9 ms·

RT is wholly owned by the Russian government. Either you didn't know that and now you're informed, or you did and you were deliberately intending to confuse by

RT is wholly owned by the Russian government. Either you didn't know that and now you're informed, or you did and you were deliberately intending to confuse by conflating a propaganda bureau of the Russian government with an independent network of media outlets that get single-digit percentages of their funding from the state. Either way I'm not going to engage with you further. edit: also, it wasn't "being applied consistently" until they fixed it, as I mentioned in the grandparent post. RT and NPR are fundamentally different, and Twitter even recognized that by changing NPR's label while keeping RT's the same.

infamouscow 4y ago
If I understand you correctly, it seems the fundamental difference is what percentage of their finances come from the state. I urge you to reconsider and continue this discussion so we both can learn what exactly is that threshold to be regarded as state-sponsored in your view. Is it 0.0001%, 10%, 51%?
- angoragoats 4y ago
  I prefer not to engage at all with folks who call NPR “the enemy of the people.” I urge you to get your head out of your ass.
  - infamouscow 4y ago
    I must have touched the nerve of a propagandist :) The inescapable fact of the matter is the onus is on NPR to absolve themselves of their conflict of interest. Their failure to do so is evidence in and of itself of their corruption. There's no way to snake and weasel out of this. I'm eager to exchange ideas, but it's important to engage with those who are genuinely interested in constructive dialogue and are open to considering different perspectives. If one chooses not to actively participate in the exchange of ideas I have to conclude: NPR is the enemy of the people and they deserve everything that happens to them.
    - angoragoats 4y ago
      > The inescapable fact of the matter is the onus is on NPR to absolve themselves of their conflict of interest No. Goodbye.

infamouscow 4y ago

If I understand you correctly, it seems the fundamental difference is what percentage of their finances come from the state. I urge you to reconsider and continue this discussion so we both can learn what exactly is that threshold to be regarded as state-sponsored in your view. Is it 0.0001%, 10%, 51%?

angoragoats 4y ago
I prefer not to engage at all with folks who call NPR “the enemy of the people.” I urge you to get your head out of your ass.
- infamouscow 4y ago
  I must have touched the nerve of a propagandist :) The inescapable fact of the matter is the onus is on NPR to absolve themselves of their conflict of interest. Their failure to do so is evidence in and of itself of their corruption. There's no way to snake and weasel out of this. I'm eager to exchange ideas, but it's important to engage with those who are genuinely interested in constructive dialogue and are open to considering different perspectives. If one chooses not to actively participate in the exchange of ideas I have to conclude: NPR is the enemy of the people and they deserve everything that happens to them.
  - angoragoats 4y ago
    > The inescapable fact of the matter is the onus is on NPR to absolve themselves of their conflict of interest No. Goodbye.