3 ms·

1. RT is reporting about themselves. Of course some other source is preferable. 2. RT is owned by the Russian government. I have no particular fondness for Vic

by untog 9y ago

1. RT is reporting about themselves. Of course some other source is preferable. 2. RT is owned by the Russian government. I have no particular fondness for Vice, but they're worlds apart. More generally, "X has a hugely compromising feature, Y has a mildly problematic feature, therefore they're exactly the same as each other" is the kind of fallacy that causes the public to trip and fall on its face over and over. Let's try to avoid it it we can.

gudenuf4gvmt 9y ago
I don’t see any reason you should view vice as better than RT—they’ve consistently shown a complete lack of regard for journalism, and they’re incentivized by page views rather (or in addition to) their owner. Why should they bother to get anything more correct? Their brand is a nightly show on HBO that isn’t boring, not a credible news source. And man, I wish I were being hyperbolic. But they are possibly the worst american news source to link to.
- untog 9y ago
  At the very least, they aren't a propaganda organ owned by a foreign government. Yeah, their coverage is sometimes kind of shitty. But every news organisation is beholden to their audience and their owner. If Vice actually did publish lies all the time then their reputation would tank and they'd stop getting clicks. The free market connection to honest journalism is a tenuous one, but it exists.
  - gudenuf4gvmt 9y ago
    Journalism is earned, not assumed. No matter the stance of RT vice still needs to demonstrate journalistic integrity. Have they? No. They’re on equal footing as i’m concerned. Propaganda is at least interpetable. Also they do tell blatant falsehoods, intentional or no. Americans care much less than they say.
    - untog 9y ago
      You're falling into exactly the fallacy I described: Vice is not the best news organisation in the world, therefore it is functionally equivalent to a propaganda outlet. It's absurd logic. Almost as absurd as the fact that yours is a brand new account created specifically to comment on this story. I'm sure it's just coincidental though...
      - gudenuf4gvmt 9y ago
        I did not say they were not the best, I said they need to demonstrate basic journalistic integrity at any point. They fail to do basic story updates to reflect obvious errors. At that point, it’s not news AT ALL, it’s just entertainment. So they aren’t just not the best, they aren’t a news outfit, they are an entertainment outlet.
        untog 9y ago
        Do you have any citations for all of us to read, or are we to trust your judgement? Also I'm curious, why was it this story in particular that inspired you to sign up for an account on Hacker News?
        henry_flower 9y ago
        dude, you're talking to a bot. look at his syntax. he's using the right single quotation mark char (’) instead of a plain apostrophe: that's because he's not typing, he's copying the predefined chunks of text from some approved document aka the fresh methodichka (методичка).
- GSimon 9y ago
  One is conceivably less false to people so it is the authentic genuine source by default, seems to be the current trend of thinking

by untog 9y ago

gudenuf4gvmt 9y ago

I don’t see any reason you should view vice as better than RT—they’ve consistently shown a complete lack of regard for journalism, and they’re incentivized by page views rather (or in addition to) their owner. Why should they bother to get anything more correct? Their brand is a nightly show on HBO that isn’t boring, not a credible news source. And man, I wish I were being hyperbolic. But they are possibly the worst american news source to link to.

untog 9y ago
At the very least, they aren't a propaganda organ owned by a foreign government. Yeah, their coverage is sometimes kind of shitty. But every news organisation is beholden to their audience and their owner. If Vice actually did publish lies all the time then their reputation would tank and they'd stop getting clicks. The free market connection to honest journalism is a tenuous one, but it exists.
- gudenuf4gvmt 9y ago
  Journalism is earned, not assumed. No matter the stance of RT vice still needs to demonstrate journalistic integrity. Have they? No. They’re on equal footing as i’m concerned. Propaganda is at least interpetable. Also they do tell blatant falsehoods, intentional or no. Americans care much less than they say.
  - untog 9y ago
    You're falling into exactly the fallacy I described: Vice is not the best news organisation in the world, therefore it is functionally equivalent to a propaganda outlet. It's absurd logic. Almost as absurd as the fact that yours is a brand new account created specifically to comment on this story. I'm sure it's just coincidental though...
    - gudenuf4gvmt 9y ago
      I did not say they were not the best, I said they need to demonstrate basic journalistic integrity at any point. They fail to do basic story updates to reflect obvious errors. At that point, it’s not news AT ALL, it’s just entertainment. So they aren’t just not the best, they aren’t a news outfit, they are an entertainment outlet.
      - untog 9y ago
        Do you have any citations for all of us to read, or are we to trust your judgement? Also I'm curious, why was it this story in particular that inspired you to sign up for an account on Hacker News?
        henry_flower 9y ago
        dude, you're talking to a bot. look at his syntax. he's using the right single quotation mark char (’) instead of a plain apostrophe: that's because he's not typing, he's copying the predefined chunks of text from some approved document aka the fresh methodichka (методичка).
GSimon 9y ago
One is conceivably less false to people so it is the authentic genuine source by default, seems to be the current trend of thinking