4 ms·

I'd be surprised if the state didn't utilise its network of media contacts to discredit him.

by trackflak 3y ago

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
So you're just going to assert, in drive-by fashion, that these journalists are government shills? Do you have any evidence that supports that claim? Do you say that about everyone that you disagree with?
- uoaei 3y ago
  [flagged]
- TheRealDunkirk 3y ago
  [flagged]
- somenameforme 3y ago
  It's kind of funny. At first I was going to say, what do you expect - a line on his CV 'worked as a medium for US propaganda'? But bizarrely enough, that's completely accurate. Michael Weiss is editor in chief at the 'Institute of Modern Russia.' It's part of Radio Free Europe [2], which is literally a propaganda outlet owned by the US government. But the reason I decided to look this up is something much more simple than these facts. That Atlantic article reeks of state propaganda, and if it's not sending your propaganda detector to 11, you really need to get it tuned a bit - especially in this day and age. More often than not, you're not going to be able to find a link on somebody's CV or Wiki or whatever directly tying them to state interests, but I mean this just isn't how "normal" people think, behave, or write. It's like he's desperately trying to convince you of a position, by making you believe that thinking otherwise would be absurd. Note the stark similarities in style and rhetoric to something like this [3] piece from the NYtimes in the leadup to the Iraq War. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Modern_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Modern_Russia [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Europe/Radio_Liberty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Europe/Radio_Libert... [3] - https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/06/opinion/irrefutable-and-undeniable.html https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/06/opinion/irrefutable-and-u...

4 ms·

I'd be surprised if the state didn't utilise its network of media contacts to discredit him.

by trackflak 3y ago

I'd be surprised if the state didn't utilise its network of media contacts to discredit him.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
So you're just going to assert, in drive-by fashion, that these journalists are government shills? Do you have any evidence that supports that claim? Do you say that about everyone that you disagree with?
- uoaei 3y ago
  [flagged]
- TheRealDunkirk 3y ago
  [flagged]
- somenameforme 3y ago
  It's kind of funny. At first I was going to say, what do you expect - a line on his CV 'worked as a medium for US propaganda'? But bizarrely enough, that's completely accurate. Michael Weiss is editor in chief at the 'Institute of Modern Russia.' It's part of Radio Free Europe [2], which is literally a propaganda outlet owned by the US government. But the reason I decided to look this up is something much more simple than these facts. That Atlantic article reeks of state propaganda, and if it's not sending your propaganda detector to 11, you really need to get it tuned a bit - especially in this day and age. More often than not, you're not going to be able to find a link on somebody's CV or Wiki or whatever directly tying them to state interests, but I mean this just isn't how "normal" people think, behave, or write. It's like he's desperately trying to convince you of a position, by making you believe that thinking otherwise would be absurd. Note the stark similarities in style and rhetoric to something like this [3] piece from the NYtimes in the leadup to the Iraq War. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Modern_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Modern_Russia [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Europe/Radio_Liberty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Europe/Radio_Libert... [3] - https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/06/opinion/irrefutable-and-undeniable.html https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/06/opinion/irrefutable-and-u...