11 ms·

Why Russia’s Alternate History of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 Matters

57 points by SanderMak 11y ago

drinchev 11y ago
Ah... Media these days. I can't trust anyone, anymore. I guess, best thing to do is not to have opinion at all. I'm having a GPS in my pocket, I can browse most of the cities from my computer through Google Earth. I can talk to my watch, which replies and sends messages for me, but not a single country can provide a satellite image of the exact location of a fired rocket or any other evidence, like radar logs of some sort. Sometimes I really think I'm living in a multi-country-conspiracy and Snowden is only the top of the iceberg.
- reqres 11y ago
  That seems to be the point of modern propaganda. It's no longer about trying to convince people of what to believe in. Instead, the idea is to throw out multiple competing ideas no matter how far fetched to breed cynicism and conspiracy theories. I tend to read RT.com from time to time when Russia is featuring in the news to see what the Russian media is saying. And I have to confess the barrage of conflicting information (vis a vis western media) is extremely disorienting and difficult to methodically process. I'm not surprised that some people feel the way that you do. What I would also add is it's interesting to note how the story is pretty consistent from western media (that rebels shot down the plane by mistake). From what I've seen, the Russian media perspective is highly fluid; i.e. prone to change and multi-pronged.
  - ckozlowski 11y ago
    There was an article posted here on HN detailing how this is performed. I'll see if I can dig up the article, but it had interviews with internet users paid by the Russian state to shape argument. A group of 2-3 would take opposing sites in creating an artificial argument on say, a forum where it was being discussed. The "Western" POV would be discredited, and the argument focused between differing "Russian" explanations. The argument would never actually cease or come to a conclusion, but re-center around a number of accepted conclusions.
- berntb 11y ago
  Well, you shouldn't really trust any information without considering cui bono, etc. The media sell eyeballs. And so on. In the present case -- there seems to be a theme in comments from security experts in the democratic countries. They claim that muddying the waters, so no one is trusted, is the real target of Russia's alternate history. If all cats are grey and everyone lies -- then military invasions and stealing areas wasn't as bad, relatively. It is all just a matter of opinion. So give the modern propaganda engine a hat tip for evil competence. Edit: What "reqres" wrote, in the same minute. It was interesting about the propanda. I would like to add to his comment that I've seldom seen so many sources in democratic countries be so consistent as about the Ukraine war, in so many countries and from so many viewpoints.
- x03 11y ago
  Adam Curtis, a documentary film-maker and journalist, has a brilliant aptitude at analysis in this area. His work in general, at the intersection of reporting and politics, is pretty excellent. It is some malice, more than you might expect; with with a great dollop of ineptitude, far more than you might expect; that allows this climate of total disorientation to exist. Take some of his thoughts: > "Politicians used to have the confidence to tell us stories that made sense of the chaos of world events. > "But now there are no big stories and politicians react randomly to every new crisis - leaving us bewildered and disorientated. > "And journalism - that used to tell a grand, unfurling narrative - now also just relays disjointed and often wildly contradictory fragments of information. > "Events come and go like waves of a fever. We - and the journalists - live in a state of continual delirium, constantly waiting for the next news event to loom out of the fog - and then disappear again, unexplained." The rest of that article is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/ae14be85-3104-3c74-a9da-85807434a38e http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/ae14be85-3104-... And the documentary-film that he's referring to in that post, Bitter Lake, is available on iPlayer (for British viewers...or people on a VPN...), here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bitter-lake http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bi...
- dsfyu404ed 11y ago
  >But not a single country can provide a satellite image of the exact location of a fired rocket or any other evidence. Assume for a minute that the CIA had that sort of in depth coverage of the event. Assume they know everything from the serial number of the warhead to the crew-members' favorite vodka. Why would they, or any other intelligence agency risk burning even the tiniest shred of information on an event that open sources have done a pretty good job covering?
- ajuc 11y ago
  There was good speach about the exact effect that modern propaganda has by Timothy Snyder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKFObB6_naw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKFObB6_naw The whole point of this kind of propaganda is to make people go "meh, everybody's lying, so I just won't trust anybody". You have police shooting black unarmed teen, and want people not to be angry about that - make a panel discussion with 12 people telling 12 versions of what happened, 11 of which blame the teenager. Accuse every other source of information of bias and lies. Many people will think "there's sth to this, I won't know the truth anyway, not my problem, let's ignore this issue".
datalist 11y ago
"Put another way: Propaganda works. Putin has understood that from Day" We can be only glad that Western media (including the NY Times) has never been used for propaganda and all information is absolutely objective, reproducible, and a hundred percent trustworthy. Has anybody already found the WMDs in Iraq?
- knowaveragejoe 11y ago
  To put the two in the same category is a bit much: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/04/russia-s-propaganda-blitzkrieg.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/04/russia-s-pr...
  - dmichulke 11y ago
    Well, one killed intentionally from 150k up to 600k people [0], the other one (if it was "him" and if it was intentionally) some 300. So not really the same category... [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War To be more specific: I don't see any of the features prcolaimed by the West (honest government, no interference in other country's business, avoid civilian kills) upheld by themselves. Also to note, I don't think Putin does it either.
    - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
      I fail to see how we went from comparing media in the two spheres of influence and whether it's propaganda to this comparison of specific actions cherry-picked from history.
    - dave_sullivan 11y ago
      I do pay attention to the way Russia does propaganda and I've noticed one common tactic is to call out some hypocrisy of the US, then use that to completely skirt the first issue. For instance "Why does Russia torture dissidents?" "Ah, sure, like the US doesn't torture people that disagree with them..." So move along because Russia doesn't torture people? Or it's OK because America does too? Or many Americans don't believe America really tortures, so Russia must not really torture either? Or, specific to this discussion: "Why do people believe the Russian propaganda machine?" "Oh, sure, like Americans don't believe their own propaganda cough Iraq war cough." So move along because Russian and American propaganda are similar? Both of those (US tortures people and Iraq war was sold with a lie) are true. The weird trick is that getting someone to admit that two parties are remotely similar makes them much more similar in our minds than we intended (our minds think in black and white, villains and heroes, "somewhere in between" is a strange and modern concept). Suddenly, you are much less worried about Russia because the US is doing it too. Or rather, you're not worried about the US, so why worry about Russia? The other favorite is appeals to nationalism: "How do you respond to protesters in the capital?" "They are not real Russians, just look, some of their signs are in English, they are meant as propaganda for the Western media. All the real Russians understand what we are doing, despite the best efforts of the West." But while we're at it, I'll raise your 600k people to the tens of millions that died during the reign of the USSR.
dmichulke 11y ago
Sounds to me like it's them that use propaganda and we are the truly informed. Keep the company of those who seek the truth- run from those who have found it
ck2 11y ago
Is this the same missile that was launched from a mobile carrier that arrived from across the Russian border and then days later was driven back across the border? Putin is extremely manipulative and dangerous. Like a Kim Jong-un without anyone like China to tell him "no". I'm surprised no-one points out he is basically on the third term of what should be a two term limit. That alone removes all legitimacy from his rule.
- 3princip 11y ago
  Putin is manipulative and dangerous, while the US and NATO continue to expand their military influence worldwide, but they're benign, right?
  - Avalaxy 11y ago
    That's a fallacy. NATO is being invited by these countries. Eastern European countries are basically begging for NATO protection. What Russia does there is pretty different, they invide a sovereign country that doesn't want them there. Of course if you're talking about the useless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan you're right.
    - 3princip 11y ago
      Well, I live in (South) Eastern Europe. The whole region is awash with puppet political elites and western backed/owned media. The result of that propaganda (which doesn't negate the existence of Russian propaganda or the bad experiences of ex-soviet block countries) in the wake of a victory in the cold-war is a very big reason for the current situation. Regarding wars and interventions, I'm not just talking about Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, (ex)Yugoslavia and Latin America. I'm also talking about the aggressive stance the US is taking in the south China sea as we speak. I'm also thinking about it's operations in Africa. If the US has a right to a global military presence, then others have too. Or is American exceptionalism real?
      - ckozlowski 11y ago
        So aggressive in fact, that Vietnam is courting the U.S. and the Philippines is opening Subic Bay to the U.S. Navy again. "Yankee Go Home" indeed.
yc1010 11y ago
I was born in the Soviet Union during its dying years back then everyone knew the system was corrupt, inefficient and basically a pile of bullshit and thankfully it all fell apart. I still remember having to queue hours to get bread from bakery, and not seeing toilet paper, milk or meat for some time... Anyone who wants to go back to those days is insane imho :( My parents and older generation of relatives mostly watch Russian news and entertainment channels via satellite, and the unashamed propaganda and brainwashing is incredible to behold, whats worse is how my parents/relatives believe everything they hear even if it is absolutely absurd or borderline conspiracy crazy. We often argue nowadays about the direction Russia has taken, but usually the arguments end once i ask "where would you want your grand children to grow up, here in the western Europe or back home", that's when they go quiet. They truly believe that Putin is some sort of a genius (ignoring the rise in oil prices that helped him) and this is actually downright scary :( at least in the Soviet days people didn't buy the propaganda, now a lot of people seem to actually believe all they hear and see, and live under a sort of a massive reality distortion field where the world is out to destroy Russia and its people. aside: interestingly enough back then the collapse of USSR was partly prompted by low oil prices and a stupid war with Islamists, fast forward 30+ years and economy is even more reliant on resource extraction and Putin is boldly marching into another quagmire
- ctdonath 11y ago
  Can you elaborate on differences/similarities between that system being a "corrupt, inefficient pile of BS" driven by propaganda, vs the socialistic "government should take care of everyone, by redistributing wealth" prominently posted in HN discussions (a la "guaranteed basic income", "reduced work weeks", "free healthcare/education/etc", "everyone has a right to _____ which others earned", etc - all requiring a dominating government taking what isn't theirs to take, all sounding wonderful but crushingly impossible in implementation a la USSR)? (Obviously I'm biased, but I am trying to make an earnest question. Russian communism sounded great too, even as you note: your parents still fall for the propaganda. Wish I could ask in a more neutral tone, but it's an inherently divisive subject.)
  - yc1010 11y ago
calgoo 11y ago
What I don't understand is how so many people can still watch TV news and believe what they say. Every news show I have seen in the last 10 years or more is complete BS and exists in a reality bubble where bad things happen but everything is fine as a kitten was saved in the end of the show. Why do they hold so much power? I can understand 50+ year olds maybe, but young people? Are you telling me young people look on their TV and believe that dictator is actually telling the truth? We know the western TV is BS, but so is theirs. Its not about one or the other, its about not believing anything at face value and actually educate yourself. Sorry about the rant, its just something that surprises me continually.
- noamyoungerm 11y ago
  Why do you think old people and young people should behave differently?
  - calgoo 11y ago
    What I mean with the 50+ is people who are not technologically aware and/or are very set in their ways. I find it a lot harder to change the mindset, or at least talking about it with older generations then the younger ones. From my point of view (European) its hard to understand that people don't distrust any news outlet or politician, but maybe that's just my personal paranoia.
- jmnicolas 11y ago
  What I don't understand is why you trust this article if you don't trust TV. The fact that it's written doesn't mean they don't lie. And what's even more troubling is that nowadays Russian propaganda is more believable than the western one ...
  - oleks 11y ago
    The fact that you are having this conversation is a good start.
  - calgoo 11y ago
etaty 11y ago
There is propaganda in every countries, just look at who own the media... My opinion, is some extreme right groups did Maidan massacre ( http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021 ), and they were ready to do more. See how IS developed in Syria. Same story. Libya same story. Also look at Egypt... Some countries are pushing other countries politics... Now, what can we do?
richardwigley 11y ago
Odd and interesting to read. I would have guessed a larger percentage of Russians got their views online. I would also think that most online news written in Russian would be under control of state media. In which case, if they did start to use the Internet to find news then nothing would change. Maybe a Russian nytimes.com?
- vbezhenar 11y ago
  I don't think that majority of young Russians even watch TV. Most of young people getting information from Internet. And there are many different points of views in Russian media space. Though main news sources are heavily influenced by Kremlin, that's true. But those who want to find an alternative point of view, will do that without any problems.
  - Avalaxy 11y ago
    Yea, except for when you're looking for wikipedia, reddit or github, right?
    - vbezhenar 11y ago
      What do you mean? Those sites are available from Russia, as far as I know.
      - Avalaxy 11y ago
        http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/27/9210475/russia-wikipedia-ban-censorship http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/27/9210475/russia-wikipedia-b... http://uk.businessinsider.com/russia-bans-reddit-2015-8?r=US&IR=T http://uk.businessinsider.com/russia-bans-reddit-2015-8?r=US... http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/03/github-russia/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/03/github-russia/
        vbezhenar 11y ago
        I'm not sure about reddit, but wikipedia and github are not banned currently. Internet censorship is worrying and might eventually ban an important sites, but not yet.
sschueller 11y ago
Propaganda is now everywhere. [1] [1] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-propaganda-ban-repealed-freeing-state-dept-to-direct-its-broadcasting-arm-american-citizens.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-...
tim333 11y ago
It's kind of scary how effective the Russian propaganda is with only 3% believing MH17 was shot down by the rebels when that is almost certainly what happened.
vbezhenar 11y ago
Honestly, I believe more to people who did those missiles, than to some random Dutch experts (with all respect, of course). Almaz-Antey did their own investigation, they did experiments, they have very expert knowledge about those missiles, so it's very important not to throw away their facts. They might be influenced by Russia politics, of course, but Netherlands, as part of Europe, definitely follows anti-Russian politics as well.
- Avalaxy 11y ago
  Err, you clearly didn't watch/read the report then, because the investigation wasn't "dutch", it was conducted by a large team if different nationalities, including Russians. Aside from that, the international team has the missile fragments and the airplane, the Russian team doesn't.
- trymas 11y ago
  Theoreticaly - yes, practically - no. As a person who lives in an ex-Soviet country, which is not Russia, many who have not seen Soviet/Russian reality distortion field (aka political lies) can be too naive to believe them. Russia, when it's convenient to them likes to exploit western liberalism and naivety. Like here, they (Russian) say that their experts, who know best in the world how BUK missile launcher system works in every aspect, concluded, that Russia did not do it. Though, I believe that Russia's underground political tactics have not much change from the times of KGB. Possibly, those Russian experts were made (by government agencies) to 'investigate' and produce 'report'. Also do not ignore the fact, that Russians gave their report at the same time as Dutch report was released. The goal was, that the people would see Russian 'report' instead of the Dutch one. The 'dictatorship' cannot let people doubt that they do not have a enemies in the west.
- Ras_ 11y ago
  They might be influenced by Russian politics? Almaz-Antey is 100% owned by the Russian federation. The state is also their biggest customer, and nearly 90% of the business is with the military. Almaz-Antey produces very high priority strategic systems, like air and missile defenses.
qwerta 11y ago
Why Russians should not believe it? - Ukraine army shoot down civil airliner with 90 people on board just a few years ago [1] - It was regular war zone with dozens other planes shoot down [2]. - It happened on Ukraine territory, most likely by Ukraine citizens. - Buk 9M38 is not Russian missile, but Soviet (that includes Ukraine). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_aircraft_losses_during_the_Ukrainian_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_aircraft_los...
- igor_a 11y ago
  "It was regular war zone with dozens other planes shoot down" with dozens of Ukrainian planes shoot down. (who shot them? where did they got weapons for that? where did they got skills for that?) "Ukraine army shoot down civil airliner with 90 people on board just a few years ago" How many planes (korean planes to be specific) were shot down by USSR (that includes Russia)
  - 3princip 11y ago
    How many planes were shot down by the US (Iranian planes to be specific)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
    - smcl 11y ago
      This a lovely example of the irritating "whataboutism" that clouds these sorts of discussions and bring nothing to the table. Iranian Air Flight 655 has nothing to do with the article or this discussion.
      - datalist 11y ago
        To be fair igor_a started dragging unrelated what-if scenarions about Russia into the discussion.
Htsthbjig 11y ago
Thank you New York Times, the News Group that Snowden could not use to whistle blow because it is a direct branch of US government, for reminding us Western how free we are against propaganda. We can really trust the 6 companies that own all media groups in the US, or the two news agencies that control all what we watch in the West. Never believe that the Government of the US have ever thought about controlling these 6 groups. That in order to make a movie about the military you have to give your script to the US military for review. Don't read Propaganda by EDWARD L. BERNAYS or any other book, just trust us, we are the good guys.
- ddorian43 11y ago
  I think you have to give the script to the military to get FREE access to the machines/ships/tanks. You get free access and they get free propaganda.
rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
Oh wow, finally an opportunity to see the pot calling the kettle black. Nytimes readers should remember this article every time they see a casual line coming from "anonymous government officials" of the United States being printed as fact without question or scrutiny.
swehner 11y ago
They skipped over this one: Why the New York Times Matters
PythonicAlpha 11y ago
One side note: The trouble, I see at least in my (Western) country: The main (public) TV programs are in the hand of the state (via regulatory control of the TV channels through political parties) or of two to three big corporations (many channels belong to one big corporation controlling them and also other news media). From Italy, I heard, that many TV channels are controlled by one media mogul that also was the president. I guess, there are also other western countries, with similar situations. At least in my country, I see clear evidence, that political unwanted news are at least suppressed or sometimes shown in a very distorted way. For example, when the software patent discussion came up some years ago in Europe, they brought news showing software patents in a shiny, only positive way. I would accept that from a purely private TV channel, but that was a "public TV channel" -- and many in my country still believe, that those public TV channels only tell the truth. But that is not so -- they tell, what our governments want us to know! Also, at least one leading news reporter was dismissed (against protests from other reporters), he was inconvenient for one leading political party. So, in the west, we don't have it as bad as in Russia -- but we should be very careful, the situation is far away from good.
- cpncrunch 11y ago
  Perhaps Italy is different, but in countries like the UK and Canada the press is constantly bashing the government.
arpa 11y ago
Lots of shills here. How's the pay?
- dang 11y ago
  Accusations of shillage without evidence are not allowed on Hacker News.
  - cpncrunch 11y ago
    I assume the OP is talking about this: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-inside-russian-troll-house http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-i... Of course, given that 97% of people in Russia believe the propoganda, it could just be plain old brainwashing rather than shilling.
    - arpa 11y ago
      True enough...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
cpncrunch 11y ago
To be honest I'm not really surprised by this. Given the Milgram experiment results (where 100% of people gave a lethal 300V shock, and 65% gave a 450V shock), it's not really surprising that 97% of people believe whatever ridiculous nonsense they are told by the authorities.

57 points by SanderMak 11y ago

Ah... Media these days. I can't trust anyone, anymore. I guess, best thing to do is not to have opinion at all. I'm having a GPS in my pocket, I can browse most of the cities from my computer through Google Earth. I can talk to my watch, which replies and sends messages for me, but not a single country can provide a satellite image of the exact location of a fired rocket or any other evidence, like radar logs of some sort. Sometimes I really think I'm living in a multi-country-conspiracy and Snowden is only the top of the iceberg.

reqres 11y ago
That seems to be the point of modern propaganda. It's no longer about trying to convince people of what to believe in. Instead, the idea is to throw out multiple competing ideas no matter how far fetched to breed cynicism and conspiracy theories. I tend to read RT.com from time to time when Russia is featuring in the news to see what the Russian media is saying. And I have to confess the barrage of conflicting information (vis a vis western media) is extremely disorienting and difficult to methodically process. I'm not surprised that some people feel the way that you do. What I would also add is it's interesting to note how the story is pretty consistent from western media (that rebels shot down the plane by mistake). From what I've seen, the Russian media perspective is highly fluid; i.e. prone to change and multi-pronged.
- ckozlowski 11y ago
  There was an article posted here on HN detailing how this is performed. I'll see if I can dig up the article, but it had interviews with internet users paid by the Russian state to shape argument. A group of 2-3 would take opposing sites in creating an artificial argument on say, a forum where it was being discussed. The "Western" POV would be discredited, and the argument focused between differing "Russian" explanations. The argument would never actually cease or come to a conclusion, but re-center around a number of accepted conclusions.
berntb 11y ago
Well, you shouldn't really trust any information without considering cui bono, etc. The media sell eyeballs. And so on. In the present case -- there seems to be a theme in comments from security experts in the democratic countries. They claim that muddying the waters, so no one is trusted, is the real target of Russia's alternate history. If all cats are grey and everyone lies -- then military invasions and stealing areas wasn't as bad, relatively. It is all just a matter of opinion. So give the modern propaganda engine a hat tip for evil competence. Edit: What "reqres" wrote, in the same minute. It was interesting about the propanda. I would like to add to his comment that I've seldom seen so many sources in democratic countries be so consistent as about the Ukraine war, in so many countries and from so many viewpoints.
x03 11y ago
Adam Curtis, a documentary film-maker and journalist, has a brilliant aptitude at analysis in this area. His work in general, at the intersection of reporting and politics, is pretty excellent. It is some malice, more than you might expect; with with a great dollop of ineptitude, far more than you might expect; that allows this climate of total disorientation to exist. Take some of his thoughts: > "Politicians used to have the confidence to tell us stories that made sense of the chaos of world events. > "But now there are no big stories and politicians react randomly to every new crisis - leaving us bewildered and disorientated. > "And journalism - that used to tell a grand, unfurling narrative - now also just relays disjointed and often wildly contradictory fragments of information. > "Events come and go like waves of a fever. We - and the journalists - live in a state of continual delirium, constantly waiting for the next news event to loom out of the fog - and then disappear again, unexplained." The rest of that article is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/ae14be85-3104-3c74-a9da-85807434a38e http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/ae14be85-3104-... And the documentary-film that he's referring to in that post, Bitter Lake, is available on iPlayer (for British viewers...or people on a VPN...), here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bitter-lake http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bi...
dsfyu404ed 11y ago
>But not a single country can provide a satellite image of the exact location of a fired rocket or any other evidence. Assume for a minute that the CIA had that sort of in depth coverage of the event. Assume they know everything from the serial number of the warhead to the crew-members' favorite vodka. Why would they, or any other intelligence agency risk burning even the tiniest shred of information on an event that open sources have done a pretty good job covering?
ajuc 11y ago
There was good speach about the exact effect that modern propaganda has by Timothy Snyder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKFObB6_naw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKFObB6_naw The whole point of this kind of propaganda is to make people go "meh, everybody's lying, so I just won't trust anybody". You have police shooting black unarmed teen, and want people not to be angry about that - make a panel discussion with 12 people telling 12 versions of what happened, 11 of which blame the teenager. Accuse every other source of information of bias and lies. Many people will think "there's sth to this, I won't know the truth anyway, not my problem, let's ignore this issue".

datalist 11y ago

"Put another way: Propaganda works. Putin has understood that from Day" We can be only glad that Western media (including the NY Times) has never been used for propaganda and all information is absolutely objective, reproducible, and a hundred percent trustworthy. Has anybody already found the WMDs in Iraq?

knowaveragejoe 11y ago
To put the two in the same category is a bit much: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/04/russia-s-propaganda-blitzkrieg.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/04/russia-s-pr...
- dmichulke 11y ago
  Well, one killed intentionally from 150k up to 600k people [0], the other one (if it was "him" and if it was intentionally) some 300. So not really the same category... [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War To be more specific: I don't see any of the features prcolaimed by the West (honest government, no interference in other country's business, avoid civilian kills) upheld by themselves. Also to note, I don't think Putin does it either.
  - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
    I fail to see how we went from comparing media in the two spheres of influence and whether it's propaganda to this comparison of specific actions cherry-picked from history.
  - dave_sullivan 11y ago
    I do pay attention to the way Russia does propaganda and I've noticed one common tactic is to call out some hypocrisy of the US, then use that to completely skirt the first issue. For instance "Why does Russia torture dissidents?" "Ah, sure, like the US doesn't torture people that disagree with them..." So move along because Russia doesn't torture people? Or it's OK because America does too? Or many Americans don't believe America really tortures, so Russia must not really torture either? Or, specific to this discussion: "Why do people believe the Russian propaganda machine?" "Oh, sure, like Americans don't believe their own propaganda cough Iraq war cough." So move along because Russian and American propaganda are similar? Both of those (US tortures people and Iraq war was sold with a lie) are true. The weird trick is that getting someone to admit that two parties are remotely similar makes them much more similar in our minds than we intended (our minds think in black and white, villains and heroes, "somewhere in between" is a strange and modern concept). Suddenly, you are much less worried about Russia because the US is doing it too. Or rather, you're not worried about the US, so why worry about Russia? The other favorite is appeals to nationalism: "How do you respond to protesters in the capital?" "They are not real Russians, just look, some of their signs are in English, they are meant as propaganda for the Western media. All the real Russians understand what we are doing, despite the best efforts of the West." But while we're at it, I'll raise your 600k people to the tens of millions that died during the reign of the USSR.

dmichulke 11y ago

Sounds to me like it's them that use propaganda and we are the truly informed. Keep the company of those who seek the truth- run from those who have found it

ck2 11y ago

Is this the same missile that was launched from a mobile carrier that arrived from across the Russian border and then days later was driven back across the border? Putin is extremely manipulative and dangerous. Like a Kim Jong-un without anyone like China to tell him "no". I'm surprised no-one points out he is basically on the third term of what should be a two term limit. That alone removes all legitimacy from his rule.

3princip 11y ago
Putin is manipulative and dangerous, while the US and NATO continue to expand their military influence worldwide, but they're benign, right?
- Avalaxy 11y ago
  That's a fallacy. NATO is being invited by these countries. Eastern European countries are basically begging for NATO protection. What Russia does there is pretty different, they invide a sovereign country that doesn't want them there. Of course if you're talking about the useless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan you're right.
  - 3princip 11y ago
    Well, I live in (South) Eastern Europe. The whole region is awash with puppet political elites and western backed/owned media. The result of that propaganda (which doesn't negate the existence of Russian propaganda or the bad experiences of ex-soviet block countries) in the wake of a victory in the cold-war is a very big reason for the current situation. Regarding wars and interventions, I'm not just talking about Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, (ex)Yugoslavia and Latin America. I'm also talking about the aggressive stance the US is taking in the south China sea as we speak. I'm also thinking about it's operations in Africa. If the US has a right to a global military presence, then others have too. Or is American exceptionalism real?
    - ckozlowski 11y ago
      So aggressive in fact, that Vietnam is courting the U.S. and the Philippines is opening Subic Bay to the U.S. Navy again. "Yankee Go Home" indeed.

yc1010 11y ago

I was born in the Soviet Union during its dying years back then everyone knew the system was corrupt, inefficient and basically a pile of bullshit and thankfully it all fell apart. I still remember having to queue hours to get bread from bakery, and not seeing toilet paper, milk or meat for some time... Anyone who wants to go back to those days is insane imho :( My parents and older generation of relatives mostly watch Russian news and entertainment channels via satellite, and the unashamed propaganda and brainwashing is incredible to behold, whats worse is how my parents/relatives believe everything they hear even if it is absolutely absurd or borderline conspiracy crazy. We often argue nowadays about the direction Russia has taken, but usually the arguments end once i ask "where would you want your grand children to grow up, here in the western Europe or back home", that's when they go quiet. They truly believe that Putin is some sort of a genius (ignoring the rise in oil prices that helped him) and this is actually downright scary :( at least in the Soviet days people didn't buy the propaganda, now a lot of people seem to actually believe all they hear and see, and live under a sort of a massive reality distortion field where the world is out to destroy Russia and its people. aside: interestingly enough back then the collapse of USSR was partly prompted by low oil prices and a stupid war with Islamists, fast forward 30+ years and economy is even more reliant on resource extraction and Putin is boldly marching into another quagmire

ctdonath 11y ago
Can you elaborate on differences/similarities between that system being a "corrupt, inefficient pile of BS" driven by propaganda, vs the socialistic "government should take care of everyone, by redistributing wealth" prominently posted in HN discussions (a la "guaranteed basic income", "reduced work weeks", "free healthcare/education/etc", "everyone has a right to _____ which others earned", etc - all requiring a dominating government taking what isn't theirs to take, all sounding wonderful but crushingly impossible in implementation a la USSR)? (Obviously I'm biased, but I am trying to make an earnest question. Russian communism sounded great too, even as you note: your parents still fall for the propaganda. Wish I could ask in a more neutral tone, but it's an inherently divisive subject.)
- yc1010 11y ago

calgoo 11y ago

What I don't understand is how so many people can still watch TV news and believe what they say. Every news show I have seen in the last 10 years or more is complete BS and exists in a reality bubble where bad things happen but everything is fine as a kitten was saved in the end of the show. Why do they hold so much power? I can understand 50+ year olds maybe, but young people? Are you telling me young people look on their TV and believe that dictator is actually telling the truth? We know the western TV is BS, but so is theirs. Its not about one or the other, its about not believing anything at face value and actually educate yourself. Sorry about the rant, its just something that surprises me continually.

noamyoungerm 11y ago
Why do you think old people and young people should behave differently?
- calgoo 11y ago
  What I mean with the 50+ is people who are not technologically aware and/or are very set in their ways. I find it a lot harder to change the mindset, or at least talking about it with older generations then the younger ones. From my point of view (European) its hard to understand that people don't distrust any news outlet or politician, but maybe that's just my personal paranoia.
jmnicolas 11y ago
What I don't understand is why you trust this article if you don't trust TV. The fact that it's written doesn't mean they don't lie. And what's even more troubling is that nowadays Russian propaganda is more believable than the western one ...
- oleks 11y ago
  The fact that you are having this conversation is a good start.
- calgoo 11y ago

etaty 11y ago

There is propaganda in every countries, just look at who own the media... My opinion, is some extreme right groups did Maidan massacre ( http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021 ), and they were ready to do more. See how IS developed in Syria. Same story. Libya same story. Also look at Egypt... Some countries are pushing other countries politics... Now, what can we do?

richardwigley 11y ago

Odd and interesting to read. I would have guessed a larger percentage of Russians got their views online. I would also think that most online news written in Russian would be under control of state media. In which case, if they did start to use the Internet to find news then nothing would change. Maybe a Russian nytimes.com?

vbezhenar 11y ago
I don't think that majority of young Russians even watch TV. Most of young people getting information from Internet. And there are many different points of views in Russian media space. Though main news sources are heavily influenced by Kremlin, that's true. But those who want to find an alternative point of view, will do that without any problems.
- Avalaxy 11y ago
  Yea, except for when you're looking for wikipedia, reddit or github, right?
  - vbezhenar 11y ago
    What do you mean? Those sites are available from Russia, as far as I know.
    - Avalaxy 11y ago
      http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/27/9210475/russia-wikipedia-ban-censorship http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/27/9210475/russia-wikipedia-b... http://uk.businessinsider.com/russia-bans-reddit-2015-8?r=US&IR=T http://uk.businessinsider.com/russia-bans-reddit-2015-8?r=US... http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/03/github-russia/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/03/github-russia/
      - vbezhenar 11y ago
        I'm not sure about reddit, but wikipedia and github are not banned currently. Internet censorship is worrying and might eventually ban an important sites, but not yet.

sschueller 11y ago

Propaganda is now everywhere. [1] [1] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-propaganda-ban-repealed-freeing-state-dept-to-direct-its-broadcasting-arm-american-citizens.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-...

tim333 11y ago

It's kind of scary how effective the Russian propaganda is with only 3% believing MH17 was shot down by the rebels when that is almost certainly what happened.

vbezhenar 11y ago

Honestly, I believe more to people who did those missiles, than to some random Dutch experts (with all respect, of course). Almaz-Antey did their own investigation, they did experiments, they have very expert knowledge about those missiles, so it's very important not to throw away their facts. They might be influenced by Russia politics, of course, but Netherlands, as part of Europe, definitely follows anti-Russian politics as well.

Avalaxy 11y ago
Err, you clearly didn't watch/read the report then, because the investigation wasn't "dutch", it was conducted by a large team if different nationalities, including Russians. Aside from that, the international team has the missile fragments and the airplane, the Russian team doesn't.
trymas 11y ago
Theoreticaly - yes, practically - no. As a person who lives in an ex-Soviet country, which is not Russia, many who have not seen Soviet/Russian reality distortion field (aka political lies) can be too naive to believe them. Russia, when it's convenient to them likes to exploit western liberalism and naivety. Like here, they (Russian) say that their experts, who know best in the world how BUK missile launcher system works in every aspect, concluded, that Russia did not do it. Though, I believe that Russia's underground political tactics have not much change from the times of KGB. Possibly, those Russian experts were made (by government agencies) to 'investigate' and produce 'report'. Also do not ignore the fact, that Russians gave their report at the same time as Dutch report was released. The goal was, that the people would see Russian 'report' instead of the Dutch one. The 'dictatorship' cannot let people doubt that they do not have a enemies in the west.
Ras_ 11y ago
They might be influenced by Russian politics? Almaz-Antey is 100% owned by the Russian federation. The state is also their biggest customer, and nearly 90% of the business is with the military. Almaz-Antey produces very high priority strategic systems, like air and missile defenses.

qwerta 11y ago

Why Russians should not believe it? - Ukraine army shoot down civil airliner with 90 people on board just a few years ago [1] - It was regular war zone with dozens other planes shoot down [2]. - It happened on Ukraine territory, most likely by Ukraine citizens. - Buk 9M38 is not Russian missile, but Soviet (that includes Ukraine). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_aircraft_losses_during_the_Ukrainian_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_aircraft_los...

igor_a 11y ago
"It was regular war zone with dozens other planes shoot down" with dozens of Ukrainian planes shoot down. (who shot them? where did they got weapons for that? where did they got skills for that?) "Ukraine army shoot down civil airliner with 90 people on board just a few years ago" How many planes (korean planes to be specific) were shot down by USSR (that includes Russia)
- 3princip 11y ago
  How many planes were shot down by the US (Iranian planes to be specific)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
  - smcl 11y ago
    This a lovely example of the irritating "whataboutism" that clouds these sorts of discussions and bring nothing to the table. Iranian Air Flight 655 has nothing to do with the article or this discussion.
    - datalist 11y ago
      To be fair igor_a started dragging unrelated what-if scenarions about Russia into the discussion.

Htsthbjig 11y ago

Thank you New York Times, the News Group that Snowden could not use to whistle blow because it is a direct branch of US government, for reminding us Western how free we are against propaganda. We can really trust the 6 companies that own all media groups in the US, or the two news agencies that control all what we watch in the West. Never believe that the Government of the US have ever thought about controlling these 6 groups. That in order to make a movie about the military you have to give your script to the US military for review. Don't read Propaganda by EDWARD L. BERNAYS or any other book, just trust us, we are the good guys.

ddorian43 11y ago
I think you have to give the script to the military to get FREE access to the machines/ships/tanks. You get free access and they get free propaganda.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago

Oh wow, finally an opportunity to see the pot calling the kettle black. Nytimes readers should remember this article every time they see a casual line coming from "anonymous government officials" of the United States being printed as fact without question or scrutiny.

swehner 11y ago

They skipped over this one: Why the New York Times Matters

PythonicAlpha 11y ago

One side note: The trouble, I see at least in my (Western) country: The main (public) TV programs are in the hand of the state (via regulatory control of the TV channels through political parties) or of two to three big corporations (many channels belong to one big corporation controlling them and also other news media). From Italy, I heard, that many TV channels are controlled by one media mogul that also was the president. I guess, there are also other western countries, with similar situations. At least in my country, I see clear evidence, that political unwanted news are at least suppressed or sometimes shown in a very distorted way. For example, when the software patent discussion came up some years ago in Europe, they brought news showing software patents in a shiny, only positive way. I would accept that from a purely private TV channel, but that was a "public TV channel" -- and many in my country still believe, that those public TV channels only tell the truth. But that is not so -- they tell, what our governments want us to know! Also, at least one leading news reporter was dismissed (against protests from other reporters), he was inconvenient for one leading political party. So, in the west, we don't have it as bad as in Russia -- but we should be very careful, the situation is far away from good.

cpncrunch 11y ago
Perhaps Italy is different, but in countries like the UK and Canada the press is constantly bashing the government.

arpa 11y ago

Lots of shills here. How's the pay?

dang 11y ago
Accusations of shillage without evidence are not allowed on Hacker News.
- cpncrunch 11y ago
  I assume the OP is talking about this: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-inside-russian-troll-house http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-i... Of course, given that 97% of people in Russia believe the propoganda, it could just be plain old brainwashing rather than shilling.
  - arpa 11y ago
    True enough...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

cpncrunch 11y ago

To be honest I'm not really surprised by this. Given the Milgram experiment results (where 100% of people gave a lethal 300V shock, and 65% gave a 450V shock), it's not really surprising that 97% of people believe whatever ridiculous nonsense they are told by the authorities.