5 ms·

No, you're thinking of Fox News & Daily Mail. Sure, there is some criticism of BBC news, but I don't think you could ever compare it to the junk filled propaga

No, you're thinking of Fox News & Daily Mail. Sure, there is some criticism of BBC news, but I don't think you could ever compare it to the junk filled propaganda machine that is RT.

oarsinsync 7y ago
They both speak for a particular segment of the population, but do not represent the country as a whole by any means, in either case. EDIT: for clarity, I wasn't suggesting the BBC did either.
Synaesthesia 7y ago
I read a lot of RT. Many of their articles are just international reports like AP news and stuff. Don’t really see a lot of propaganda.
- bouncycastle 7y ago
  Yeah, of course they have to drop some real articles to look legit. The propaganda is what's in between Eg. Today's home page, first headline "Russia's 'secret weapon' for winning influence in Africa – and it's not what you might think". Then have a look at the op-ed pieces that are basically hit-pieces disguised as journalism. Also, there are things that they do not report (or omit) which is what you should be most concerned about.
  - Synaesthesia 7y ago
    This is in every kind of newspaper. You have to learn to discern propaganda from news and learn judgement.
pnako 7y ago
Sure, there is some criticism of RT, but I don't think you could ever compare it to the junk filled propaganda machine that is BBC news.
ultraism 7y ago
RT covers factual news. They just choose to cover news that makes America, et al look bad and choose to not cover news that makes Russia look bad. Opinion pieces are of course opinions, not news, and are also usually pro-Russian policy opinions.
- hakfoo 7y ago
  The value of a state run news service is that the bias is fairly obvious. I know roughly who writes the cheques at thr BBC, RT, NHK, or DW. With privately owned media, figuring out where they're not going to be impartial is a lot more subtle. Who's buying the ads? What other companies are owned by major shareholders or key staff?

No, you're thinking of Fox News & Daily Mail. Sure, there is some criticism of BBC news, but I don't think you could ever compare it to the junk filled propaganda machine that is RT.

oarsinsync 7y ago

They both speak for a particular segment of the population, but do not represent the country as a whole by any means, in either case. EDIT: for clarity, I wasn't suggesting the BBC did either.

Synaesthesia 7y ago

I read a lot of RT. Many of their articles are just international reports like AP news and stuff. Don’t really see a lot of propaganda.

bouncycastle 7y ago
Yeah, of course they have to drop some real articles to look legit. The propaganda is what's in between Eg. Today's home page, first headline "Russia's 'secret weapon' for winning influence in Africa – and it's not what you might think". Then have a look at the op-ed pieces that are basically hit-pieces disguised as journalism. Also, there are things that they do not report (or omit) which is what you should be most concerned about.
- Synaesthesia 7y ago
  This is in every kind of newspaper. You have to learn to discern propaganda from news and learn judgement.

pnako 7y ago

Sure, there is some criticism of RT, but I don't think you could ever compare it to the junk filled propaganda machine that is BBC news.

ultraism 7y ago

RT covers factual news. They just choose to cover news that makes America, et al look bad and choose to not cover news that makes Russia look bad. Opinion pieces are of course opinions, not news, and are also usually pro-Russian policy opinions.

hakfoo 7y ago
The value of a state run news service is that the bias is fairly obvious. I know roughly who writes the cheques at thr BBC, RT, NHK, or DW. With privately owned media, figuring out where they're not going to be impartial is a lot more subtle. Who's buying the ads? What other companies are owned by major shareholders or key staff?