5 ms·

Both Russian and American medias are two sides of same coin. Both are expert in spreading propaganda, only difference is American media is convincing and Russia

by lipun4u 10y ago

Both Russian and American medias are two sides of same coin. Both are expert in spreading propaganda, only difference is American media is convincing and Russian media appears to be fake and there is no freedom of media in Russia and freedom of media is rarely used in the US. I follow RT and NYTimes, and I can say both have left journalism long back.

tptacek 10y ago
Whatever anyone's qualms about the New York Times, I find it hard to take seriously any argument that puts it on the same level as RT. The New York Times is not in fact an instrument of the US Government.
- sverige 10y ago
  Correct. The NYT is an instrument of the Democrat party, just as Fox News is an instrument of the GOP. Journalism has abandoned the pretense of impartiality, and it is especially notable during this election cycle.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    Fox News may very well be an instrument of the GOP, but the same cannot be said of the New York Times and the Democratic party. There are no serious observers who believe the two publications are equivalently rigorous.
- zigzigzag 10y ago
  As a non-American who follows US politics closely, the NYT might as well be run by the US Government: as far as I can tell the worldviews of the people who run the NYT are identical to those who run the USA and so it's not surprising that it's so often viewed as a mouthpiece. This specific story being a case in point. Just look at how they handled GWB's "War on Terror", or NSA revelations etc. They just sat on them, despite how newsworthy they were. Too often it was foreign media that broke the stories.
- internaut 10y ago
  Here is a different take on the subject tptacek. It is unlikely that NYT is ordered to produce stories according to the current administration's liking. Broadly in the West we don't go in for that sort of thing and one hopes we never will. We don't like being told what to think. The trouble though, is that all ideas have to come from somewhere. The power of Western style propaganda is that the government does not have to orchestrate it as intensely as in autocracies. It happens automatically because they live and breathe the same air. The relationship is more symbiotic. If you have real power, you can afford not to be petty. That is the same deal as with the Joker in the medieval court with the King. A government official only kills journalists were they a real threat to his power. If you punish people for a small degree of insolence it is because you are not secure in your power and any provocation could be used to coordinate an attack to displace you. Being 'above' that is a tacit demonstration of power and stability (a good thing!). What is the practical difference between the information printed by the New York Times and the opinions of the State Department? I cannot think of any. Any divisions I see are also expressed within the government itself. So they must be coordinated. But is it really from government to media? The neo-reactionary take is basically the exact reverse of this: "The New York Times is not in fact an instrument of the US Government." That's not as whack-a-doodle as it at first sounds. The New York Times is the mouth of a much larger network they refer to as the Cathedral, just as Christianity is not just the physical Vatican City. This is not necessarily an 'evil' to vanquish, but it does mean if the NYT is misguided on some subject, then it invariably also means the government too is running into the same dead end. The long and short of it is that the press and the government sup from the same pool of propaganda while they generate it, they believe in their own manufactures. I hope this makes sense to you.

by lipun4u 10y ago

tptacek 10y ago

Whatever anyone's qualms about the New York Times, I find it hard to take seriously any argument that puts it on the same level as RT. The New York Times is not in fact an instrument of the US Government.

sverige 10y ago
Correct. The NYT is an instrument of the Democrat party, just as Fox News is an instrument of the GOP. Journalism has abandoned the pretense of impartiality, and it is especially notable during this election cycle.
- tptacek 10y ago
  Fox News may very well be an instrument of the GOP, but the same cannot be said of the New York Times and the Democratic party. There are no serious observers who believe the two publications are equivalently rigorous.
zigzigzag 10y ago
As a non-American who follows US politics closely, the NYT might as well be run by the US Government: as far as I can tell the worldviews of the people who run the NYT are identical to those who run the USA and so it's not surprising that it's so often viewed as a mouthpiece. This specific story being a case in point. Just look at how they handled GWB's "War on Terror", or NSA revelations etc. They just sat on them, despite how newsworthy they were. Too often it was foreign media that broke the stories.
internaut 10y ago
Here is a different take on the subject tptacek. It is unlikely that NYT is ordered to produce stories according to the current administration's liking. Broadly in the West we don't go in for that sort of thing and one hopes we never will. We don't like being told what to think. The trouble though, is that all ideas have to come from somewhere. The power of Western style propaganda is that the government does not have to orchestrate it as intensely as in autocracies. It happens automatically because they live and breathe the same air. The relationship is more symbiotic. If you have real power, you can afford not to be petty. That is the same deal as with the Joker in the medieval court with the King. A government official only kills journalists were they a real threat to his power. If you punish people for a small degree of insolence it is because you are not secure in your power and any provocation could be used to coordinate an attack to displace you. Being 'above' that is a tacit demonstration of power and stability (a good thing!). What is the practical difference between the information printed by the New York Times and the opinions of the State Department? I cannot think of any. Any divisions I see are also expressed within the government itself. So they must be coordinated. But is it really from government to media? The neo-reactionary take is basically the exact reverse of this: "The New York Times is not in fact an instrument of the US Government." That's not as whack-a-doodle as it at first sounds. The New York Times is the mouth of a much larger network they refer to as the Cathedral, just as Christianity is not just the physical Vatican City. This is not necessarily an 'evil' to vanquish, but it does mean if the NYT is misguided on some subject, then it invariably also means the government too is running into the same dead end. The long and short of it is that the press and the government sup from the same pool of propaganda while they generate it, they believe in their own manufactures. I hope this makes sense to you.