Reporter Unloads on Russia-Funded TV Network During Live Broadcast, Then Gets Kicked Off: 'You Have

Reporter Unloads on Russia-Funded TV Network During Live Broadcast, Then Gets Kicked Off: 'You Have 24 Hours a Day to Lie About the United States…'

www.theblaze.com

A reporter who was supposed to go on the Kremlin-owned Russia Today news network to discuss Bradley Manning’s sentencing instead used the opportunity to protest Russia’s new anti-gay law on Wednesday.

You have 24 hours a day to lie about the United States and to ignore what’s happening in Russia, you have 24 hours a day to do that, I am going to take my two minutes and tell people the truth,” Kirchick said.

(visit the link for the full news article)

As much as people love to make out out how America is the most vile,despicable country on the planet,well folks not so much.

I have often heard about how 'western propaganda' is the scourge of humanity, relentlessly on here turns how a few of us have been saying for years not the only one.

I honestly got a kick out this especially the part about how RT has 24 hours a day to lie about the US.

The 'Kremlin funded propaganda network'.

Interesting stuff going on in Russia things that not too many people want to even talk about for some reason.


www.theblaze.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

The video:

RT lies about the US? No doubt, just like any MSM outlet is doing, but the US gov't sure does make RT's job easy when it comes to bashing the US. That said, Russia does have RT to spread its propaganda but I don't think Russia can touch the US when it comes to spreading international propaganda. A good example is the US gov't spending over 24 million dollars to fly a plane over Cuba to broadcast our propaganda, which, ironically enough, becomes a waste of time and money when Cuba just jams the signal. So one can only wonder what the budget is for the rest of the world. Oh and now that the US is now legally allowed (like that stopped them before, Operation Mockingbird) to use the same propaganda on its citizens, well the fun begins and Russia ain't nothing on US!

I've been watching RT for over 10 years on the Free to Air propaganda satellite at 97W.

Just like PressTV, I can't remember them even mentioning their "own country", the one in their title.

They concentrate on U.S. gun statistics, and anti capitalist drivel, mixed in with a few touchy-feely fluff pieces aimed at the OWS and activist types.

Why do you suppose both they, and the propaganda arm of the Iranian Government would be interested in such things?

I like Max Kaiser, though, enough to tolerate it, and haven't even tried to digest the whole Larry King thing.

Hartman and that crosstalk guy Lavelle? I'd almost pay money to punch one, or both, of them out.



Obviously, that's my opinion, so point it out, again, if it helps yours.

reply to post by lernmore


Watching for over 10 years? Looks like RT was created in 2005.

Wikipedia

The creation of Russia Today was a part of a larger effort by the Russian government intended to improve the image of Russia abroad.[15] RT was conceived by former media minister Mikhail Lesin,[16] and Vladimir Putin’s press spokesperson Aleksei Gromov.[17] At the time of RT’s founding RIA Novosti director Svetlana Mironyuk stated: "Unfortunately, at the level of mass consciousness in the West, Russia is associated with three words: communism, snow and poverty," and added "We would like to present a more complete picture of life in our country."[16]

In 2005 RIA Novosti helped establish "ANO TV-Novosti", (Autonomous Non-profit Organization TV-News) - The parent organization of RT TV. ANO TV-Novosti General director (CEO) position was filled by Mr. Sergey Frolov[18] Frolov described: "A main problem in the beginning was that in our country we've never broadcast English-language television. When it began Russia Today had a certain lack of personnel: it seems hard to find qualified journalists, political scientists, economists, analysts, with good English skills in Moscow."[19]

RT started broadcasting as "Russia Today" on 10 December 2005, beginning with 300 journalists, including approximately 70 from outside Russia.[15] Russia Today’s editor-in-chief position was filled by Margarita Simonyan who recruited foreign journalists as presenters and consultants.[16] She said the channel’s intent was to have a "professional format" like the BBC, CNN and Euronews that would "reflect Russia's opinion of the world" and present a "more balanced picture" of Russia.[20]

Simonyan was a reportedly well-connected former Kremlin pool reporter, only 25 years of age at the time, working in journalism since she was 18. She told the New York Times that after the fall of the Soviet Union many new young journalists were hired, thus the youth of most of the staffers.[21] Journalist Danny Schechter, who has been a guest on RT,[22] has stated that having been part of the start-up team for CNN, he saw RT as another “channel of young people who are inexperienced, but very enthusiastic about what they are doing."[23] Shortly after the channel was launched, James Painter wrote that Russia Today and similar stations like France 24 and TeleSUR saw themselves as “counter-hegemonic”, offering a differing vision and news content from that of Western media like CNN and the BBC.[24]

I guess they try to make Russia look better by focusing on their old enemy's faults, failures, and straight up criminal actions. On the RT website there is a section called Russian Politics, so I'd go there for all things Russian, and a section specifically for the USA.

Well then excuse my mistake...

I've been watching the propaganda satellite for "over 10 years", which always had Aljezeera and PressTV.
Apparently I've been watching RT since 2005.

feel better?

ETA: Have you found any typos I should be aware of, while I still have time to edit my post?

reply to post by lernmore


Yeah I do but I sense your anger. Do you feel better?

reply to post by neo96


Neo, I don't know if I missed something, but is he a Russian Reporter or a U.S. Reporter? If he was a Russian reporter, he's taken quite a risk for his cause.

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by neo96

 

Neo, I don't know if I missed something, but is he a Russian Reporter or a U.S. Reporter? If he was a Russian reporter, he's taken quite a risk for his cause.

'

I would say hes 'contributor' as most 'news organizations' have them I would say US as RT just uses foreign 'contributors' to j'ustify' their station.

In the video he said he wanted the Gays in Russia to know they have friends in solidarity.

Around the 50 second mark,.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by lernmore

 

Yeah I do but I sense your anger. Do you feel better?

Oh, you're referring to the colorful description of my dis-taste for the last two I mentioned.

I don't get angry...

That's just my descriptive way of saying, I don't like them, really. Run with it though.

Back to the OP: Am I wrong in thinking the meat of the topic here is the fact that one of RT's own reporters basically admitted that they lie about the U.S.?

Right away you attacked me, but can you point out why my opinion of them is wrong, or how the couple year difference somehow makes what I said about their programming untrue?

I think I have a pretty good grasp of who they are, and their goals.... you?

Shouldn't the people in russia be concerned about this? Why is this guy so worked up about something that does not affect him? If he is going to make a point, he might be better served do it in an articulate way, he comes off as an idiot. I fail to see how this does anything but make him look bad. I can't imagine why he was on at all, as I imagine he'd sound just as stupid saying sound bites about Manning?

It interesting to note that the gay community has gotten more worked up about russia then Manning himself, as there was no support for him at all to speak of. Instead of talking about that fact, he's diverting attention from it. Curious.

reply to post by lernmore


Attacked you? Nay, I only corrected you because when you said RT was on the air for 10 years I got the thinking, no way they're fairly new. So I pointed out the facts to ya. I think I've made it pretty clear in all my posts in this thread that RT is a Russian propaganda machine. Even Russia admits it.

The creation of Russia Today was a part of a larger effort by the Russian government intended to improve the image of Russia abroad

Originally posted by Swills
I think I've made it pretty clear in all my posts in this thread that RT is a Russian propaganda machine.

Excellent place, then, for me to line up with you in agreement.


Still feels like 10 years, though.

Also, for the record, there's no "Russian" option on the satellite feed, and we weren't talking about the website. Your post, even re-reading sounds like the goal is "Russia=Good", and I've never once seen them even mention Russia.

Their goal is the downfall of America.

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by neo96

 

Neo, I don't know if I missed something, but is he a Russian Reporter or a U.S. Reporter? If he was a Russian reporter, he's taken quite a risk for his cause.

nothing to see here really, just a tool of tptb throwing a hissy fit and reviving the Ugly American image in one very ugly display.
NOTE to MODS and tttp: I'm talking about the alleged "journalist" and not the OP, m'kay?
James_Kirchick
no stranger to controversy,disinfo and agitprop is jamie
a YALE alumni too!

Ron Paul newsletters
Main article: Ron Paul newsletters

In 2008, Kirchick wrote about newsletters published under the name of Texas Congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul. The story, which said the newsletters contained racist and anti-homosexual material, became prominent in the 2012 presidential election.[4][5] It was later claimed by television station Fox19 that Ron Paul was not the author of the newsletters, although they were published under his name and he has taken moral responsibility for them. A number of other freelance writers were stated by Fox19 to have written the newsletters. The report stated that Kirchick had not responded to inquiries on the matter.[12] However, Sam Stein of the Huffington Post wrote in an article on the newsletters that there is evidence from old interviews with Ron Paul that Paul did write some of the newsletters during this time period, as stated by Ron Paul himself.[13]

In addition, Erik Wemple for The Washington Post wrote an article that included Kirchick's response to Fox19, where Kirchick implied that the writer of the Fox19 article, Ben Swann, was incorrect in his naming of the supposed writer of the "Special Edition on Racial Terrorism". Kirchick also linked to a copy of the newsletter that had Ron Paul's name as the byline.[14]

en.wikipedia.org...

he even shamelessly admits it: just trying to make RT look bad because western "journalism" is losing ratings and is "disturbingly popular" among American youth"

In an interview with FP on Wednesday afternoon, Kirchick explained his rationale for hijacking the segment. "I generally have a policy not to go on RT or Press TV or any of these dictatorial channels," he said. "But I had been so energized with all of the news out of Russia about the anti-gay laws that I thought this would be a good stunt to pull." Kirchick is no fan of stations like RT -- which he described as "disturbingly popular" among American youth -- and said that he had previously pulled a similar stunt on Press TV, which is funded by the Iranian government. "I consider it a way to shame these people who call themselves journalists and work at these stations," Kirchick said. "The only justification for anyone who is a Westerner, who lives in a free country, to appear on these stations is to behave in this way and show your utter contempt for them," he added.

blog.foreignpolicy.com...

just another 'murican acting out

in a contemptible manner indeed

certainly not somebody credible at all
the projection of western journalism's having morphed into the ministry of truth onto foreign journalists is nauseating, especially when jamie isn't worthy of licking dog poo off glen greenwald's shoes

Huh, this guy who was brought onto the RT show was there to discuss the Bradley Manning situation (the verdict, if I am correct), yet immediately launches into an anti-RT/anti-Russian/anti-journalist tirade because he opposes Russia's anti-homosexual laws.

This ponce displays outrageous disrespect for other individuals who are just doing their jobs and is astounding in his vehement claims that Russian 'anti-gay' laws are so wrong. Who the f*** is this guy to slag off another's laws when he's been invited to speak on an unrelated subject?

All I will say, is that he comes across as the 'typical American' who thinks that the world should be like them, behave like them, and view them as wonderful. Shoots off claiming RT doesn't discuss Russian issues - well, he ain't watched much RT then has he And the gay issues he so wants to discuss - well, he didn't seem interested to learn that RT had just discussed the new law a few days earlier. Such arrogance!

IMHO, good on the Russians for standing-up for traditional values and at-least trying to rid their society of such perverted practices. Sure, some will still do it in secret. But that state can never accept it as normal or permissible, not if it wants to defend morality and demographic sustainability. Anyways, introduce these liberal ideas and 'freedoms' at their peril. Cheers to Russia and RT!

Ah James Kirchick the same person whom was agaisnt Ron Paul in 2008? seeing him do this in Russia is not surprising and look at what organization he belongs to. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington strong advocates of military interventions.

He is a fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington

In 2008, Kirchick wrote about newsletters published under the name of Texas Congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul. The story, which said the newsletters contained racist and anti-homosexual material, became prominent in the 2012 presidential election

However, Sam Stein of the Huffington Post wrote in an article on the newsletters that there is evidence from old interviews with Ron Paul that Paul did write some of the newsletters during this time period, as stated by Ron Paul himself.