RT Ceases Broadcasting in Washington After Being ‘Thrown Out,’ Chief Editor Says

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: UKTruth

It's not banned. Two cables companies in Virginia just decided they would no longer air RT. Which is well within their right to do.

So it is banned then. Whether it is their right to ban it is neither here nor there.

a reply to: UKTruth

If TV Land chose to no longer play reruns of Mama's Family would you say that Mama's Family had been banned?

originally posted by: UKTruth
Well, the other night I was surfing the news channels and RT was showing an in-depth story of what is going on in Syria. Meanwhile, CNN was devoting all it's time to a porn star. I know which channel is real news and which is tabloid trash. That said, I am not surprised to see RT banned in a country that is now known for state control of media and suppression/censorship.

Well said bro. It would be comical if it wasn't so sad.

a reply to: UKTruth

A ban requires a government law, bro. I see no laws implemented to ban RT. Do you?

a reply to: UKTruth

RT just did a tabloid piece ...Actually a interesting piece

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: UKTruth

A ban requires a government law, bro. I see no laws implemented to ban RT. Do you?

A ban requires a govt. law???

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: UKTruth

If TV Land chose to no longer play reruns of Mama's Family would you say that Mama's Family had been banned?

If they removed an entire channel using their broadcasting network because they had a problem with that channel's news then yes it would be a ban.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: UKTruth

A ban requires a government law, bro. I see no laws implemented to ban RT. Do you?

A ban requires a govt. law???

Yes, because it has to be legally enforceable. Otherwise it isn't banned. It may be restricted without legal recourse, but restrictions != bans. Though people on this website seem to have a hard time understanding that.

a reply to: UKTruth

Rereading through the OP, it's not even the cable company that is pulling RT. It sounds like a couple local affiliates have decided to stop airing their RT programming.

This would be like if my local Fox affiliate decided they wanted to run reruns of VIP on Saturdays but the Fox affiliate in another market chose not to run VIP.

That's not a ban. Hell that's not even newsworthy in anyway.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Yeah, it's just RT adopting the typical conservative persecution complex. "PLEASE cry for me because things are tough! WAAAAH!"

Banning RT was an idea 'they might use' raised by MAria Zanokovych on the russian , 60 minutes.

She said , 'if they ban RT in Britain then no British journalist will work in russia , none" . A intimation to reciprocity < :/ So we can assume its something that could happen which would hurt very close to the heart of the Motherland .

Is the thread a test of opinion to such a move ?

If someone banned RT in the UK , half the asleep would , 'what's RT again ?' But then again the watchers of it would be pretty annoyed , much the same as quite a few people , as in a lot really , are annoyed that an certain investigation has been presumptively pre concluded . Don't doubt they can usually see when unfair is not strictly fair .

The RT documentaries are usually quite qood , the one where they found what a Dodgy Bergoglio The Pope really is , by God he is a Dodgy Bergoglio . They generally leave it up to the viewer to judge . Don't take RT off the air

Double Post

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So the PGA golf tour banning certain clothes is not a ban? Or banning certain golf clubs...not a ban?
'''now, now everyone, we're not banning these things, you just can't ever wear or use them... ok...got it?"

Or how about banning smoking indoors at pubs? Oh, sorry, I meant restricting...lol
"sorry, sir, smoking is restricted indoors..."
"oh, ok, what are the restrictions?"
"you cant do it.... but we're not banning it".

originally posted by: DJW001
The BBC, France24 and other news organizations are supported by their respective governments and are clearly "foreign agents of influence."

There's a difference. The BBC ain't a broadcaster that is devoted to propagating a State contrived narrative. RT.com and other Russian broadcasters exist for one reason. Also the BBC is "not supported" by the British government per se.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So the PGA golf tour banning certain clothes is not a ban? Or banning certain golf clubs...not a ban?
'''now, now everyone, we're not banning these things, you just can't ever wear or use them... ok...got it?"

Can you still wear those clothes outside of the PGA tour? Yes or no?

Or how about banning smoking indoors at pubs? Oh, sorry, I meant restricting...lol
"sorry, sir, smoking is restricted indoors..."
"oh, ok, what are the restrictions?"
"you cant do it.... but we're not banning it".

Are you still allowed to smoke cigarettes? Yes or No?

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Martin Niemöller

Add:

When they came for the press,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a journalist.

a reply to: DerBeobachter

This is two local affiliates that have opted to not run any RT programming. I hardly think that warrants a comparison to the Nazis.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
a reply to: DJW001

"Much as I dislike the blatant nature of RT's propaganda, they have a right to disseminate it. It is up to us as "consumers of news" to judge it on its own merits."

Now replace RT with CNN, do you still agree?

I would quibble about the expression "blatant propaganda," but yes, of course. There is a difference between "spin" and broadcasting opinion as fact. CNN does sometimes stray into that area, but not nearly as often as Fox.

SOMETIMES??? BWAHAHAHAHAHABAHAHABAHAHAHAHAHAHA

a reply to: Xcalibur254

That's not a ban. Hell that's not even newsworthy in anyway.

It is just another example of how the Russian government needs to convince its citizens that the whole world is picking on Russia. They banish our diplomats for no good reason, now they censor our television network!

a reply to: UKTruth

Well, the other night I was surfing the news channels and RT was showing an in-depth story of what is going on in Syria. Meanwhile, CNN was devoting all it's time to a porn star.

You mean you watched RT justifying Russia's support of a brutal regime while covering up the ongoing genocide, whereas CNN was covering one of the many lawsuits threatening to bring down a corrupt American president? I know which one is more pressing. As a British subject, Trump's legal affairs will have more impact on your life than Russia' s glorious triumphs against "terrorists" in Syria.