30 ms·

> They wouldn't be a source on, for example, what is happening in Ukraine at the moment Alexander Mercouris has posted blow-by-blow updates on every battle and

> They wouldn't be a source on, for example, what is happening in Ukraine at the moment Alexander Mercouris has posted blow-by-blow updates on every battle and political move of the war once or twice a day for months. He called, for example, the Russian capture of Mariupol a month before it happened, while the entire time corporate media was running non-stop propaganda about how well the war was going for Ukraine.

smt88 4y ago
"Corporate media" never said Ukraine was winning in Mariupol. It was always given as a counterpoint. Sometimes I think people understand the mainstream narrative only through the lens of the contrarians, which is sometimes accurate and sometimes not.
wolverine876 4y ago
> He called, for example, the Russian capture of Mariupol a month before it happened, while the entire time corporate media was running non-stop propaganda about how well the war was going for Ukraine. This claim conflates the overall war with Mariupol. I didn't see any serious media that claimed that Mariupol would end other than it did. Everyone called it the same way, that I saw (though I don't read opinion pieces). Many opinion writers create strawpersons; they say 'the corporate media did X' and then contrast themselves with it. When that happens look at some mainstream media (which is not one thing, but many, many independent publications) yourself and corroborate it. It's almost always false, IME.
AtlasBarfed 4y ago
If the war was going poorly for Ukraine, then it would be over and Russia would have won. If the war was going so-so for Ukraine, half the country would be under Russian control. IMO as long as Ukraine doesn't lost any substantive amount of territory over the summer and stalemates the Donbas/etc, they are winning the war and Russia will falter in the winter. IMO strategically Ukraine is winning the war, they are getting better weapons, gaining experience, getting supplies, Putin is weakening, the World will adapt to the economic disruption, and Russian troop morale will continue to falter. The West obviously loves Ukraine draining Putin of all his might. The risk of nuclear war is still ominous.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> He called, for example, the Russian capture of Mariupol a month before it happened, while the entire time corporate media was running non-stop propaganda about how well the war was going for Ukraine. The entire corporate media was reporting the likely impending fall of Mariupol for long before it happened, while still covering how much Russia had been forced to pivot in their war aims, was taking enormous casualties (in general and in senior officers) by historical standards, and all kinds of other negative indicators. You can win battles while losing the war.
r721 4y ago
Alexander Mercouris is the most blatant pro-Kremlin propagandist on your list, he always repeats what the Kremlin says - you could just get the same talking points from Lavrov or Zakharova. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-duran/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-duran/

smt88 4y ago

"Corporate media" never said Ukraine was winning in Mariupol. It was always given as a counterpoint. Sometimes I think people understand the mainstream narrative only through the lens of the contrarians, which is sometimes accurate and sometimes not.

wolverine876 4y ago

> He called, for example, the Russian capture of Mariupol a month before it happened, while the entire time corporate media was running non-stop propaganda about how well the war was going for Ukraine. This claim conflates the overall war with Mariupol. I didn't see any serious media that claimed that Mariupol would end other than it did. Everyone called it the same way, that I saw (though I don't read opinion pieces). Many opinion writers create strawpersons; they say 'the corporate media did X' and then contrast themselves with it. When that happens look at some mainstream media (which is not one thing, but many, many independent publications) yourself and corroborate it. It's almost always false, IME.

AtlasBarfed 4y ago

If the war was going poorly for Ukraine, then it would be over and Russia would have won. If the war was going so-so for Ukraine, half the country would be under Russian control. IMO as long as Ukraine doesn't lost any substantive amount of territory over the summer and stalemates the Donbas/etc, they are winning the war and Russia will falter in the winter. IMO strategically Ukraine is winning the war, they are getting better weapons, gaining experience, getting supplies, Putin is weakening, the World will adapt to the economic disruption, and Russian troop morale will continue to falter. The West obviously loves Ukraine draining Putin of all his might. The risk of nuclear war is still ominous.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> He called, for example, the Russian capture of Mariupol a month before it happened, while the entire time corporate media was running non-stop propaganda about how well the war was going for Ukraine. The entire corporate media was reporting the likely impending fall of Mariupol for long before it happened, while still covering how much Russia had been forced to pivot in their war aims, was taking enormous casualties (in general and in senior officers) by historical standards, and all kinds of other negative indicators. You can win battles while losing the war.

r721 4y ago

Alexander Mercouris is the most blatant pro-Kremlin propagandist on your list, he always repeats what the Kremlin says - you could just get the same talking points from Lavrov or Zakharova. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-duran/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-duran/