3 ms·
Correct me if I am wrong, but it's just about the thumbnail inappropriately used in one of the videos. Not about the report itself or the factual errors in it.
by dagenleg 10y ago
Correct me if I am wrong, but it's just about the thumbnail inappropriately used in one of the videos. Not about the report itself or the factual errors in it. Just the thumbnail which was probably assigned from some stock of "Syrian war destruction photos". That's sounds more like sloppy work than a deliberate lie.
- megous 10y agoIt's not a generic stock photo. It's a photo from rebel held areas made just 4 days prior to the report. Clearly labeled as such on the purchase page. http://pictures.reuters.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2C0FCI3L2F3KU#/SearchResult&VBID=2C0FCI3L2F3KU&PN=4&POPUPPN=230&POPUPIID=2C0BF1FXHIJKT http://pictures.reuters.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2C0...
- megous 10y agoAlso the entire RT reporting about Syria is a factual error. They omit so much, it's ridiculous. Russia last fall/winter killed around 4000 civilians in Syria, before they scaled back this year. Where are detailed reports on those reported on RT? Google "site:rt.com russia massacres" and have fun finding something perpetrated by Russia's military there, even playing it down as an accident.