• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When Russian news and Ukrainian news contradict each other, who do you tend to believe?

When Russian news and Ukrainian news contradict each other, who do you tend to believe?

  • the Ukrainian side

    Votes: 47 77.0%
  • Putin's side

    Votes: 4 6.6%
  • I am not sure

    Votes: 2 3.3%
  • other

    Votes: 8 13.1%

  • Total voters
    61

Rumpel

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
37,289
Reaction score
6,900
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
When Russian news and Ukrainian news contradict each other, who do you tend to believe?
 
The Ukrainian side, of course. Putin lies and suppresses factual news in his country to brainwash and control his people, most people know that, it's been obvious for a long time.
 
The Ukrainian side, of course.

Russians are no doubt lovely people.

But their government is filled with liars and butchers.

During the Soviet days, there was a joke about their two main newspapers. One was called (in English) "Truth" and the other was called "News." Well, as you have already guessed, the joke went that there was no truth in "Truth," and there was no ...
 
This poll is very simple to dissect.

Most reasonable people will look for information about this war from outlets leaning towards the west, which will mean a focus on Ukraine from those in Ukraine. This means everyone from most US outlets to those across the EU.

However, the Russian disinformation campaign via FoxNews presents an alternative to that which clearly leans Putin.

Let that sink in.
 
The Ukrainian side, of course. Putin lies and suppresses factual news in his country to brainwash and control his people, most people know that, it's been obvious for a long time.
That is why I only listed: "Putin's side" - and not "Russia's side".
 
Now:

  • Total voters 5
4 x for Ukraine
1 x for Putin
 
Curious that you phased the polling as a choice between "Ukraine's side" and "Putin's side."

Not that you're wrong to do it, mind you - I do think this invasion is more about Putin and his ambitions than it is about Russian interests.
 
Since the beginning of the war I tended to regard Ukrainian claims with skepticism, because while I clearly side with them, of course they're going to package information in a way that suits them.

However, I've found that the info they've been releasing has ended up being consistently verified and reliable. Russia lies big, and so far Ukraine really hasn't been lying much, if at all.

Also, this person makes an extremely astute point:

 
.

I voted "other".

For starters, there are no Russian news. So there is little from that side to contradict. Even when there was news from the Russian side, that is before hostilities and shutdown of Russian channels, I always accepted news from Russians with a grain of salt, and only if it could be corroborated on western channels.

With start of hostilities, it is also wise to take Ukrainian news with a grain of salt.
 
When Russian news and Ukrainian news contradict each other, who do you tend to believe?

Obviously the Ukrainian side because Russia is provably dishonest to defend itself. Vlaidimir Putin is Donald Trump of the East. The Russia Constitution does not enumerate the right to free press.
 
Since the beginning of the war I tended to regard Ukrainian claims with skepticism, because while I clearly side with them, of course they're going to package information in a way that suits them.

However, I've found that the info they've been releasing has ended up being consistently verified and reliable. Russia lies big, and so far Ukraine really hasn't been lying much, if at all.

Also, this person makes an extremely astute point:


Yeah I have had a similar shift. Like I pretty much assumed they were 2-3x over reporting Russian casualties. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Plus the US often verifies much of the information they put out.
 
Better question: Who lies more, Putin or Trump?

Trump the Terrorist has nothing to do with the topic, so that is not a better question here.

But since you asked, the answer is obviously Trump the Terrorist. He rarely tells the truth.
 
Russia lies and spreads fake news, Ukraine tends to tell the truth but often uses emotive language and hyperbole when telling it.
 
Well, I guess one example is this:

Ukraine: Russians are massacring our citizens.
Russia: Actually, Ukrainians are massacring themselves.



Both can be equally correct. Take Mariupol. Who is massacring who? If the decision is taken to defend Mariupol then that is where Ukrainian soldiers and weapons will have to be dug in, and naturally that is also where the invading weapons have to be targeted. The civilians get massacred by the exchanges of both sides.
 
Russia lies and spreads fake news,


Not anymore. Russian channels have been censored. We cannot be relied upon to determine for ourselves what is fake or not.



Ukraine tends to tell the truth but often uses emotive language and hyperbole when telling it.


Which Ukraine? The ethnic pro western Ukraine or the ethnic pro Russian Ukraine of east Ukraine?
 
Curious that you phased the polling as a choice between "Ukraine's side" and "Putin's side."

Not that you're wrong to do it, mind you - I do think this invasion is more about Putin and his ambitions than it is about Russian interests.
You got it right!
That's why I worded this poll that way.
 
Both can be equally correct. Take Mariupol. Who is massacring who? If the decision is taken to defend Mariupol then that is where Ukrainian soldiers and weapons will have to be dug in, and naturally that is also where the invading weapons have to be targeted. The civilians get massacred by the exchanges of both sides.
You're illustrating Scherba's point perfectly. By telling big enough lies what you're effectively doing is pushing the overton window further from the truth.

The idea is that if one person claims that 2+2=4 and another claims that 2+2=18, then logically the truth must be that 2+2=11. And what this demonstrates is that the "the truth must be in the middle" thinking is extremely flawed and is intentionally exploited by the kind of Russian disinformation you post here.
 
Last edited:
Which Ukraine? The ethnic pro western Ukraine or the ethnic pro Russian Ukraine of east Ukraine?
Please do not play diificult or hard to get ....
Some always enjoy more to criticise a poll whichever way possible or not possible - rather than to vote.
To those I say: Please create your own poll.
 
Since the beginning of the war I tended to regard Ukrainian claims with skepticism, because while I clearly side with them, of course they're going to package information in a way that suits them.

However, I've found that the info they've been releasing has ended up being consistently verified and reliable. Russia lies big, and so far Ukraine really hasn't been lying much, if at all.

I never doubted Ukraine news media favors itself in its reporting about the Border War. The fact that Ukraine news already is proven to be accurate tells us not to care how biased they are, unlike the Russia news stories being proven false.

Also, this person makes an extremely astute point:

Who made what point? I can't read embedded tweets (and have no reason to create a Twitter account).
 
I never doubted Ukraine news media favors itself in its reporting about the Border War. The fact that Ukraine news already is proven to be accurate tells us not to care how biased they are, unlike the Russia news stories being proven false.

I don't mind skepticism regarding such things being my first impulse.

Who made what point? I can't read embedded tweets (and have no reason to create a Twitter account).

Sounds like you won't be able to see a lot of stuff then.
 
I don't mind skepticism regarding such things being my first impulse.

That is fine with me.

Sounds like you won't be able to see a lot of stuff then.

It only happens when someone posts a tweet URL. I can read tweets that are copied like pictures using the context menu.
 
Back
Top Bottom