4 ms·
It’s incredible what money can do. I’m sorry but this article smells Russian money an awful lot. It’s very not subtle, trying to influence us to think Russia is
by qsdf38100 4y ago
It’s incredible what money can do. I’m sorry but this article smells Russian money an awful lot. It’s very not subtle, trying to influence us to think Russia is too strong, can’t be stopped, and trying to will hurt us, not them.
I don’t buy it. I think it’s a sign of desperation, their propaganda and their supporters are increasingly obvious.
Not saying sanctions don’t have an effect on western economies, but this article bends reality to the absurd. As usual with alt right and Russian state media.
- missedthecue 4y agoAre you sure you aren't suffering from a case of confirmation bias here? I have noticed, especially in circles like Twitter or HN that people are very eager to accept and buy into reports that the Russian economy is doing poorly, but if Western sources, media, analysts, companies, think-tanks, and agencies report that Russia might not be doing as poorly as we thought, the amount of suspicion and the level of hard-facts standards suddenly goes through the roof. This can cause us to reach at rather silly lengths to explain away these reports using whatever reasoning necessary. On the other hand, maybe you're right, and maybe The Economist, Goldman Sachs, the IMF, and the numerous other sources referenced in the article have all been compromised by the KGB within the past several months and have been turned into Kremlin propaganda pieces.
- qsdf38100 4y agoYou might be right. But note that the KGB doesn't need to fully compromise some trusted medias. It's often just an "opinion" paper, from one guy. You just have to influence a few journalists. And it might not always be money. It might be embarassing intel, like things ready to be "leaked", it might be promises, conflict of interests... And then there are always people doing it for free, because they have come to believe the Russian State Media alternate reality.
- yucky 4y agoWhat is more likely, that The Economist is Russian propaganda now or that you might be wrong?
- qsdf38100 4y agoYou don’t have to buy the whole thing. You can buy 1 guy, and then have a trophy "look even The economist agrees Russia us too strong to be stopped and we should just surrender already".
- yucky 4y agoThat's not how the Economist works. And making arguments like this 100% discredits your position. If I were on the fence, I would definitely come down on the opposite side based solely on this silly argument.
- qsdf38100 4y agoSo tell me, how does the Economist work? If you think that no journalist can be influenced or bought, then I'd say you are the one being silly here.
- yucky 4y agoWell for one, there is an editorial staff. "One guy" can't just write some shit and slide it in to the publication. Just move on, you're not helping yourself.
- qsdf38100 4y agoYou would be surprised what kind of crap articles can get through, for instance at the prestigious BBC. See this instance of transphobic article https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=b4buJMMiwcg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=b4buJMMiwcg. So you’re just plain wrong, but I have to move on apparently.
- qsdf38100 4y agoI’d have loved to read your take on that video, and read if you still think reputable medias are immune to trash articles pushed by malevolent actors. But a downvote is fine too, I guess.