33 ms·

China's state media buys Meta ads pushing Russia's line on war

449 points by sofixa 5y ago

waffleiron 5y ago
> Many of the ads, which are mostly clips of CGTN newscasts, sprinkle in pro-Russia, anti-NATO talking points and downplay Russia's actions in launching an unprovoked invasion of its neighbor. So what exactly did they say?
- hkmaxpro 5y ago
  I don’t know about the ads, but here are their state media reports: They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons in Ukraine: https://www.newsweek.com/china-peddles-russias-claim-that-us-has-bioweapons-ukraine-1685844 https://www.newsweek.com/china-peddles-russias-claim-that-us... And here’s CGTN’s article on “biolabs” in Ukraine, citing Russia media outlets and officials: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202203/1254330.shtml https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202203/1254330.shtml Edit: As pointed out by a commenter, the above article is from GlobalTimes, not CGTN. The actual CGTN article: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-03-07/Russia-reveals-evidence-of-U-S-funded-bio-program-in-Ukraine-18cUbBlPXhu/index.html https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-03-07/Russia-reveals-evidenc...
  - bpodgursky 5y ago
    They are probably building up a strategy of blaming COVID-19 on fabricated US/Ukraine bioweapons research (accidental release).
    - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
      There does appear to be a growing body of evidence circumstantially suggesting that COVID-19 is due to American incompetence and gross negligence.
      - bpodgursky 5y ago
        No, there is not.
        9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
        Unfortunately, there is. Following Go rules, since I no longer have the energy to dig up references for you, let’s just call ko.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        edgyquant 5y ago
        No there isn’t, you’re spreading misinformation in a laughably obvious way.
        9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
        Nervously laughable dis-misinformation, perhaps.
        edgyquant 5y ago
        No laughable as in anyone who reads your comments sees that you’re outright lying. You quoted a paragraph about wuhan lab leaks as proof America was somehow responsible for covid. This stuff works on Facebook or Reddit where no one actually reads linked sources or quotes, it doesn’t work here.
      - octopoc 5y ago
        How so? If it leaked from a lab, it is almost certainly from the Wuhan lab. The Wuhan lab was a joint French-Chinese operation. Before COVID-19, EcoHealth (an organization with ties to the Wuhan lab) applied for a grant from DARPA to perform gain-of-function-esque research on COVID[1]. DARPA denied the application. [1] https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa/ https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-gra...
  - thepasswordis 5y ago
    https://twitter.com/raczylo/status/1501324063926534148 https://twitter.com/raczylo/status/1501324063926534148 Edit: "The US has an interest in biolabs in Ukraine" - I feel like this is a pretty useless nit to pick. (Sorry for the twitter source. It's a video of Marco Rubio, a US senator, talking to Victoria Nuland) The US is basically warning that Russia plans to release stuff from these labs and blame the Ukrainians for it. Kindof the same thing they were supposedly doing with Chernobyl. If that's Russian propaganda, then the propaganda has gotten to pretty senior levels of the state department. edit: look I'm definitely not some Chinese misinfo spreader. I think that weaponization of social media, weaponization of the news, and weaponization of human emotion is basically the next version of nuclear weapons. That is: a new type of weapon that will (and is) completely change(ing) the war landscape. I think that sort of weapon is in use now, and the use will only increase. You've already seen Russia ban facebook for their citizens, China has their great firewall, and strict control over their citizens social media. It's here. But I think the people who are trying to reach for these claims about bioweapons labs, or "bio labs" or perhaps no labs at all, are the ones spreading misinformation. That ambiguity and division that you are creating by spreading these lies is the problem. This desire to attack people's ability to interpret simple statements, and read the plain meaning of those simple statements is an attack on people's ability to resist this propaganda. Does the US have "bio labs" in Ukraine? Yes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30615313 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30615313 Is the US concerned that the materials in these labs could fall into the hands of the Russians? Also yes. These are facts. Acknowledging these facts does not make you a Q anon conspiracy theorist, a Trump supporter, or anything else. These things are just nakedly true. Now once you've acknowledged these things as simply true, you can get to the question of "is this a problem?" - To be clear, in my opinion: no these things are not necessarily a problem. Yes the US runs bio weapons labs in Ukraine. We do it for reasons that people have indicated in some of their comments. These are defensive in nature. There's a question about if human beings generally should be studying this, but that is independent to the question about the US running biolabs (studying weapons...so...bioweapons labs) in Ukraine. You HAVE to acknowledge these truths. It should be obvious that having a good ability to separate truth from fiction is the way to defend against the type of propaganda that I outlined above. Twisting yourselves into knots to not accidentally acknowledge some information which is blatantly true, is how the propaganda is allowed to spread. It is an attack on your sense making ability. Please stop doing this.
  - waffleiron 5y ago
    >And here’s CGTN’s article That's GlobalTimes. I know they are both state media, but we are talking CGTN here. > citing Russia media outlets and officials I bet I can find them quoting US or Ukrainian media outlets and officials too. Should media not report what countries fighting a war claim? It's not like Western media consistently gets it right (e.g. deaths on snake island) by reporting only the pro-Ukrainian side. > They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons Why link to Newsweek instead of the actual CGTN post? I am less interested what Western media claims CGTN says than proof of what they actually say.
    - hkmaxpro 5y ago
      Indeed I mixed up CGTN and GlobalTimes. But, hey, the CGTN post is very easy to find, given the Newsweek article: https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=CGTN+russia+Igor+Konashenkov https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=CGTN+russia+Igor+Konashenkov
    - JohnHaugeland 5y ago
      > It's not like Western media consistently gets it right (e.g. deaths on snake island) by reporting only the pro-Ukrainian side. You're acting like an anti-Ukrainian position exists, to be discussed. What position other than pro-victim would you like to see reported on, please? It seems like you're very new here, and the only thing you've discussed is the Russia situation, or trying to make it look like it's reasonable to listen to state media to learn what's happening, by contrasting state propaganda to a disgraced magazine that was sold for a dollar to the daily beast ten years ago, then to religious extremists Russia has invaded another country without provocation, and is shelling civilians, children's schools, hospitals, and grocery lines. What pro-Russian spin would you like to see, specifically, please, new anonymous account? Thanks. ---- An aside: I am of the opinion that if websites like Facebook and Twitter don't get their fake account problem under control, laws will be coming to do it for them, and if those laws are written by politicians, it's going to go really badly for UGC websites
  - somenameforme 5y ago
    The existence of biolabs is completely genuine. You can read more (from a .gov site) here [1]. They seem to have removed the fact-sheets from the site, but you can still access them on archive.org, like here [2]. The fact sheets don't have anything especially seedy on them but do confirm that the labs were funded by the US Department of Defense, and do work with pathogens. Point being you don't need the quotes. There are definitely DoD built biolabs, and a surprisingly large amount of them. [1] - https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defense-threat-reduction-office/biological-threat-reduction-program/ https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defen... [2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20170211022339/https://photos.state.gov/libraries/ukraine/895/pdf/kiev-ivm-fact-sheet-eng.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20170211022339/https://photos.st...
    - hkmaxpro 5y ago
      How do your links [1][2] support the claim that Ukraine is developing “biomilitary activities” (as claimed in the title of the Global Times article)? They seem to point to medical research to fight against diseases, rather than “biomilitary activities”.
      - maratc 5y ago
        Genuine question: Why would the US Department of Defence fund "medical research to fight against diseases"?
        hn_go_brrrrr 5y ago
        To defend against biological weapons. The DoD is responsible for defending the US against all kinds of attacks -- conventional, nuclear, chemical, and biological -- even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself.
        waffleiron 5y ago
        > even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself. US has changed to a limited interpretation of what a biological weapon is, and considers non-deadly biological agents to not be bioweapons when it comes to treaties banning them. https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/resource/original.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.or... The US does research into chemical and bio-weapons they do not consider to be lethal: https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/chemweapons/nonlethal.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.or...
  - itsoktocry 5y ago
    >And here’s CGTN’s article on “biolabs” in Ukraine, citing Russia media outlets and official There are biolabs in the Ukraine, as confirmed by Nuland in the Senate hearings. Whether they have bio-weapons or medical research, who knows, but you can perhaps understand that the Russians might be concerned? What's really amazing about this story that only days ago it was painted as a Q-anon theory. Turns out it was real. We are neck deep in propaganda from all directions, but most people think it's only coming from the Russian side.
    - ethbr0 5y ago
      There's a reason "dual purpose" exists as a term. Most American grade schools have "hacking devices", should we define that to be any computer. And at this point, the Russians have demostrated a clear willingness to lie about anything in pursuit of their geopolitical agenda (see: months of explicit denial of preparing for a Ukrainian invasion, by all levels of their government, in official statements).
      - ashwagary 5y ago
        >And at this point, the Russians have demostrated a clear willingness to lie about anything in pursuit of their geopolitical agenda US history says the DOD, Pentagon, & the CIA are just as willing, if not more.
        tonguez 5y ago
        Actually, pointing out the hypocrisy is invalid because that means you stand with Putin because Twitter said so. Derp.
      - brabel 5y ago
        Russians lie, but history tells us that so does everyone else: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPe5f5dcrGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPe5f5dcrGE (Why Leaders Lie?)
        ethbr0 5y ago
  - waffleiron 5y ago
    >They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons in Ukraine According to Newsweek, but the CGTN article actually doesn't use "bioweapons".
    - hkmaxpro 5y ago
      If you read the Newsweek article carefully, the bioweapon claim is from Igor Konashenkov. CGTN only calls it “military biological program”. So technically not the same, but of course CGTN wants to give the same impression to keep spreading misinformation.
      - waffleiron 5y ago
        > the bioweapon claim is from Igor Konashenkov. Yes, but this comment chain is about CGTN, so when switching let's keep it clear. > course CGTN wants to give the same impression to keep spreading misinformation. That's the least charitable interpretation, yes. However, I see no lies in their article. edit: You specifically said: > They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons They meaning CGTN.
  - politician 5y ago
    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Wuhan.
- droptablemain 5y ago
  "unprovoked invasion of its neighbor" -- have you not heard of the 14,000 killed in Donbass over the last eight years?
  - sofixa 5y ago
    And what were they doing in Ukraine to get themselves killed?
    - droptablemain 5y ago
      They weren't in Ukraine. They were in the People's Republic of Donetsk or the People's Republic of Luhansk. They voted overwhelmingly to leave Ukraine in 2014 after the nationalists overthrew the government took over in Kiev.
      - sofixa 5y ago
        Unless the vote was with neutral ( international) observers, which it wasn't, a vote under foreign military occupation is bullshit of the highest order.
aaron695 5y ago
miohtama 5y ago
Should these ads fail in fact checks? Does Meta do fact check, similar with Mr Trump campaigns, on its ads?
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
  Should Mr Biden also be fact checking all of his propaganda ads, too?
  - Milner08 5y ago
    - coffeeblack 5y ago
      Because of the bias of the “fact” checkers, I guess? But seriously, the term “fact checking” is just a modern euphemism for propaganda. The other day Facebook “fact checked” a peer reviewed paper in the British Medical Journal. There are so many ridiculous examples. This blind trust people have is worrying.
    - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
      I don’t know, didn’t he say that all Americans have been tested for COVID-19 on a national TV advertisement? I’m absolutely certain that that claim wasn’t fact checked.
      - jessaustin 5y ago
        I, for one, have never taken a covid test.
        9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
        Well, proof by counter example it is.
  - gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
DrinkWater 5y ago
I don’t know why China is so keen on helping Russia. Is this some kind of godfather deal and they want some massive ROI from Russia once things settle down a bit? Or is this some long-term strategy “against the West”?
- linspace 5y ago
  Me neither, I think the war is bad for their interests. On the other hand Putin falling may be bad for their interests too.
- null_object 5y ago
  I think both are possible - but if they continue destabilizing the West, who’s gonna be buying their shoddily made consumer crap?
  - Ygg2 5y ago
    In that case, I'm sure China would support the West, with loans. With generous interest rate for China.
- throwmeariver1 5y ago
  A weakened Russia is the best thing that can happen for China and India if they get Russia to completely cut from the west. Russia and the vast amount of natural resources are at their disposal at a really low prize.
  - tartoran 5y ago
    But buying ads to push their narrative does not make Russia weaker. Not doing anything does
    - oneorangeday 5y ago
      But it does create a divide in our politics and with elections coming up we may see some support for Russia from one or more politicians.
throwmeariver1 5y ago
I had Uyghur propaganda popping regulary on youtube (western europe) so I guess big tech doesn't really care.
- addet0x 5y ago
  Big Tech cares only about your attention & money.
- npteljes 5y ago
  Not caring would be the default position of a company, no?
supermatt 5y ago
Political propaganda has no place on these advertising platforms. Deeper pockets shouldn't mean a louder voice on these matters.
- waffleiron 5y ago
  I agree, but sadly deeper pockets have always meant louder voice.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
    That does not mean we should offer megaphones to the most powerful, does it?
    - zardo 5y ago
      It does for the megaphone salesmen.
    - sparksparkapach 5y ago
      capitalism dictates that we should offer it to the ones with enough capital to spare, nothing we should do about it then
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  Just more evidence that advertising is a huge net-negative on the world and should be abolished as far as I'm concerned.
- buo 5y ago
  Right. Ads should be limited to selling actual products or services.
  - gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
    Is selling products or services not political propaganda in its own way?
ushtaritk421 5y ago
Eh. Aren't we the part of the world that supports free speech? Let them say what they want.
- PoignardAzur 5y ago
  As someone who lives in a country where political advertising is illegal, I'm pretty confident you can shut that crap down without impacting free speech.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Slikey 5y ago
  Free Speech for individuals does not mean that we have an interest in allowing foreign and potentially hostile actors to run propaganda campaigns using the ad targeting machine we have built using social media. They can say what they want and every citizen can do so as well, but we should not allow asymmetric amplification.
  - pphysch 5y ago
    Lot of words to say "free speech for me but not for thee"
  - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
    Just be honest and admit that you are pro-censorship in some issues, instead of using weasel words like that.
    - krapp 5y ago
      That isn't honest. Honest would be admitting the difference of opinion as to what "free speech" and "censorship" entail.
  - trasz 5y ago
    This is exactly how China is justifying their censorship.
johndfsgdgdfg 5y ago
[flagged]
- coffeeblack 5y ago
  Criticizing the CCP has nothing to do with the Chinese people. You are not a racist against Americans when you criticize Biden or Trump.
  - throw10920 5y ago
    I, personally, agree with your assessment of the post being a wumaodang, but I've been incorrect on that front before (and corrected by dang himself, who had done previous investigation into the account I was concerned about), and so in the spirit of the HN guidelines "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like." I think it might be best to elide that particular statement... ...which doesn't invalidate the rest of your comment, at all.
    - coffeeblack 5y ago
      Good point, you are right. Post updated.
  - bigcat123 5y ago
- twoxproblematic 5y ago
  [dead]
coffeeblack 5y ago
The “ADV Podcasts” (a China focused podcast) has talked about the propaganda collaboration of Putin’s government and the CCP government for some weeks.
323 5y ago
Chinese reporter embedded in Russia troops: https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1501189465636839431 https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1501189465636839431
- bigcat123 5y ago
- pphysch 5y ago
  Wait til you hear who is embedded in the neo-Nazi Azov/Aidar battalions...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
NotChina 5y ago
[dead]
sebow 5y ago
Always chuckle when we talk corporate or western state-sponsored propaganda yet "we" still have shit like this. Collusion between the private companies and governments is fascism, by definition. Which is what China does in their country, and which is what we sometimes allow, willingly or not, in our countries through the internet. I personally am against censorship of any kind. And while that in principle means allowing propaganda garbage from all sides, it also means not censoring domestic "propaganda"(which could be anything depending on your reference) or material. People dislike this because having a personal filter is hard, but the alternative is arguably worse if you only allow a certain side.(which goes back to the first point of fascism by collusion)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
rdxm 5y ago
andrewclunn 5y ago
Normal day: Eww an ad, skip / ignore. War time: This foreign government bought ADS! They're promoting propaganda and influencing our policy, election, populace! My own government (which only tells the truth) must stop this from happening.
- jessaustin 5y ago
  Yeah, I don't really trust any of these people, because somehow they're all too dumb to install uBlock Origin.
axiosgunnar 5y ago
Why can China even buy ads on Facebook, a website they have banned? So they are allowed to push their narrative onto Westerners, but the inverse is not allowed?
- bagacrap 5y ago
  Everything about the West's relationship with China is asymmetric. I don't really blame China for realpolitik while trying to play catch up here, but I do wish they'd stop their expansionism. They already have enough people and resources to be the world #1 economy. Also the human rights violations are a bit of a mystery to me --- what's the point of a strong economy if people are suffering? Hopefully that will resolve itself in the same way the US used slave labor to bootstrap itself (unjustly, but it is what it is) then later banned it.
- z0r 5y ago
  Because multinational corporations will take money from any buyer the law allows, so long as nobody is looking too closely at the moment
bannedbybros 5y ago
mensetmanusman 5y ago
I see these conspiracies starting to enter my social media: apparently they are saying the us is running dozens of biowarfare labs. The only evidence is photoshopped maps. No one ever has a list of addresses to verify, ha.
- soared 5y ago
  Labs were given to Ukraine from the US DoD/DTRA, so pretty easy jump for conspiracy theorists to go all biowarfare zombie sarin etc. The page below explains what they are actually used for. https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defense-threat-reduction-office/biological-threat-reduction-program/ https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defen...
- cityzen 5y ago
  Sounds kind of like the US government gaslighting americans to believe Iraq had WMDs...
  - mensetmanusman 5y ago
    Yes, but the stupid thing on Russia’s part is that they waited until after the invasion to start this conversation. It’s almost like the population has laughed at the prospect of going to war to defeat a Jewish Nazi and now they are scrambling to post rationalize.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
adultSwim 5y ago
I'm uncomfortable with how this article talks about how evil the ads are without actually showing them. It's not clear to me who is doing the propaganda here (the ads vs the article about the ads).
- bilbo0s 5y ago
  It's not clear to me who is doing the propaganda here (the ads vs the article about the ads Just, Devil's Advocate, but why can't it be both?
  - throw10920 5y ago
    Nailed it. I think that very few people would say that Chinese state media is not a propaganda machine, and Axios has a noticeable spin to it in general.
ngcc_hk 5y ago
It is the strategy one should worry. With china backed by Russia it is a much bigger problem latter as you have a more self contained (energy and military strategy) empire with a sidekick. It is more like North Korea but on a much bigger scale. Given so far no good strategy to contain its ambition, and the diversion of focus to Europe, china will dominate pacific and the link on the land bridge. Originally it might be a rivalary but now forced cooperation. Not sure how this bigger game being played out. Btw short term asking china to help … it its so ridiculous but pop up so many times it is not even funny. What happen china really can deliver and work with Russia what then …
ksec 5y ago
>Good WSJ article on Russia vs. China. In a nutshell, China miscalculated the situation. They will likely look to limit their bet (on Russia) for fear of becoming Russia 2.0 to the West. [1] The tweet is from Neil Cybart and WSJ. You may know him as one of the more accurate Apple analysts. And most people still to this day think either China miscalculated it, or China's official stance is somewhat unclear. ( Paul Graham ) And as usual, Benedict Evans has much better take on the situation. Mostly likely because of his major in History. [1] https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1500825861242724352 https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1500825861242724352
- _lpa_ 5y ago
  > And as usual, Benedict Evans has much better take on the situation. Mostly likely because of his major in History. Which is?
  - duxup 5y ago
    It would seem to be two tweets with maybe 3 to 6 sentences (depending on if you think one word and a period is a sentence). That's Twitter for you...
- actuator 5y ago
  Those cancerous Twitter login modals are not letting me read the whole thread but I don't agree that China has much to lose here. They get a far weaker Russia much more dependent on them now economically. Russia is rich in fossil fuels which China lacks and has some advantages in defence and space tech which China can easily get their hands on. CCP might not be that confident about taking Taiwan now but they get a massive economic boost and a possible big brother relationship with Russia now.
  - RC_ITR 5y ago
    Sure but a far weaker Russia is what? The worlds 20th largest economy, with a history of having a geopolitical chip on its shoulder (I think most observers would agree that the Russian people would die before becoming ‘chinas little brother’) ?
solididiot 5y ago
- throw10920 5y ago
  > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. From the Hacker News guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Actually, that whole page is worth reading, given that your comment violates a lot of it. Another sample: > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. You're probably being downvoted because your post (a) is whataboutism (b) is emotionally-heavy while content-light (c) seems to make the assumption that Russian/Chinese propaganda is somehow equivalent to US propaganda and (d) violates several of the HN guidelines.
bushbaba 5y ago
I also saw CGTN pro-russia ads on Youtube. So Google is also profiting off this.
curt15 5y ago
What does FB gain by allowing traffic from CCP IP addresses when traffic to Chinese addresses is blocked?
- hrunt 5y ago
  Ad revenue
- actuator 5y ago
  Are we sure it is CCP IP address. CGTN might have established offices outside PRC and those might be the one publishing these. Also, banning CGTN is not the way, just like banning RT wasn't. I can understand banning demonstrably false misinformation but that should be content specific, complete RT ban doesn't sit right with me. Economist has published articles stating how Iraq war was justified or NYT with their WMD propoganda. RT was doing it at a massive scale but it doesn't seem right nonetheless.
qiskit 5y ago
Good. Lets hear all sides. Everyone should check out as many state propaganda around the world they can and not rely on just one state propaganda for "truth". All propaganda has innate biases and they all spin stories for their agenda. The easiest way to understand this is by looking at state propaganda around the world on a single topic like ukraine. Then you'll understand that truly, the truth is the first casualty of war. It's a luxury afforded to people not in war at the moment. So we should enjoy this privilege while we can.
- MangoCoffee 5y ago
  >Lets hear all sides There is no all sides. a big fat kid beating up a skinny kid when that skinny kid did NOTHING to the big fat kid. where's all sides? when you punch someone first regardless of your reason. you lose all moral high ground. especially Russia's reason is absurd. i don't understand why people believe there is any sides to this war.
  - qiskit 5y ago
    > There is no all sides. There are always "all sides". Always. To deny this is to deny reality. > a big fat kid beating up a skinny kid when that skinny kid did NOTHING to the big fat kid. Nobody believes this. Even you don't. So why do you say it? Russia didn't all of a sudden invade ukraine for no reason. There is obviously a reason. Whether you believe the casus belli is justified is another matter. > you lose all moral high ground. There is no moral high ground in war. Only winners and losers. And the winners will decide what the moral high ground is. > i don't understand why people believe there is any sides to this war. Because it's a fact. Every war has multiple angles to it because every war has different sides. Denying the obvious isn't going to help. Maybe it'll convince the uneducated. But you aren't going to convince intelligent people with such a zealous argument.
    - neop1x 5y ago
      >> Russia didn't all of a sudden invade ukraine for no reason. Or maybe Russia fanned the conflict over the years, supporting separatists and paving the way into this invasion. To have reasons and excuses for it...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Graffur 5y ago
How has TikTok not been mentioned yet?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ZYinMD 5y ago
> ...and downplay Russia's actions in launching an unprovoked invasion I would argue it is not "unprovoked". By incorporating Ukraine, NATO will have a direct adjacent border with Russia head to head, and missiles will be placed along the border, right at Russia's doorstep, what a stupid strategy for world peace. Putin has told us over many years it's unacceptable for the Russians. Think when USSR tried to place missiles in Cuba. Edit: for folks who clearly disagree, I'd like to recommend a speech by John Mearsheimer, which is currently gaining 3M views per day, now at 19M: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
- andrewxdiamond 5y ago
  How does Russia annexing Ukraine solve this issue then? Wouldn’t that still be butting our borders up against each other?
- malcolmgreaves 5y ago
  Stop spreading Russian propaganda. It's absolutely 100% Russian aggression. They've invaded a sovereign country that they had a treaty with to not attack.
- ncr100 5y ago
  I disagree. Who is likely to invade a neighbor, Poland or Russia? Not Poland. So, not provocative. And Russia is definitely doing an unprovoked invasion.
- sega_sai 5y ago
  WTF are you talking about ? NATO explicitly said that it has no plans to incorporate Ukraine. And incorporating Ukraine was not possible given the disputed territory of Crimea. Your are just repeating Putin's propaganda here.
- sidibe 5y ago
  Please look at a map. NATO already has several borders with Russia.
- HWR_14 5y ago
floucky 5y ago
The propaganda is also very strong on Chinese social media (especially Wechat). I leave in France and I know a few Chinese person that keep telling me that this war was mainly caused by USA, that the Ukraine president is a dictator and so on...
- throwaway4good 5y ago
  Outside the west, there is a massive world that just sees things differently. Here the US is not a force for good but a warmongering empire. Think of it what you will but it would be wrong to discard it as mere propaganda. These are deeply held beliefs.
  - fvv 5y ago
    Belief From a country or countries where people are not free to inform themselves or to speech openly about opinions , that's where propaganda have are easily spread..
    - actuator 5y ago
      Well, to be fair if you remove restrictions then it is the Western version of events that will rules as they have the established platforms and money to spread info. To see their power look at the French poll of who won them the World War. It became 20% in the recent decades from 57% for Russia https://www.france24.com/en/20190601-who-won-wwii-russias-role-gets-short-shrift-france https://www.france24.com/en/20190601-who-won-wwii-russias-ro...
      - LaMarseillaise 5y ago
        The idea that the Soviet Union won WWII is itself propaganda and ignores the contributions of many, many nations, not to mention the entire Pacific war. Also, the liberation of France was exclusively the western allies.
        lenkite 5y ago

449 points by sofixa 5y ago

> Many of the ads, which are mostly clips of CGTN newscasts, sprinkle in pro-Russia, anti-NATO talking points and downplay Russia's actions in launching an unprovoked invasion of its neighbor. So what exactly did they say?

hkmaxpro 5y ago
I don’t know about the ads, but here are their state media reports: They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons in Ukraine: https://www.newsweek.com/china-peddles-russias-claim-that-us-has-bioweapons-ukraine-1685844 https://www.newsweek.com/china-peddles-russias-claim-that-us... And here’s CGTN’s article on “biolabs” in Ukraine, citing Russia media outlets and officials: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202203/1254330.shtml https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202203/1254330.shtml Edit: As pointed out by a commenter, the above article is from GlobalTimes, not CGTN. The actual CGTN article: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-03-07/Russia-reveals-evidence-of-U-S-funded-bio-program-in-Ukraine-18cUbBlPXhu/index.html https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-03-07/Russia-reveals-evidenc...
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  They are probably building up a strategy of blaming COVID-19 on fabricated US/Ukraine bioweapons research (accidental release).
  - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
    There does appear to be a growing body of evidence circumstantially suggesting that COVID-19 is due to American incompetence and gross negligence.
    - bpodgursky 5y ago
      No, there is not.
      - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
        Unfortunately, there is. Following Go rules, since I no longer have the energy to dig up references for you, let’s just call ko.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        edgyquant 5y ago
        No there isn’t, you’re spreading misinformation in a laughably obvious way.
        9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
        Nervously laughable dis-misinformation, perhaps.
        edgyquant 5y ago
        No laughable as in anyone who reads your comments sees that you’re outright lying. You quoted a paragraph about wuhan lab leaks as proof America was somehow responsible for covid. This stuff works on Facebook or Reddit where no one actually reads linked sources or quotes, it doesn’t work here.
    - octopoc 5y ago
      How so? If it leaked from a lab, it is almost certainly from the Wuhan lab. The Wuhan lab was a joint French-Chinese operation. Before COVID-19, EcoHealth (an organization with ties to the Wuhan lab) applied for a grant from DARPA to perform gain-of-function-esque research on COVID[1]. DARPA denied the application. [1] https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa/ https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-gra...
- thepasswordis 5y ago
  https://twitter.com/raczylo/status/1501324063926534148 https://twitter.com/raczylo/status/1501324063926534148 Edit: "The US has an interest in biolabs in Ukraine" - I feel like this is a pretty useless nit to pick. (Sorry for the twitter source. It's a video of Marco Rubio, a US senator, talking to Victoria Nuland) The US is basically warning that Russia plans to release stuff from these labs and blame the Ukrainians for it. Kindof the same thing they were supposedly doing with Chernobyl. If that's Russian propaganda, then the propaganda has gotten to pretty senior levels of the state department. edit: look I'm definitely not some Chinese misinfo spreader. I think that weaponization of social media, weaponization of the news, and weaponization of human emotion is basically the next version of nuclear weapons. That is: a new type of weapon that will (and is) completely change(ing) the war landscape. I think that sort of weapon is in use now, and the use will only increase. You've already seen Russia ban facebook for their citizens, China has their great firewall, and strict control over their citizens social media. It's here. But I think the people who are trying to reach for these claims about bioweapons labs, or "bio labs" or perhaps no labs at all, are the ones spreading misinformation. That ambiguity and division that you are creating by spreading these lies is the problem. This desire to attack people's ability to interpret simple statements, and read the plain meaning of those simple statements is an attack on people's ability to resist this propaganda. Does the US have "bio labs" in Ukraine? Yes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30615313 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30615313 Is the US concerned that the materials in these labs could fall into the hands of the Russians? Also yes. These are facts. Acknowledging these facts does not make you a Q anon conspiracy theorist, a Trump supporter, or anything else. These things are just nakedly true. Now once you've acknowledged these things as simply true, you can get to the question of "is this a problem?" - To be clear, in my opinion: no these things are not necessarily a problem. Yes the US runs bio weapons labs in Ukraine. We do it for reasons that people have indicated in some of their comments. These are defensive in nature. There's a question about if human beings generally should be studying this, but that is independent to the question about the US running biolabs (studying weapons...so...bioweapons labs) in Ukraine. You HAVE to acknowledge these truths. It should be obvious that having a good ability to separate truth from fiction is the way to defend against the type of propaganda that I outlined above. Twisting yourselves into knots to not accidentally acknowledge some information which is blatantly true, is how the propaganda is allowed to spread. It is an attack on your sense making ability. Please stop doing this.
- waffleiron 5y ago
  >And here’s CGTN’s article That's GlobalTimes. I know they are both state media, but we are talking CGTN here. > citing Russia media outlets and officials I bet I can find them quoting US or Ukrainian media outlets and officials too. Should media not report what countries fighting a war claim? It's not like Western media consistently gets it right (e.g. deaths on snake island) by reporting only the pro-Ukrainian side. > They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons Why link to Newsweek instead of the actual CGTN post? I am less interested what Western media claims CGTN says than proof of what they actually say.
  - hkmaxpro 5y ago
    Indeed I mixed up CGTN and GlobalTimes. But, hey, the CGTN post is very easy to find, given the Newsweek article: https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=CGTN+russia+Igor+Konashenkov https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=CGTN+russia+Igor+Konashenkov
  - JohnHaugeland 5y ago
    > It's not like Western media consistently gets it right (e.g. deaths on snake island) by reporting only the pro-Ukrainian side. You're acting like an anti-Ukrainian position exists, to be discussed. What position other than pro-victim would you like to see reported on, please? It seems like you're very new here, and the only thing you've discussed is the Russia situation, or trying to make it look like it's reasonable to listen to state media to learn what's happening, by contrasting state propaganda to a disgraced magazine that was sold for a dollar to the daily beast ten years ago, then to religious extremists Russia has invaded another country without provocation, and is shelling civilians, children's schools, hospitals, and grocery lines. What pro-Russian spin would you like to see, specifically, please, new anonymous account? Thanks. ---- An aside: I am of the opinion that if websites like Facebook and Twitter don't get their fake account problem under control, laws will be coming to do it for them, and if those laws are written by politicians, it's going to go really badly for UGC websites
- somenameforme 5y ago
  The existence of biolabs is completely genuine. You can read more (from a .gov site) here [1]. They seem to have removed the fact-sheets from the site, but you can still access them on archive.org, like here [2]. The fact sheets don't have anything especially seedy on them but do confirm that the labs were funded by the US Department of Defense, and do work with pathogens. Point being you don't need the quotes. There are definitely DoD built biolabs, and a surprisingly large amount of them. [1] - https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defense-threat-reduction-office/biological-threat-reduction-program/ https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defen... [2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20170211022339/https://photos.state.gov/libraries/ukraine/895/pdf/kiev-ivm-fact-sheet-eng.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20170211022339/https://photos.st...
  - hkmaxpro 5y ago
    How do your links [1][2] support the claim that Ukraine is developing “biomilitary activities” (as claimed in the title of the Global Times article)? They seem to point to medical research to fight against diseases, rather than “biomilitary activities”.
    - maratc 5y ago
      Genuine question: Why would the US Department of Defence fund "medical research to fight against diseases"?
      - hn_go_brrrrr 5y ago
        To defend against biological weapons. The DoD is responsible for defending the US against all kinds of attacks -- conventional, nuclear, chemical, and biological -- even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself.
        waffleiron 5y ago
        > even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself. US has changed to a limited interpretation of what a biological weapon is, and considers non-deadly biological agents to not be bioweapons when it comes to treaties banning them. https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/resource/original.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.or... The US does research into chemical and bio-weapons they do not consider to be lethal: https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/chemweapons/nonlethal.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.or...
- itsoktocry 5y ago
  >And here’s CGTN’s article on “biolabs” in Ukraine, citing Russia media outlets and official There are biolabs in the Ukraine, as confirmed by Nuland in the Senate hearings. Whether they have bio-weapons or medical research, who knows, but you can perhaps understand that the Russians might be concerned? What's really amazing about this story that only days ago it was painted as a Q-anon theory. Turns out it was real. We are neck deep in propaganda from all directions, but most people think it's only coming from the Russian side.
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    There's a reason "dual purpose" exists as a term. Most American grade schools have "hacking devices", should we define that to be any computer. And at this point, the Russians have demostrated a clear willingness to lie about anything in pursuit of their geopolitical agenda (see: months of explicit denial of preparing for a Ukrainian invasion, by all levels of their government, in official statements).
    - ashwagary 5y ago
      >And at this point, the Russians have demostrated a clear willingness to lie about anything in pursuit of their geopolitical agenda US history says the DOD, Pentagon, & the CIA are just as willing, if not more.
      - tonguez 5y ago
        Actually, pointing out the hypocrisy is invalid because that means you stand with Putin because Twitter said so. Derp.
    - brabel 5y ago
      Russians lie, but history tells us that so does everyone else: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPe5f5dcrGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPe5f5dcrGE (Why Leaders Lie?)
      - ethbr0 5y ago
- waffleiron 5y ago
  >They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons in Ukraine According to Newsweek, but the CGTN article actually doesn't use "bioweapons".
  - hkmaxpro 5y ago
    If you read the Newsweek article carefully, the bioweapon claim is from Igor Konashenkov. CGTN only calls it “military biological program”. So technically not the same, but of course CGTN wants to give the same impression to keep spreading misinformation.
    - waffleiron 5y ago
      > the bioweapon claim is from Igor Konashenkov. Yes, but this comment chain is about CGTN, so when switching let's keep it clear. > course CGTN wants to give the same impression to keep spreading misinformation. That's the least charitable interpretation, yes. However, I see no lies in their article. edit: You specifically said: > They peddle Russia’s claim that US has bioweapons They meaning CGTN.
- politician 5y ago
  Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Wuhan.
droptablemain 5y ago
"unprovoked invasion of its neighbor" -- have you not heard of the 14,000 killed in Donbass over the last eight years?
- sofixa 5y ago
  And what were they doing in Ukraine to get themselves killed?
  - droptablemain 5y ago
    They weren't in Ukraine. They were in the People's Republic of Donetsk or the People's Republic of Luhansk. They voted overwhelmingly to leave Ukraine in 2014 after the nationalists overthrew the government took over in Kiev.
    - sofixa 5y ago
      Unless the vote was with neutral ( international) observers, which it wasn't, a vote under foreign military occupation is bullshit of the highest order.

aaron695 5y ago

miohtama 5y ago

Should these ads fail in fact checks? Does Meta do fact check, similar with Mr Trump campaigns, on its ads?

9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
Should Mr Biden also be fact checking all of his propaganda ads, too?
- Milner08 5y ago
  - coffeeblack 5y ago
    Because of the bias of the “fact” checkers, I guess? But seriously, the term “fact checking” is just a modern euphemism for propaganda. The other day Facebook “fact checked” a peer reviewed paper in the British Medical Journal. There are so many ridiculous examples. This blind trust people have is worrying.
  - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
    I don’t know, didn’t he say that all Americans have been tested for COVID-19 on a national TV advertisement? I’m absolutely certain that that claim wasn’t fact checked.
    - jessaustin 5y ago
      I, for one, have never taken a covid test.
      - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago
        Well, proof by counter example it is.
- gunfighthacksaw 5y ago

DrinkWater 5y ago

I don’t know why China is so keen on helping Russia. Is this some kind of godfather deal and they want some massive ROI from Russia once things settle down a bit? Or is this some long-term strategy “against the West”?

linspace 5y ago
Me neither, I think the war is bad for their interests. On the other hand Putin falling may be bad for their interests too.
null_object 5y ago
I think both are possible - but if they continue destabilizing the West, who’s gonna be buying their shoddily made consumer crap?
- Ygg2 5y ago
  In that case, I'm sure China would support the West, with loans. With generous interest rate for China.
throwmeariver1 5y ago
A weakened Russia is the best thing that can happen for China and India if they get Russia to completely cut from the west. Russia and the vast amount of natural resources are at their disposal at a really low prize.
- tartoran 5y ago
  But buying ads to push their narrative does not make Russia weaker. Not doing anything does
  - oneorangeday 5y ago
    But it does create a divide in our politics and with elections coming up we may see some support for Russia from one or more politicians.

throwmeariver1 5y ago

I had Uyghur propaganda popping regulary on youtube (western europe) so I guess big tech doesn't really care.

addet0x 5y ago
Big Tech cares only about your attention & money.
npteljes 5y ago
Not caring would be the default position of a company, no?

supermatt 5y ago

Political propaganda has no place on these advertising platforms. Deeper pockets shouldn't mean a louder voice on these matters.

waffleiron 5y ago
I agree, but sadly deeper pockets have always meant louder voice.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
  That does not mean we should offer megaphones to the most powerful, does it?
  - zardo 5y ago
    It does for the megaphone salesmen.
  - sparksparkapach 5y ago
    capitalism dictates that we should offer it to the ones with enough capital to spare, nothing we should do about it then
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
Just more evidence that advertising is a huge net-negative on the world and should be abolished as far as I'm concerned.
buo 5y ago
Right. Ads should be limited to selling actual products or services.
- gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
  Is selling products or services not political propaganda in its own way?

ushtaritk421 5y ago

Eh. Aren't we the part of the world that supports free speech? Let them say what they want.

PoignardAzur 5y ago
As someone who lives in a country where political advertising is illegal, I'm pretty confident you can shut that crap down without impacting free speech.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Slikey 5y ago
Free Speech for individuals does not mean that we have an interest in allowing foreign and potentially hostile actors to run propaganda campaigns using the ad targeting machine we have built using social media. They can say what they want and every citizen can do so as well, but we should not allow asymmetric amplification.
- pphysch 5y ago
  Lot of words to say "free speech for me but not for thee"
- baobabKoodaa 5y ago
  Just be honest and admit that you are pro-censorship in some issues, instead of using weasel words like that.
  - krapp 5y ago
    That isn't honest. Honest would be admitting the difference of opinion as to what "free speech" and "censorship" entail.
- trasz 5y ago
  This is exactly how China is justifying their censorship.

johndfsgdgdfg 5y ago

[flagged]

coffeeblack 5y ago
Criticizing the CCP has nothing to do with the Chinese people. You are not a racist against Americans when you criticize Biden or Trump.
- throw10920 5y ago
  I, personally, agree with your assessment of the post being a wumaodang, but I've been incorrect on that front before (and corrected by dang himself, who had done previous investigation into the account I was concerned about), and so in the spirit of the HN guidelines "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like." I think it might be best to elide that particular statement... ...which doesn't invalidate the rest of your comment, at all.
  - coffeeblack 5y ago
    Good point, you are right. Post updated.
- bigcat123 5y ago
twoxproblematic 5y ago
[dead]

coffeeblack 5y ago

The “ADV Podcasts” (a China focused podcast) has talked about the propaganda collaboration of Putin’s government and the CCP government for some weeks.

323 5y ago

Chinese reporter embedded in Russia troops: https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1501189465636839431 https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1501189465636839431

bigcat123 5y ago
pphysch 5y ago
Wait til you hear who is embedded in the neo-Nazi Azov/Aidar battalions...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

NotChina 5y ago

[dead]

sebow 5y ago

Always chuckle when we talk corporate or western state-sponsored propaganda yet "we" still have shit like this. Collusion between the private companies and governments is fascism, by definition. Which is what China does in their country, and which is what we sometimes allow, willingly or not, in our countries through the internet. I personally am against censorship of any kind. And while that in principle means allowing propaganda garbage from all sides, it also means not censoring domestic "propaganda"(which could be anything depending on your reference) or material. People dislike this because having a personal filter is hard, but the alternative is arguably worse if you only allow a certain side.(which goes back to the first point of fascism by collusion)

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

rdxm 5y ago

andrewclunn 5y ago

Normal day: Eww an ad, skip / ignore. War time: This foreign government bought ADS! They're promoting propaganda and influencing our policy, election, populace! My own government (which only tells the truth) must stop this from happening.

jessaustin 5y ago
Yeah, I don't really trust any of these people, because somehow they're all too dumb to install uBlock Origin.

axiosgunnar 5y ago

Why can China even buy ads on Facebook, a website they have banned? So they are allowed to push their narrative onto Westerners, but the inverse is not allowed?

bagacrap 5y ago
Everything about the West's relationship with China is asymmetric. I don't really blame China for realpolitik while trying to play catch up here, but I do wish they'd stop their expansionism. They already have enough people and resources to be the world #1 economy. Also the human rights violations are a bit of a mystery to me --- what's the point of a strong economy if people are suffering? Hopefully that will resolve itself in the same way the US used slave labor to bootstrap itself (unjustly, but it is what it is) then later banned it.
z0r 5y ago
Because multinational corporations will take money from any buyer the law allows, so long as nobody is looking too closely at the moment

bannedbybros 5y ago

mensetmanusman 5y ago

I see these conspiracies starting to enter my social media: apparently they are saying the us is running dozens of biowarfare labs. The only evidence is photoshopped maps. No one ever has a list of addresses to verify, ha.

soared 5y ago
Labs were given to Ukraine from the US DoD/DTRA, so pretty easy jump for conspiracy theorists to go all biowarfare zombie sarin etc. The page below explains what they are actually used for. https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defense-threat-reduction-office/biological-threat-reduction-program/ https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/sections-offices/defen...
cityzen 5y ago
Sounds kind of like the US government gaslighting americans to believe Iraq had WMDs...
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  Yes, but the stupid thing on Russia’s part is that they waited until after the invasion to start this conversation. It’s almost like the population has laughed at the prospect of going to war to defeat a Jewish Nazi and now they are scrambling to post rationalize.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

adultSwim 5y ago

I'm uncomfortable with how this article talks about how evil the ads are without actually showing them. It's not clear to me who is doing the propaganda here (the ads vs the article about the ads).

bilbo0s 5y ago
It's not clear to me who is doing the propaganda here (the ads vs the article about the ads Just, Devil's Advocate, but why can't it be both?
- throw10920 5y ago
  Nailed it. I think that very few people would say that Chinese state media is not a propaganda machine, and Axios has a noticeable spin to it in general.

ngcc_hk 5y ago

It is the strategy one should worry. With china backed by Russia it is a much bigger problem latter as you have a more self contained (energy and military strategy) empire with a sidekick. It is more like North Korea but on a much bigger scale. Given so far no good strategy to contain its ambition, and the diversion of focus to Europe, china will dominate pacific and the link on the land bridge. Originally it might be a rivalary but now forced cooperation. Not sure how this bigger game being played out. Btw short term asking china to help … it its so ridiculous but pop up so many times it is not even funny. What happen china really can deliver and work with Russia what then …

ksec 5y ago

>Good WSJ article on Russia vs. China. In a nutshell, China miscalculated the situation. They will likely look to limit their bet (on Russia) for fear of becoming Russia 2.0 to the West. [1] The tweet is from Neil Cybart and WSJ. You may know him as one of the more accurate Apple analysts. And most people still to this day think either China miscalculated it, or China's official stance is somewhat unclear. ( Paul Graham ) And as usual, Benedict Evans has much better take on the situation. Mostly likely because of his major in History. [1] https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1500825861242724352 https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1500825861242724352

_lpa_ 5y ago
> And as usual, Benedict Evans has much better take on the situation. Mostly likely because of his major in History. Which is?
- duxup 5y ago
  It would seem to be two tweets with maybe 3 to 6 sentences (depending on if you think one word and a period is a sentence). That's Twitter for you...
actuator 5y ago
Those cancerous Twitter login modals are not letting me read the whole thread but I don't agree that China has much to lose here. They get a far weaker Russia much more dependent on them now economically. Russia is rich in fossil fuels which China lacks and has some advantages in defence and space tech which China can easily get their hands on. CCP might not be that confident about taking Taiwan now but they get a massive economic boost and a possible big brother relationship with Russia now.
- RC_ITR 5y ago
  Sure but a far weaker Russia is what? The worlds 20th largest economy, with a history of having a geopolitical chip on its shoulder (I think most observers would agree that the Russian people would die before becoming ‘chinas little brother’) ?

solididiot 5y ago

throw10920 5y ago
> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. From the Hacker News guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Actually, that whole page is worth reading, given that your comment violates a lot of it. Another sample: > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. You're probably being downvoted because your post (a) is whataboutism (b) is emotionally-heavy while content-light (c) seems to make the assumption that Russian/Chinese propaganda is somehow equivalent to US propaganda and (d) violates several of the HN guidelines.

bushbaba 5y ago

I also saw CGTN pro-russia ads on Youtube. So Google is also profiting off this.

curt15 5y ago

What does FB gain by allowing traffic from CCP IP addresses when traffic to Chinese addresses is blocked?

hrunt 5y ago
Ad revenue
actuator 5y ago
Are we sure it is CCP IP address. CGTN might have established offices outside PRC and those might be the one publishing these. Also, banning CGTN is not the way, just like banning RT wasn't. I can understand banning demonstrably false misinformation but that should be content specific, complete RT ban doesn't sit right with me. Economist has published articles stating how Iraq war was justified or NYT with their WMD propoganda. RT was doing it at a massive scale but it doesn't seem right nonetheless.

qiskit 5y ago

Good. Lets hear all sides. Everyone should check out as many state propaganda around the world they can and not rely on just one state propaganda for "truth". All propaganda has innate biases and they all spin stories for their agenda. The easiest way to understand this is by looking at state propaganda around the world on a single topic like ukraine. Then you'll understand that truly, the truth is the first casualty of war. It's a luxury afforded to people not in war at the moment. So we should enjoy this privilege while we can.

MangoCoffee 5y ago
>Lets hear all sides There is no all sides. a big fat kid beating up a skinny kid when that skinny kid did NOTHING to the big fat kid. where's all sides? when you punch someone first regardless of your reason. you lose all moral high ground. especially Russia's reason is absurd. i don't understand why people believe there is any sides to this war.
- qiskit 5y ago
  > There is no all sides. There are always "all sides". Always. To deny this is to deny reality. > a big fat kid beating up a skinny kid when that skinny kid did NOTHING to the big fat kid. Nobody believes this. Even you don't. So why do you say it? Russia didn't all of a sudden invade ukraine for no reason. There is obviously a reason. Whether you believe the casus belli is justified is another matter. > you lose all moral high ground. There is no moral high ground in war. Only winners and losers. And the winners will decide what the moral high ground is. > i don't understand why people believe there is any sides to this war. Because it's a fact. Every war has multiple angles to it because every war has different sides. Denying the obvious isn't going to help. Maybe it'll convince the uneducated. But you aren't going to convince intelligent people with such a zealous argument.
  - neop1x 5y ago
    >> Russia didn't all of a sudden invade ukraine for no reason. Or maybe Russia fanned the conflict over the years, supporting separatists and paving the way into this invasion. To have reasons and excuses for it...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Graffur 5y ago

How has TikTok not been mentioned yet?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ZYinMD 5y ago

> ...and downplay Russia's actions in launching an unprovoked invasion I would argue it is not "unprovoked". By incorporating Ukraine, NATO will have a direct adjacent border with Russia head to head, and missiles will be placed along the border, right at Russia's doorstep, what a stupid strategy for world peace. Putin has told us over many years it's unacceptable for the Russians. Think when USSR tried to place missiles in Cuba. Edit: for folks who clearly disagree, I'd like to recommend a speech by John Mearsheimer, which is currently gaining 3M views per day, now at 19M: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4

andrewxdiamond 5y ago
How does Russia annexing Ukraine solve this issue then? Wouldn’t that still be butting our borders up against each other?
malcolmgreaves 5y ago
Stop spreading Russian propaganda. It's absolutely 100% Russian aggression. They've invaded a sovereign country that they had a treaty with to not attack.
ncr100 5y ago
I disagree. Who is likely to invade a neighbor, Poland or Russia? Not Poland. So, not provocative. And Russia is definitely doing an unprovoked invasion.
sega_sai 5y ago
WTF are you talking about ? NATO explicitly said that it has no plans to incorporate Ukraine. And incorporating Ukraine was not possible given the disputed territory of Crimea. Your are just repeating Putin's propaganda here.
sidibe 5y ago
Please look at a map. NATO already has several borders with Russia.
HWR_14 5y ago

floucky 5y ago

The propaganda is also very strong on Chinese social media (especially Wechat). I leave in France and I know a few Chinese person that keep telling me that this war was mainly caused by USA, that the Ukraine president is a dictator and so on...

throwaway4good 5y ago
Outside the west, there is a massive world that just sees things differently. Here the US is not a force for good but a warmongering empire. Think of it what you will but it would be wrong to discard it as mere propaganda. These are deeply held beliefs.
- fvv 5y ago
  Belief From a country or countries where people are not free to inform themselves or to speech openly about opinions , that's where propaganda have are easily spread..
  - actuator 5y ago
    Well, to be fair if you remove restrictions then it is the Western version of events that will rules as they have the established platforms and money to spread info. To see their power look at the French poll of who won them the World War. It became 20% in the recent decades from 57% for Russia https://www.france24.com/en/20190601-who-won-wwii-russias-role-gets-short-shrift-france https://www.france24.com/en/20190601-who-won-wwii-russias-ro...
    - LaMarseillaise 5y ago
      The idea that the Soviet Union won WWII is itself propaganda and ignores the contributions of many, many nations, not to mention the entire Pacific war. Also, the liberation of France was exclusively the western allies.
      - lenkite 5y ago