3 ms·

I am tired of this Anti-Iran propaganda in the news.

by cubancigar11 14y ago

kevingadd 14y ago
Are you saying the events described didn't happen?
- hmottestad 14y ago
  Propaganda doesn't need to be untrue. Though this is a US site, and Wired is a US magazine, and the US seem to have something against Iran (or it's nuclear program anyway). You would be hard pressed to find many pro-Iran articles.
  - VMG 14y ago
    > Propaganda doesn't need to be untrue. So where is the difference between propaganda and reporting?
    - lazugod 14y ago
      Propoganda would be to always report on Iran in such negative contexts as CIA espionage and UN sanctions, and never report directly on its innovations or ongoings. Lying by omission, basically. I don't read Wired enough to know if this is the case.
    - rmc 14y ago
      Usually focus, (only focus on the negative of one side, or the positive of another), or omitting certain facts.
    - EliRivers 14y ago
      Propaganda involves a deliberate attempt to provoke a desired emotional reaction. As a rough rule of thumb, if the author seeks to make you feel rather than think, it's propaganda. This is generally done with techniques such as distortion of facts, omission of truths, caricatured images, extreme simplification of complex situations and so forth. Contrary to some opinions, propaganda is not just about making you dislike someone or something else. Montages of your own people/accomplishments/military force, accompanied by stirring music, for example, is propaganda.
- ruby_on_rails 14y ago
  I thought this was anti-hollywood.
- cubancigar11 14y ago
  No. Just that every where I look these days there is an article about Iran. Every next day there is some new article about Iran doing something. And when it isn't then there are articles like these - dug up from the history to fill some new Iran related news. I am scared if this is a precursor to a new war. It looks awfully similar to the last time. (Btw, I am an Indian in India who has got nothing to do with USA and Iran.)
  - kghose 14y ago
    Actually, having lived in India for a while in the 90s I can tell you that (if you lived in India at that time) you are likely to be more biased against the US (and other NATO powers) and more biased towards Russia and the Arab states. India was "non-aligned" during the cold war but was fairly tilted towards the USSR (cheap munitions, convenient ideology) and this was conveyed through the strongly controlled media. Due to the size and volatility of the Muslim population in India there were many moves to appear (and push people to appear) allied with the Arab states and against Israel. I wonder what, in general, the modern viewpoint is. Young people in India now are more into consumer goods and I think less political than they were 20 years ago, but I only get brief snapshots now.
    - user9756 14y ago
      Funny, the same can be said of people living in the US and US allies. The west has a very "strongly controlled media" too, and the message being sent is quite clear.
      - kghose 14y ago
        I'm sure you can have the opinion that media in North America and Western Europe is very strongly controlled, but it is a fact that mass media (Television and radio, though not newspapers) in India up to the end of the 90s were state controlled. After liberalization in the late 90s private television stations opened up.
        user9756 14y ago
elteto 14y ago
You obviously have a misunderstanding of what propaganda means. I find this article very interesting and full of factual information, the exact opposite of what propaganda is. It is all about the rescue operation and they don't even go into what provoked the attack on the embassy. Which part of it is propaganda again?
- davidw 14y ago
  Presumably the part where they don't clearly state that the United States is responsible for all the world's ills. Sheez. This whole thread is further evidence that off-topic articles should be ruthlessly extirpated.

I am tired of this Anti-Iran propaganda in the news.

kevingadd 14y ago

Are you saying the events described didn't happen?

hmottestad 14y ago
Propaganda doesn't need to be untrue. Though this is a US site, and Wired is a US magazine, and the US seem to have something against Iran (or it's nuclear program anyway). You would be hard pressed to find many pro-Iran articles.
- VMG 14y ago
  > Propaganda doesn't need to be untrue. So where is the difference between propaganda and reporting?
  - lazugod 14y ago
    Propoganda would be to always report on Iran in such negative contexts as CIA espionage and UN sanctions, and never report directly on its innovations or ongoings. Lying by omission, basically. I don't read Wired enough to know if this is the case.
  - rmc 14y ago
    Usually focus, (only focus on the negative of one side, or the positive of another), or omitting certain facts.
  - EliRivers 14y ago
    Propaganda involves a deliberate attempt to provoke a desired emotional reaction. As a rough rule of thumb, if the author seeks to make you feel rather than think, it's propaganda. This is generally done with techniques such as distortion of facts, omission of truths, caricatured images, extreme simplification of complex situations and so forth. Contrary to some opinions, propaganda is not just about making you dislike someone or something else. Montages of your own people/accomplishments/military force, accompanied by stirring music, for example, is propaganda.
ruby_on_rails 14y ago
I thought this was anti-hollywood.
cubancigar11 14y ago
No. Just that every where I look these days there is an article about Iran. Every next day there is some new article about Iran doing something. And when it isn't then there are articles like these - dug up from the history to fill some new Iran related news. I am scared if this is a precursor to a new war. It looks awfully similar to the last time. (Btw, I am an Indian in India who has got nothing to do with USA and Iran.)
- kghose 14y ago
  Actually, having lived in India for a while in the 90s I can tell you that (if you lived in India at that time) you are likely to be more biased against the US (and other NATO powers) and more biased towards Russia and the Arab states. India was "non-aligned" during the cold war but was fairly tilted towards the USSR (cheap munitions, convenient ideology) and this was conveyed through the strongly controlled media. Due to the size and volatility of the Muslim population in India there were many moves to appear (and push people to appear) allied with the Arab states and against Israel. I wonder what, in general, the modern viewpoint is. Young people in India now are more into consumer goods and I think less political than they were 20 years ago, but I only get brief snapshots now.
  - user9756 14y ago
    Funny, the same can be said of people living in the US and US allies. The west has a very "strongly controlled media" too, and the message being sent is quite clear.
    - kghose 14y ago
      I'm sure you can have the opinion that media in North America and Western Europe is very strongly controlled, but it is a fact that mass media (Television and radio, though not newspapers) in India up to the end of the 90s were state controlled. After liberalization in the late 90s private television stations opened up.
      - user9756 14y ago

elteto 14y ago

You obviously have a misunderstanding of what propaganda means. I find this article very interesting and full of factual information, the exact opposite of what propaganda is. It is all about the rescue operation and they don't even go into what provoked the attack on the embassy. Which part of it is propaganda again?

davidw 14y ago
Presumably the part where they don't clearly state that the United States is responsible for all the world's ills. Sheez. This whole thread is further evidence that off-topic articles should be ruthlessly extirpated.