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.

 

Kremlin ‘considering stimulus plan for Russian economy’

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 06:51 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA




Like I would speculate the Pride of the Russian people and their resilience against the psychological impacts we normally suffer during recessive times. Russian people are seemingly stronger than we are willing to be.



Because they have no other choice in Russia. If they had a choice Putin wouldn't have been in charge as long as he has.

And when they have a chance of a choice the government snuffs that choice out. Either they are put in prison or killed as we saw not to long ago.



When has a western politician stood in front of a crowd of press and answered any question without screening them first. Controlling messages is what defines western society, and you point the finger at Putin and speculate that he is doing what we have professionalized? How rich.


Show me thew last time a Russian president was honest to their people?

Show me where the Russian government hasn't used their media to keep the people in a fog about what they are actually doing...like Ukraine?

Controlling messages are what Russia has done throughout history...the west has the ability to say what they want without having the fear of being imprisoned by the government...can Russian media do the same?

How many media sites in the west are allowed to talk bad about the government and what they do without the fear of any reprisal from the government...now how many in Russia are allowed to do the same?

Seems you forget these little things just so you can bash the west...how rich.




posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: MALBOSIA
Show me where the Russian government hasn't used their media to keep the people in a fog about what they are actually doing...like Ukraine?

Controlling messages are what Russia has done throughout history...the west has the ability to say what they want without having the fear of being imprisoned by the government...can Russian media do the same?

How many media sites in the west are allowed to talk bad about the government and what they do without the fear of any reprisal from the government...now how many in Russia are allowed to do the same?

Seems you forget these little things just so you can bash the west...how rich.


I think your just mad and you have no answer for why he has +80% approval rating.

Some light reading for you.


The elite media set a framework within which others operate. If you are watching the Associated Press, who grind out a constant flow of news, in the mid-afternoon it breaks and there is something that comes along every day that says “Notice to Editors: Tomorrow’s New York Times is going to have the following stories on the front page.” The point of that is, if you’re an editor of a newspaper in Dayton, Ohio and you don’t have the resources to figure out what the news is, or you don’t want to think about it anyway, this tells you what the news is. These are the stories for the quarter page that you are going to devote to something other than local affairs or diverting your audience. These are the stories that you put there because that’s what the New York Times tells us is what you’re supposed to care about tomorrow. If you are an editor in Dayton, Ohio, you would sort of have to do that, because you don’t have much else in the way of resources. If you get off line, if you’re producing stories that the big press doesn’t like, you’ll hear about it pretty soon. In fact, what just happened at San Jose Mercury News is a dramatic example of this. So there are a lot of ways in which power plays can drive you right back into line if you move out. If you try to break the mold, you’re not going to last long. That framework works pretty well, and it is understandable that it is just a reflection of obvious power structures.



The universities, for example, are not independent institutions. There may be independent people scattered around in them but that is true of the media as well. And it’s generally true of corporations. It’s true of Fascist states, for that matter. But the institution itself is parasitic. It’s dependent on outside sources of support and those sources of support, such as private wealth, big corporations with grants, and the government (which is so closely interlinked with corporate power you can barely distinguish them), they are essentially what the universities are in the middle of. People within them, who don’t adjust to that structure, who don’t accept it and internalize it (you can’t really work with it unless you internalize it, and believe it); people who don’t do that are likely to be weeded out along the way, starting from kindergarten, all the way up. There are all sorts of filtering devices to get rid of people who are a pain in the neck and think independently. Those of you who have been through college know that the educational system is very highly geared to rewarding conformity and obedience; if you don’t do that, you are a troublemaker. So, it is kind of a filtering device which ends up with people who really honestly (they aren’t lying) internalize the framework of belief and attitudes of the surrounding power system in the society. The elite institutions like, say, Harvard and Princeton and the small upscale colleges, for example, are very much geared to socialization. If you go through a place like Harvard, most of what goes on there is teaching manners; how to behave like a member of the upper classes, how to think the right thoughts, and so on.



When you critique the media and you say, look, here is what Anthony Lewis or somebody else is writing, they get very angry. They say, quite correctly, “nobody ever tells me what to write. I write anything I like. All this business about pressures and constraints is nonsense because I’m never under any pressure.” Which is completely true, but the point is that they wouldn’t be there unless they had already demonstrated that nobody has to tell them what to write because they are going say the right thing. If they had started off at the Metro desk, or something, and had pursued the wrong kind of stories, they never would have made it to the positions where they can now say anything they like. The same is mostly true of university faculty in the more ideological disciplines. They have been through the socialization system.When you critique the media and you say, look, here is what Anthony Lewis or somebody else is writing, they get very angry. They say, quite correctly, “nobody ever tells me what to write. I write anything I like. All this business about pressures and constraints is nonsense because I’m never under any pressure.” Which is completely true, but the point is that they wouldn’t be there unless they had already demonstrated that nobody has to tell them what to write because they are going say the right thing. If they had started off at the Metro desk, or something, and had pursued the wrong kind of stories, they never would have made it to the positions where they can now say anything they like. The same is mostly true of university faculty in the more ideological disciplines. They have been through the socialization system.Text



Okay, you look at the structure of that whole system. What do you expect the news to be like? Well, it’s pretty obvious. Take the New York Times. It’s a corporation and sells a product. The product is audiences. They don’t make money when you buy the newspaper. They are happy to put it on the worldwide web for free. They actually lose money when you buy the newspaper. But the audience is the product. The product is privileged people, just like the people who are writing the newspapers, you know, top-level decision-making people in society. You have to sell a product to a market, and the market is, of course, advertisers (that is, other businesses). Whether it is television or newspapers, or whatever, they are selling audiences. Corporations sell audiences to other corporations. In the case of the elite media, it’s big businesses.



Actually, it is very similar to Leninism. We do things for you and we are doing it in the interest of everyone, and so on. I suspect that’s part of the reason why it’s been so easy historically for people to shift up and back from being, sort of enthusiastic Stalinists to being big supporters of U.S. power. People switch very quickly from one position to the other, and my suspicion is that it’s because basically it is the same position. You’re not making much of a switch. You’re just making a different estimate of where power lies. One point you think it’s here, another point you think it’s there. You take the same position.

What makes the mainstream media mainstream

Say what you want about Russia but dont act like your countries snip dont stink. Garry Webb and Michael Hasting come to mind. I am sure there are scores more.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

His approval rating is that high because he owns state media and they push his lies. Its no different than Putin rigging elections and putin using state resources to put down the people who want democracy.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: MALBOSIA

His approval rating is that high because he owns state media and they push his lies. Its no different than Putin rigging elections and putin using state resources to put down the people who want democracy.


Putin owns RT?

So the rating isnt true? Putin bought RT and paid the staff to say it 80% ??

Do you have any sources? This is groundbreaking!!!!



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Wiki RT News

RT has been called a propaganda outlet for the Russian government[10][11][12] and its foreign policy[10][13][12][14] by news reporters,[15] including former RT reporters.[16][17][18] It has also been accused of spreading disinformation.[19][20][21][22] The United Kingdom media regulator Ofcom has repeatedly found RT to have breached rules on impartiality and of broadcasting "materially misleading" content.[23][24][25] The network states that it offers a Russian perspective on global events.[3]


Perspective in Russia = propaganda.

Owner -

State-owned RIA Novosti news agency, which founded RT in 2005, is one of the largest in Russia.


Chair person - Svetlana Mironyuk -

On 9 December 2013 President of Russia Vladimir Putin issued a decree which abolished RIA Novosti and merged it with the international radio service Voice of Russia to create the new information agency Rossiya Segodnya. On the same day, Mironyuk issued a statement saying that she was not aware of the decision until the decree was published, and that she believed the purpose to be to economize rather than to optimize the information service. This statement caused some protests, and on the next day Mironyuk issued another statement. Without formally retracting the first statement, she said that the duty of all employees of RIA Novosti was to implement the decree of the president, and those who disagreed with the decree were in fact destabilizing the situation, and their activity was purely destructive.[6]

On 1 February 2016, Mironyuk was appointed a vice-president and the head of communications of Sberbank.[7]


Sberbank... Another entity owned by Putin and his cronies.

Yes - Putin owns RT.
edit on 13-2-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

That was all a bunch blah blah followed by a flagrant lie.

Putin does not "own" the federal government. Well maybe he pwns them but you spelled it wrong.

So anyway. We have state owned media here in Canada. They are mandated to promote Canadian values and when they tick off the feds the feds cut their budget. How is this any different in Russia? RT suppresses stories that are harmfull to their national image. Western Corporate media suppresses stories that are harmfull to corporate interests even when those interests cause irreversable harm to public.

Take youe privately pwnd media and shove it. Im a nationalist.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Right.. denial much?



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: MrSpad

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
The amount of money they are talking about is small in the scheme of things, they will just borrow from China.

Once the sanctions are lifted and they will be soon, by Europe at least, investment will flood into Russia. People love to make money fast.


China did not help them last year and is not going to this year without some sort of big concession to make sure they get some money back. For China, Russia's problems have allowed them to overtake Russia as the largest trade partner in the Central Asian Republics, steal Russian arms markets and make some big trade and defense deals with Ukraine. China will do what is best for China. And Western investors got burned in Russia once unless something significant changes, like the Government, the risk far exceeds the rewards. And Russia needs to get into shape where the West can not shut down its economy anytime they feel like it.


I realize the sanctions by Russia are not having an effect of the US economy what so ever. I think you may not realize how much of an effect they are having on certain countries in Europe however. They are affecting farmers on a massive scale. Russia has made alternative arrangements for fresh produce from other countries and the fear in Europe is that even when the sanctions end Russia will have no need to reinstate the trade with said European countries.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join