4 ms·

It’s a wishful thinking, that everybody has some brain. There are enough flatearthers, antivaxers and wannabe putin’s buddies.

by lnsru 5y ago

kyrra 5y ago
Silencing ideas that you do not agree with does not lead to an open society. Because guess what, the less popular ideas ends up being the right one sometimes. (In this case I agree that RT is likely propaganda, but knowing an argument you disagree with makes it easier to argue against people that make it.)
- throw_m239339 5y ago
  Every media is propaganda. RT is directly financed by the Kremlin just like CNN is at the behest of the current American administration. It's absurd to think any of these channels will not try to manipulate their audience. What is certain on the other hand is that it is Russia which invaded Ukraine, a free country, at first place. What is also certain is that any news organization in Russia that doesn't follow the Kremlin's narrative is deemed criminal by Russian authorities.
  - iforgetti 5y ago
    While I agree with the sentiment of your comment, I do not agree that a government financed news station is in fact "just like" CNN providing favorable coverage to the current administration presumably in exchange for access or similar. In the case of CNN, we see the collective bias of those who run the company optimizing coverage for engagement based on their assessment of the bias of those watching. In the case of RT, we literally know that guests or anchors who do not work to legitimize propaganda are at risk of physical retribution.
  - kcb 5y ago
    > RT is directly financed by the Kremlin just like CNN is at the behest of the current American administration It's not just like at all.
- baybal2 5y ago
- 0xcoffee 5y ago
  In theory I agree with you, but it's not like silencing 'ideas and argument you disagree with' Look at this: https://www.rt.com/russia/551384-russia-ukraine-nuclear-false-flag/ https://www.rt.com/russia/551384-russia-ukraine-nuclear-fals... >“The SBU and the militants of the Azov Battalion are planning to blow up the reactor and accuse the Russian Armed Forces of allegedly launching a missile attack on the experimental nuclear facility,” This isn't a discussion in which people are arguing different opinions in good faith, it's straight up manipulation to excuse killing more people.
  - jafoi 5y ago
    It's a quoted statement...
  - logicchains 5y ago
    Given that some of the Azov are literally Nazis (https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/german-tv-shows-nazi-symbols-helmets-ukraine-soldiers-n198961 https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/german-tv-s...), that's hardly completely beyond the realms of possibility. Or we're supposed to start giving Nazis the benefit of the doubt now just because Russia started it?
    - fer 5y ago
      Given that Russia deployed Wagner Group in Ukraine, whose founder has SS tattoos on his neck, why unsubstantiated statements from Russia are to be believed?
    - friedturkey 5y ago
      Russia is also a known hotbed for neonazis. So is Alabama. Just because a region has small factions of race extremists it doesn’t mean they’re blowing up nuclear reactors. But Russia’s history of false flag operations and whataboutism are so well-documented that it’s literally a textbook example. They’ve invaded Georgia and Ukraine before using the same exact lies. Putin’s history in Chechnya is also horrific. So you should trust Russia saying they’re coming to liberate someone as much as you should trust a certain other country coming to liberate someone: you shouldn’t.
Gareth321 5y ago
“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” Easily my favourite George R. R. Martin quote. We discovered why free speech is important during the 17th century in the Enlightenment period. The scientific method itself owes its existence to free speech, and the ability for any person to disagree with any other person, regardless of their class, race, age, nationality, religion, or beliefs. The same goes for democracy. Take away the fundamental principle of free speech and you undermine science and democracy. Are evil people going to attempt to convince the suggestible that they're not evil? Of course! Contrary to common sentiment, free speech has a cost. We pay this cost gladly so that we can live in relative prosperity.
- lm28469 5y ago
  Free speech has never been absolute. RT is a state owned propaganda organ, disinformation doesn't contribute to free speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
  - lamp987 5y ago
    "as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise." this still applies. RT readers arent shooting you. funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least.
    - lm28469 5y ago
      > as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion I mean, we obviously can't. Who's going to make them provide balanced news ? no one since they're literally part of the Russian government. You can't "counter them by rational argument" if these arguments never reach the target What about islamist news ? Why don't we broadcast that freely ? Can't you provide rational arguments against that ? What about nazis, why are they banned in Germany ? Are you afraid of not having rational arguments ? > funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least. Well, I can say the same about freedom of speech...

It’s a wishful thinking, that everybody has some brain. There are enough flatearthers, antivaxers and wannabe putin’s buddies.

by lnsru 5y ago

It’s a wishful thinking, that everybody has some brain. There are enough flatearthers, antivaxers and wannabe putin’s buddies.

kyrra 5y ago

Silencing ideas that you do not agree with does not lead to an open society. Because guess what, the less popular ideas ends up being the right one sometimes. (In this case I agree that RT is likely propaganda, but knowing an argument you disagree with makes it easier to argue against people that make it.)

throw_m239339 5y ago
Every media is propaganda. RT is directly financed by the Kremlin just like CNN is at the behest of the current American administration. It's absurd to think any of these channels will not try to manipulate their audience. What is certain on the other hand is that it is Russia which invaded Ukraine, a free country, at first place. What is also certain is that any news organization in Russia that doesn't follow the Kremlin's narrative is deemed criminal by Russian authorities.
- iforgetti 5y ago
  While I agree with the sentiment of your comment, I do not agree that a government financed news station is in fact "just like" CNN providing favorable coverage to the current administration presumably in exchange for access or similar. In the case of CNN, we see the collective bias of those who run the company optimizing coverage for engagement based on their assessment of the bias of those watching. In the case of RT, we literally know that guests or anchors who do not work to legitimize propaganda are at risk of physical retribution.
- kcb 5y ago
  > RT is directly financed by the Kremlin just like CNN is at the behest of the current American administration It's not just like at all.
baybal2 5y ago
0xcoffee 5y ago
In theory I agree with you, but it's not like silencing 'ideas and argument you disagree with' Look at this: https://www.rt.com/russia/551384-russia-ukraine-nuclear-false-flag/ https://www.rt.com/russia/551384-russia-ukraine-nuclear-fals... >“The SBU and the militants of the Azov Battalion are planning to blow up the reactor and accuse the Russian Armed Forces of allegedly launching a missile attack on the experimental nuclear facility,” This isn't a discussion in which people are arguing different opinions in good faith, it's straight up manipulation to excuse killing more people.
- jafoi 5y ago
  It's a quoted statement...
- logicchains 5y ago
  Given that some of the Azov are literally Nazis (https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/german-tv-shows-nazi-symbols-helmets-ukraine-soldiers-n198961 https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/german-tv-s...), that's hardly completely beyond the realms of possibility. Or we're supposed to start giving Nazis the benefit of the doubt now just because Russia started it?
  - fer 5y ago
    Given that Russia deployed Wagner Group in Ukraine, whose founder has SS tattoos on his neck, why unsubstantiated statements from Russia are to be believed?
  - friedturkey 5y ago
    Russia is also a known hotbed for neonazis. So is Alabama. Just because a region has small factions of race extremists it doesn’t mean they’re blowing up nuclear reactors. But Russia’s history of false flag operations and whataboutism are so well-documented that it’s literally a textbook example. They’ve invaded Georgia and Ukraine before using the same exact lies. Putin’s history in Chechnya is also horrific. So you should trust Russia saying they’re coming to liberate someone as much as you should trust a certain other country coming to liberate someone: you shouldn’t.

Gareth321 5y ago

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” Easily my favourite George R. R. Martin quote. We discovered why free speech is important during the 17th century in the Enlightenment period. The scientific method itself owes its existence to free speech, and the ability for any person to disagree with any other person, regardless of their class, race, age, nationality, religion, or beliefs. The same goes for democracy. Take away the fundamental principle of free speech and you undermine science and democracy. Are evil people going to attempt to convince the suggestible that they're not evil? Of course! Contrary to common sentiment, free speech has a cost. We pay this cost gladly so that we can live in relative prosperity.

lm28469 5y ago
Free speech has never been absolute. RT is a state owned propaganda organ, disinformation doesn't contribute to free speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- lamp987 5y ago
  "as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise." this still applies. RT readers arent shooting you. funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least.
  - lm28469 5y ago
    > as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion I mean, we obviously can't. Who's going to make them provide balanced news ? no one since they're literally part of the Russian government. You can't "counter them by rational argument" if these arguments never reach the target What about islamist news ? Why don't we broadcast that freely ? Can't you provide rational arguments against that ? What about nazis, why are they banned in Germany ? Are you afraid of not having rational arguments ? > funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least. Well, I can say the same about freedom of speech...