3 ms·
There is no comparison between public (not state) broadcasters like the Australian ABC or the BBC and propaganda arms of totalitarian governments. It's not simp
by kspacewalk2 5y ago
There is no comparison between public (not state) broadcasters like the Australian ABC or the BBC and propaganda arms of totalitarian governments. It's not simply a matter of bias. RT exists purely to spread Kremlin propaganda, all else is secondary and serves the primary aim (e.g. the odd well-made documentary or show attracting viewership for the main event, e.g. pushing blatant wartime propaganda).
You may agree or disagree with the idea of banning propaganda arms of authoritarian regimes on YouTube, of course. But that's a separate issue from your off-base comparison.
- CyanBird 5y ago> RT exists purely to spread Kremlin propaganda, all else is secondary and serves the primary aim Yes, just like RadioFreeAsia, VoiceOfAmerica, RadioFarda, etcetcetc But you don't care to mention these because they fit the "good guys" narrative
- oska 5y agoI'm aware that the BBC and the ABC tout themselves as 'public' broadcasters but it's a self-serving fiction. The ABC is the one I am most familiar with so I will speak to that example. It is completely state funded and its board is appointed by the Australian government. I have grown up in Australia watching the ABC (I very rarely watch commercial/corporate TV) and I have seen it increasingly become a mouthpiece for the state, just as you are accusing RT of being (and I don't disagree). The coverage by the ABC of the Ukrainian conflict has been pathetic and almost completely partisan.