3 ms·

They are as trustworthy as any other. You've an axe to grind.

• octodog 6y ago
  Whether you choose to trust them or not, they have a history of publishing content that is false and serves to advance and protect Russia's interests. One such example on the Skripal poisoning: https://www.rt.com/news/452946-skripal-anniversary-truth-novichok/ https://www.rt.com/news/452946-skripal-anniversary-truth-nov... If you want you can read more about RT and Sputnik here: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/research-analysis/weaponising-news https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/research-analysis/wea...
  • bzb3 6y ago
    I don't trust them, in very much the same way I don't trust any other media outlet, since you'll find similar stories for any other online newspaper. But by singling them out, you make it sound like they are the worst, when they are basically average
    • thatlongthrow1 6y ago
      >trustworthy as any other >are basically average These two claims you made are incorrect. Honestly this is a bit bizarre.
• thatlongthrow1 6y ago
  >They are as trustworthy as any other. This is incorrect. Their "reporting" on certain events like Russia's downing of MH17 give this away. Is there any specific points of reporting on MH17 done by RT or associate agencies like Sputnik you view as trustworthy? I'd love to hear you out fully.