4 ms·

Yet nobody has any issues with the New York Times, even though they are the US' propaganda machine?

by alfiedotwtf 11y ago

throwawayaway 11y ago
me and chomsky do, i bet you do too.
ck2 11y ago
NY Times is owned/funded by the US government?
- happyscrappy 11y ago
  They are aligned with the capitalist pigdogs preventing our socialist utopia.
- skylan_q 11y ago
  No, they aren't. But they don't need to be. Just because they aren't directly controlled on paper by the US gov't, it doesn't mean that they aren't just a tool for US gov't propaganda. Distrust of the media is more crucial than ever for independent thought.
chc 11y ago
The New York Times is often far too deferent to the U.S. Government and a lot of people do knock them for it, but the difference between that and a state-run propaganda office like RT is pretty significant. See, for example, this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/18/malaysia-airlines-russian-reporter-quits/12847251/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/18/malaysia... where a RT reporter resigned on the spot because she was being forced to report facts that everyone knew were blatantly false. It sucks in both cases, but this is a whole different level of suck.
- throwawayaway 11y ago
  would you say the difference quantitative or qualitative?
- sitkack 11y ago
  That says more about the reporter than the news organization. edit: downvote. All news organizations should have journalists as principled. All news orgs demand the same things.
- CamperBob2 11y ago
  (Shrug) If you work for Fox News, you, too, are under orders to report things that are blatantly false. (Disagree? Then you need to explain why they felt it necessary to argue in court that they have the right to lie to their viewers and call it "News.")
  - comex 11y ago
    Indeed, one should avoid quoting Fox News or using it as a source, too. (Although that name is an umbrella for a large number of 'products' - I would trust something written on foxnews.com more than whatever Hannity said in his daily primetime show.)
  - chadzawistowski 11y ago
    I don't disagree, but Snopes debunked that Fox News argued for the right to lie. http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/foxlies.asp http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/foxlies.asp
- A_COMPUTER 11y ago
  ...And if you investigate her on-air quitting, you find out this: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_cold_war-hungry_neocons_stage_managed_liz_wahls_resignation_20140319 http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_cold_war-hungry_neoc...

Yet nobody has any issues with the New York Times, even though they are the US' propaganda machine?

throwawayaway 11y ago

me and chomsky do, i bet you do too.

ck2 11y ago

NY Times is owned/funded by the US government?

happyscrappy 11y ago
They are aligned with the capitalist pigdogs preventing our socialist utopia.
skylan_q 11y ago
No, they aren't. But they don't need to be. Just because they aren't directly controlled on paper by the US gov't, it doesn't mean that they aren't just a tool for US gov't propaganda. Distrust of the media is more crucial than ever for independent thought.

chc 11y ago

The New York Times is often far too deferent to the U.S. Government and a lot of people do knock them for it, but the difference between that and a state-run propaganda office like RT is pretty significant. See, for example, this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/18/malaysia-airlines-russian-reporter-quits/12847251/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/18/malaysia... where a RT reporter resigned on the spot because she was being forced to report facts that everyone knew were blatantly false. It sucks in both cases, but this is a whole different level of suck.

throwawayaway 11y ago
would you say the difference quantitative or qualitative?
sitkack 11y ago
That says more about the reporter than the news organization. edit: downvote. All news organizations should have journalists as principled. All news orgs demand the same things.
CamperBob2 11y ago
(Shrug) If you work for Fox News, you, too, are under orders to report things that are blatantly false. (Disagree? Then you need to explain why they felt it necessary to argue in court that they have the right to lie to their viewers and call it "News.")
- comex 11y ago
  Indeed, one should avoid quoting Fox News or using it as a source, too. (Although that name is an umbrella for a large number of 'products' - I would trust something written on foxnews.com more than whatever Hannity said in his daily primetime show.)
- chadzawistowski 11y ago
  I don't disagree, but Snopes debunked that Fox News argued for the right to lie. http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/foxlies.asp http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/foxlies.asp
A_COMPUTER 11y ago
...And if you investigate her on-air quitting, you find out this: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_cold_war-hungry_neocons_stage_managed_liz_wahls_resignation_20140319 http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_cold_war-hungry_neoc...