Journalist Eva Bartlett interviews DPR Civilians on referendum to join Russia

[Rogue Valley]

RT is a Russian news outlet, so some bias is naturally expected there.

RT is owned and published by the Kremlin.

It's sole purpose is to spread Kremlin propaganda. Ditto for Sputnik News.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

More or less. An article you may find interesting:

Hedges: NATO — The Most Dangerous Military Alliance on the Planet - scheerpost.com

The massive expansion of NATO, not only in Eastern and Central Europe but the Middle East, Latin America, Africa and Asia, presages endless war and a potential nuclear holocaust.

scheerpost.com

You keep doing this. You keep posting the arguments that other people created. You don't even bother to summarize the argument. You don't quote the pertinent sections of the arguments. You don't highlight you agree with or disagree with?

Why don't you want to do any work?

What is YOUR argument?

Why do you want me to make your argument for you???~!?!?!?!

WTF!

Why should I put any work into refuting your arguments if you don't bother putting the effort into making them to begin with???????????????

WHAT THE **** IS THE POINT?

Why are you doing this?

I can copy and paste a link to various websites too. That's not debating or having a discussion.

Link here

Link there.

You might as well just post a link to a the Russian foreign ministry in every post.

 

[Fledermaus]

All good sites in my view.

Says every Russian shill ever.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

My main focus is on the Ukraine conflict, so I'm not sure I'd spend enough time in said hypothetical thread.

Well, that's fine, but I'm not going to talk about a difficult and complex topic like that, and debate the merits of your arguments, because it would require a new thread.

So, let's move on.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

RT is a Russian news outlet, so some bias is naturally expected there. But do you have any evidence to substantiate your assertion in regards to the other news outlets you mentioned?

RT is not a biased news source.

It is a Russian government propaganda outlet, okay?

It's not that they just demonstrate bias. It's not they kind of prefer Russian government sources, or they like the Russian narrative, or they are sympathetic to the Russian cause, etc.

They ARE a source of Russian government propaganda.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

If -only- the U.S. Navy was just about making the oceans safe for all the countries of the world. In point of fact, they're most likely responsible for acts of sabotage like this one:

Destruction of Nordstream Pipeline: False Flag? | Winter Watch

The most incendiary story in eons...the sabotage of the Nordstream gas pipelines...received scant, if any, coverage in the U.S. mainstream media. This alone should lead you to wonder which parties were responsible for the attack. But the notion that two separated at some distance (see map below)...

www.winterwatch.net

There's just not enough information to conclude who might have destroyed the pipelines. It's pure conjecture at this point.

But if you want to talk about this issue you can make a new thread and we can talk about it.

Oh, by the way, when do you make that thread, I expect you to make an argument and not link to someone else's argument, okay?

 

[phoenyx]

RT is not a biased news source.

It is a Russian government propaganda outlet, okay?

It's not that they just demonstrate bias. It's not they kind of prefer Russian government sources, or they like the Russian narrative, or they are sympathetic to the Russian cause, etc.

They ARE a source of Russian government propaganda.

They are funded by the Russian government, but so is the BBC in the UK, the CBC in Canada, NPR in the U.S. One can certainly expect that all of these sources will be biased towards their governments, but that doesn't mean that all they do is put out government propaganda.

Similarly, corporate news sources are frequently biased against those who criticize their owners or their advertisers. The trick is to know what biases a source is likely to have and keep an eye out for it.

My favourite sources are small media outlets that receive little if any funding from large corporate interests or the government. Unfortunately, their lack of funding from these large sources of income limits the amount of journalism they can take on. Pretty much all of the news sources you referred to other than RT fall into that category.

 

[Fledermaus]

My favourite sources are small media outlets

 

[phoenyx]

There's just not enough information to conclude who might have destroyed the pipelines.

I strongly disagree.

But if you want to talk about this issue you can make a new thread and we can talk about it.

Oh, by the way, when do you make that thread, I expect you to make an argument and not link to someone else's argument, okay?

If I link to an article and don't express any disagreement with it, odds are I agree with most if not all of the arguments made within it. If someone has already made a good argument, I see no need to put it into "my own words", though if you get me going on a subject, I may do so.

In terms of making a thread on the subject, I think I'll pass for the time being, busy with lots of other threads right now.

 

[Rogue Valley]

They are funded by the Russian government, but so is the BBC in the UK, the CBC in Canada, NPR in the U.S.

No. RT is not like the BBC, CBC, or NPR.

Those outlets are monitored by the government/competition and do not engage in propaganda.

The sole purpose of RT/Sputnik is to flood the West with Kremlin propaganda.

 

[phoenyx]

No. RT is not like the BBC, CBC, or NPR.

Those outlets are monitored by the government/competition and do not engage in propaganda.

Plenty of evidence suggests they are just as involved in propaganda. For the BBC:

Yes, the BBC is propaganda.

How the BBC manufactures consent for the British State.

the307.substack.com

How the BBC Spreads Lies: How to read propaganda | The Vineyard of the Saker

A bird's eye view of the vineyard

thesaker.is

For the CBC:

The CBC’s “Voice of Canada”: Weapon of Cold War propaganda

By Richard Saunders Throughout the Cold War, Canada’s Department of External Affairs wielded the CBC’s International Service (CBC-IS)1 as a propaganda weapon in what it called “political warf…

canadianpatriot.org

For the NPR:

How To Create NPR Propaganda: As Seen In A Hit Piece Against Me – Lee Camp

leecamp.com

 

[Rogue Valley]

Plenty of evidence suggests they are just as involved in propaganda. For the BBC:

Your newest lame sources....

the307
thesaker
canadianpatriot
leecamp

Im done going back and forth with you. You do your thing and I'll do mine.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Plenty of evidence suggests they are just as involved in propaganda. For the BBC:

Yes, the BBC is propaganda.

How the BBC manufactures consent for the British State.

the307.substack.com

How the BBC Spreads Lies: How to read propaganda | The Vineyard of the Saker

A bird's eye view of the vineyard

thesaker.is

For the CBC:

The CBC’s “Voice of Canada”: Weapon of Cold War propaganda

By Richard Saunders Throughout the Cold War, Canada’s Department of External Affairs wielded the CBC’s International Service (CBC-IS)1 as a propaganda weapon in what it called “political warf…

canadianpatriot.org

For the NPR:

How To Create NPR Propaganda: As Seen In A Hit Piece Against Me – Lee Camp

leecamp.com

You really need to learn how to evaluate sources.......that is quite the collection of nut jobbery right there.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Your newest lame sources....

the307
thesaker
canadianpatriot
leecamp

Im done going back and forth with you. You do your thing and I'll do mine.

I agree with you.

This Russian shill is a complete and total waste of time.