6 ms·
Why are Kansas City’s airwaves filled with pro-Putin ‘Radio Sputnik’ propaganda?
- vannevar 5y ago>KCXL has no ties to Russia and is against the country’s conflict with Ukraine, Schartel told us Wednesday. But he needs the money, and he’d lose his business if he pulled the plug on Radio Sputnik. If your business cannot survive without being propped up by payments from a foreign adversary, you don't have a legitimate business.
- op00to 5y agoI love how no one seems to immediately notice this hole in Russian collaborator businesses’ defense.
- cyanydeez 5y agoShould be interesting in this year's US midterms to see how much reported income is in US elections compared to 2018
- coolso 5y agoGlobalism in absolute shambles!
- yucky 5y agoDoes this apply to Apple?
- ncmncm 5y ago"conflict with"? Is that how they spell "invasion" in KC?
- 8bitsrule 5y agoKCXL: "At KCXL 102.9fm and 1140am, we bring you the truth. We tell you the things that the liberal media wont tell you." The Voice of America and BBC World Service have been blasting Eastern Europe and Russia from 100kW++ stations since WW2. Sounds like RU found a cheaper way.
- aix1 5y agoThe BBC stopped the shortwave broadcasts in 2008. They have announced yesterday that they're bringing them back: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/4/22961286/bbc-news-blocked-in-russia-ukraine-invasion-shortwave-radio https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/4/22961286/bbc-news-blocked-...
- Nasreddin_Hodja 5y agoBut who does listen to shortwaves nowadays?
- madengr 5y ago
- mrlonglong 5y agoThat's free speech, protected so there's nothing that can be done about it. Or is there anything ...
- weare138 5y agoA foreign state run entity like Sputnik is not protected under the Constitution. They're not US citizens.
- retrac 5y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_... There has not been much in the way of recent case law; one has to go back to the Sedition Act or the acts during WW II to find aggressive laws outright banning foreign propaganda. So it's hard to say quite where the line might be with its interaction with the current interpretation of the 1st amendment (which does apply to non-citizens). But the US federal government does likely have some constitutionally-valid powers to regulate, and perhaps restrict, foreign propaganda.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- phendrenad2 5y agoIs the owner actually paid by the Russian government? The article links to a paywall and isn't very clear.
- derbOac 5y ago
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- gurumeditations 5y agoBy HN logic, attacking this guy for broadcasting Russian propaganda is a “slippery slope” towards censorship.
- ALittleLight 5y agoCriticizing him for it isn't a slippery slope towards censorship, but stopping him from broadcasting Russian propaganda is censorship. We get to hear and see American and Ukrainian propaganda in many channels - why not one (or more) for the Russian perspective?
- jerkstate 5y agoI hope nobody tells these hand-wringers about shortwave radio
- jmpman 5y agoAs soon as Russia raises their nuclear forces to “special combat readiness”, I’m fine with taking their propaganda off the air.
- gamechangr 5y agoIt's freedom of speech or no freedom of speech ( no matter how off putting) It's written to offend. Even the title " airwaves filled with pro Putin propaganda" I just came back from a trip to Kansas City. I dont think anyone in KC is aware that "the sirwaves were filled" with this little radio station.