Why should we trust RT more than other news sources?
I only told you my own experience. My experience is that ATS and Youtube is full of various examples where Western Media has basically lied.
FlyersFanCan you give us a reason why we should TRUST Russia Today?