5 ms·

We definitely did block or at least make them less available, as I recall prior to the invasion RT was commonly on when walking into a hotel room or in Youtube

by taf2 2y ago

We definitely did block or at least make them less available, as I recall prior to the invasion RT was commonly on when walking into a hotel room or in Youtube recommendation lists. Post invasion in US I never see it in any hotels or recommended on Youtube... was it censored or maybe just wildly boycotted, not sure... but seems appropriate as a response to me

radlad 2y ago
I think there is a huge difference between the government blocking access to a media outlet versus hotels choosing to no longer display said media outlet on their televisions. AFAIK, there has been no ban. It would probably face some backlash given the First Amendment right to freedom of press. (Though I'm not sure that truly extends to the press of a foreign country?)
oivey 2y ago
This is a government ban. It is not at all comparable to your perception that private businesses are playing less Russia origin media.
arp242 2y ago
RT was outright banned by the EU after they invaded Ukraine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Responses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Responses – it's also been dropped/banned by most mainstream platforms. I don't think you can compare Al Jazeera and RT, because one has been a firehose of bullshit that has literally advocates invasion of Ukraine, and the other does not. As far as I know, Al Jazeera is banned purely because they've been critical of current Israeli policy. There are some reasonable criticisms of Al Jazeera and things they could have done better, but that applies to every media outlet on the planet.
- jolj 2y ago
  You'd might want to watch some arabic al jazeera. While Al Jazeera English pushes s the progressive post-colonialist narrative in the United States, Al Jazeera Arabic gears the Middle East for a war by pushing a Muslim Brotherhood idea of a Sharia state, Salafism and Jihad. Both have the same aim, just as Qatar Airways sponsor your flights with oil money so you might fly through Qatar, Al Jazeera pays journalists so they can push Qatar's narratives to Western or Arabic audience. This is highly similar to RT in intent. Looking from Israel standpoint, it's a news outlet that pushes your enemies propaganda arm videos unfiltered and also uses it to radicalize part of your population
  - arp242 2y ago
    I don't speak Arabic so I can't really judge that; I'm sure there's tons of stuff I'd find distasteful, but being distasteful or even inflammatory (within some limits of reason) should not be outlawed. All I can do is go by articles such as this, which don't really seem to cite the same "firehose of bullshit"-type stuff. Also note that the Israeli government spends tons of money to push Israeli narratives and viewpoints. That's fine, they're allowed to do that, but we can leverage the same "highly similar to RT in intent" accusations against them. In the end we should judge actions, not intent.
    - jolj 2y ago
      In most of the world outside of the United States, there are laws that relate to the concept of a "defensive democracy". For example the laws that outlaw display of swastikas in Germany are contradictory with freedom of speech but are aimed at denying a democracy being exploited by extreme groups (see ww2). The discussion here is about the actions of Israel versus Al Jazeera, not a possibility of banning Al Jazeera in the United States or maybe Israeli viewpoints. Also, I am pretty sure Israeli spendings to push Israeli narratives in the US are minuscule, especially compared to Qatar's.
      - arp242 2y ago
        It is not my impression that Al Jazeera can reasonably be compared to Nazi Germany, but okay...
        jolj 2y ago
        I was not comparing them, and I think this is dishonest to read my comment that way. I was giving an example of the way democracies around the world restrict free speech in order to defend other rights This is quite popular in europe and is a result of lesson learned from the nazis
        arp242 2y ago
- smallstepforman 2y ago
  To clarify your post: “because one has been a firehose of bullshit that has literally advocates invasion of Ukraine” How is that different from CNN/BBC/whatever advocating NATO/US invasions in the last half century? (Serbia, Iraq2, Libya, etc). And more recently Gaza.
  - arp242 2y ago
    They didn't; there was tons of criticism about that, including on the beeb and CNN and everywhere else. You're confusing debate with propaganda. There were enormous protests against the Iraq war in London and other places. Try that in Russia. Never mind Serbia was busy with its own ethnic cleansing campaigns and maybe taking some action about that wasn't entirely a bad thing...

by taf2 2y ago

radlad 2y ago

I think there is a huge difference between the government blocking access to a media outlet versus hotels choosing to no longer display said media outlet on their televisions. AFAIK, there has been no ban. It would probably face some backlash given the First Amendment right to freedom of press. (Though I'm not sure that truly extends to the press of a foreign country?)

oivey 2y ago

This is a government ban. It is not at all comparable to your perception that private businesses are playing less Russia origin media.

arp242 2y ago

RT was outright banned by the EU after they invaded Ukraine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Responses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Responses – it's also been dropped/banned by most mainstream platforms. I don't think you can compare Al Jazeera and RT, because one has been a firehose of bullshit that has literally advocates invasion of Ukraine, and the other does not. As far as I know, Al Jazeera is banned purely because they've been critical of current Israeli policy. There are some reasonable criticisms of Al Jazeera and things they could have done better, but that applies to every media outlet on the planet.

jolj 2y ago
You'd might want to watch some arabic al jazeera. While Al Jazeera English pushes s the progressive post-colonialist narrative in the United States, Al Jazeera Arabic gears the Middle East for a war by pushing a Muslim Brotherhood idea of a Sharia state, Salafism and Jihad. Both have the same aim, just as Qatar Airways sponsor your flights with oil money so you might fly through Qatar, Al Jazeera pays journalists so they can push Qatar's narratives to Western or Arabic audience. This is highly similar to RT in intent. Looking from Israel standpoint, it's a news outlet that pushes your enemies propaganda arm videos unfiltered and also uses it to radicalize part of your population
- arp242 2y ago
  I don't speak Arabic so I can't really judge that; I'm sure there's tons of stuff I'd find distasteful, but being distasteful or even inflammatory (within some limits of reason) should not be outlawed. All I can do is go by articles such as this, which don't really seem to cite the same "firehose of bullshit"-type stuff. Also note that the Israeli government spends tons of money to push Israeli narratives and viewpoints. That's fine, they're allowed to do that, but we can leverage the same "highly similar to RT in intent" accusations against them. In the end we should judge actions, not intent.
  - jolj 2y ago
    In most of the world outside of the United States, there are laws that relate to the concept of a "defensive democracy". For example the laws that outlaw display of swastikas in Germany are contradictory with freedom of speech but are aimed at denying a democracy being exploited by extreme groups (see ww2). The discussion here is about the actions of Israel versus Al Jazeera, not a possibility of banning Al Jazeera in the United States or maybe Israeli viewpoints. Also, I am pretty sure Israeli spendings to push Israeli narratives in the US are minuscule, especially compared to Qatar's.
    - arp242 2y ago
      It is not my impression that Al Jazeera can reasonably be compared to Nazi Germany, but okay...
      - jolj 2y ago
        I was not comparing them, and I think this is dishonest to read my comment that way. I was giving an example of the way democracies around the world restrict free speech in order to defend other rights This is quite popular in europe and is a result of lesson learned from the nazis
        arp242 2y ago
smallstepforman 2y ago
To clarify your post: “because one has been a firehose of bullshit that has literally advocates invasion of Ukraine” How is that different from CNN/BBC/whatever advocating NATO/US invasions in the last half century? (Serbia, Iraq2, Libya, etc). And more recently Gaza.
- arp242 2y ago
  They didn't; there was tons of criticism about that, including on the beeb and CNN and everywhere else. You're confusing debate with propaganda. There were enormous protests against the Iraq war in London and other places. Try that in Russia. Never mind Serbia was busy with its own ethnic cleansing campaigns and maybe taking some action about that wasn't entirely a bad thing...