[Unthinking Majority]

And what political / ideological grouping is not about winning? Who really cares about truth and fairness more than winning?

People who aren't sociopaths?

[Rich]

People who aren't sociopaths?

I'm not suggesting the majority of people are like Joseph Stalin or even Richard Nixon. The majority of politically engaged people may shy away from conscious falsehoods, but still their discourse is so selective, manipulative, distorted and there is so much bad faith argument that it is effectively lying when looked at in totality.

It seems to me that partisanship is an evolved response. That when ever human beings in communities have collective choices, when ever there are collective decisions to be made, humans divide into partisan groups on the issue. As societies become more complex, these single decision groups become more permanent factions, eventually becoming the political parties of the modern world.

[Unthinking Majority]

I'm not suggesting the majority of people are like Joseph Stalin or even Richard Nixon. The majority of politically engaged people may shy away from conscious falsehoods, but still their discourse is so selective, manipulative, distorted and there is so much bad faith argument that it is effectively lying when looked at in totality.

Yes this is true much of the time. My point is that why the heck would we allow a foreign government actively working to crush us to be able to broadcast their propaganda in our countries?

I have no problem with Russian citizens doing it, or anyone else. I just wouldn't allow a very adversarial foreign government to manipulate the populace through information warfare via weaponized propaganda. Just like I wouldn't support Russian spy planes to fly over my country.

This is the game of international relations. And since we have no choice but to play it, we should be playing to win against those that mean us harm.

[Rancid]

The relative openness in the west. Not just media, but also university systems and businesses culture is something Russia and China have exploited a lot. It has often been noted by security experts as a big issue that threatens the openness itself.

Generally speaking, I agree, if they cannot reciprocate, then they should not be allowed to reap the benefits of the relative openness the west offers.

This is also true for businesses. I don't understand why we cannot force 51% of Huawei's operations in the US to be owned by the US government for example. Or create laws that specifically apply to them only.

That is, openness for everyone else, but not Russia and China. Fuck those tinpot gutter governments.

[Rugoz]

This is the game of international relations. And since we have no choice but to play it, we should be playing to win against those that mean us harm.

That's not how it works though. I you propagate a universalist ideology, you have to stick to it yourself to a certain degree.

[AFAIK]

@Rancid The TPP placed restrictions on state owned enterprises and the govt's role in the economy. Any unilateral move wouldn't survive one round in the US courts, though.

[blackjack21]

This is an anti-Western propaganda media outlet funded and controlled by the Russian government. It is a national security issue and should be banned from cable companies and other distributors. I support freedom of speech, I support anti-government speech, I support regular Russian citizens saying whatever anti-Western opinions/facts they want. I don't support an enemy government of the West with very bad intentions pumping bullshit into people's homes and phones for the purpose of weakening these countries to score geopolitical points. It's outrageous.

As long as it is appropriately labelled and the source and motivation of its broadcast noted, why wouldn't the West be able to handle that? The so-called mainstream media in the West is far more insidious and more hostile to Western culture than anything coming out of Russia. The ability of the Chinese to censor US movies and television is far more problematic. So why single out Russia?

Close but no dice. Its news segments are an anti-'western propaganda' outlet. Obvious lies about Russia and China and other countries under 24/7 western imperialist attack are debunked. Then besides the news bulk of shows on RT are cool positive documentaries about random things in many other countries.

Even then, we still don't get much of the frank criticisms of the West from someone like Vladimir Putin, even from RT.

The Russian government are only out to harm western countries, it's not about "truth" or "fairness", it's about winning.

Well, that's debatable. If you want to know what's going on with the Gilets Jaunes from the United States, for example, RT is your only source. The US media censors that sort of coverage.

This is a government that is banned from the Olympics because it has systemic government-orchestrated doping programs and has tampered with doping lab data.

Really? The Olympics is your purity test?

It's always amusing to me when people get mad about Russia Today but have nothing to say about Radio Free Europe or Radio Free Asia.

Or Voice of America...

But RT is still relevant because they broadcast news stories that Western media refuses to air and I happen to be interested in.

That's exactly it. That's why I like DW as well.

[Pants-of-dog]

If we look at the history and foreign policies of western countries, it would seem that Russia is allowed to broadcast propaganda because both Russia and the USA are capitalist. Friedman’s Golden Arches theory.

Now, Friedman was obviously incorrect, or at least, simplistic. Two countries with significant economic ties can be at war. But this is not about countries. Russia and the USA are not in conflict.

Instead, Putin and his faction are trying to amass power and wealth and are using RT as part of that. Much like Trump and his faction are and get help from Fox and Breitbart, and Biden gets support from CNN and centre right outlets.

That is how capitalism works.

[ThirdTerm]

From 2013 to 2016, Al Jazeera English's online live stream and the programs were blocked in the United States. RT now needs to register as a foreign agent after the Russian hacking debacle. If RT angers American regulators any further, RT will lose its FCC license. RT America has been around only for a decade and its future is uncertain.

[skinster]

It still baffles me that people cry about media they don't even consume, you know you don't have to read it or watch it?

Besides, RT gives a platform to leftists in the West. Along with rightwingers. Why is this a terrible thing?

It's like all the crybaby cancel culture where people think getting rid of certain people or sites is going to stop those ideas from being. Newsflash: they'll go elsewhere. Better to have them closer so things you disagree with have the space to be debated, rather than crying over them like a pissy-baby that can't stand differing opinions.

I mean ffs we live in rightwing-land in the West full of rightwing media every fucking day, do you hear us crying about it?

[wat0n]

I mean ffs we live in rightwing-land in the West full of rightwing media every fucking day, do you hear us crying about it?

All the time

But you're right, I also don't see a reason to ban RT from broadcasting. At most, it should be clear it's owned by the Russian government and that's pretty much it.

[skinster]

All the time

Not really.

But you're right, I also don't see a reason to ban RT from broadcasting. At most, it should be clear it's owned by the Russian government and that's pretty much it.

It already is clear. As is the same for Chinese media or some left media in Latin America. They put on YouTube this is X-state-funded or whatever. They never say the same of the BBC, which is state-funded propaganda too.

[wat0n]

I'm thinking more about TV broadcasts. YouTube is actually more accurate in that respect, but many of these channels are centered on traditional TV broadcasting.

And that adds another layer to the discussion, does it even make sense to worry so much about this when traditional TV may be on its way out?