NG
Like the phrase goes, the truth hurts sometimes.
Indeed it does - but I'm not sure what 'truth' has to do in a discussion about RT...
Thing is, noggin, that "truth", for want of a better word, is often a subjective opinion.
I don't agree. RT would love you to believe that though... Then they can bend it... Or state that 'one person's truth isn't another person's truth'. Which in general is specious nonsense.
The Russians, the Iranians, and a whole host of other governments/peoples that the British government is "against" think the same about our news media.
No - the Russians and Iranians know the truth isn't favourable to their positions, so want to suppress it. That's not the same thing.
If RT is a provocative news station to "us", BBC Persian is a highly provocative news station to Iran.
Apples and Oranges.
RT is state sponsored propaganda. It is provocative because it broadcasts falsehood intentionally, and is far from unbiased. It has a position. That position is almost universally the same position as the Putin government.
BBC Persian is publicly funded (but no longer Grant-in-Aid FCO funded) unbiased broadcasting of facts. It is provocative because it provides truthful and factually verified information, in Persian, that Iran's rulers would rather its people didn't hear. It contradicts the 'state line' and casts doubt on the honesty of Iran's rulers.
Yes - the British Government initiated the formation of the BBC Persian TV service (and previously funded the BBC Persian radio services for decades) - but the British Government have always taken the view that unbiased broadcasting is a better advert for British values, than propaganda. The government sees the benefit of Britain being seen as having a free broadcast media by those living in countries without any.
The government is directly funding some new language services, but the existing World Service operation is now funded by the licence fee. The FCO does have an input into the regions the BBC broadcast in - but not what the BBC broadcasts. That's the key and vital difference that people like to ignore.
RT is state controlled, World Service was state funded. They are not the same...
noggin
Founding member
Russia Today
Like the phrase goes, the truth hurts sometimes.
Indeed it does - but I'm not sure what 'truth' has to do in a discussion about RT...
Thing is, noggin, that "truth", for want of a better word, is often a subjective opinion.
I don't agree. RT would love you to believe that though... Then they can bend it... Or state that 'one person's truth isn't another person's truth'. Which in general is specious nonsense.
Quote:
The Russians, the Iranians, and a whole host of other governments/peoples that the British government is "against" think the same about our news media.
No - the Russians and Iranians know the truth isn't favourable to their positions, so want to suppress it. That's not the same thing.
Quote:
If RT is a provocative news station to "us", BBC Persian is a highly provocative news station to Iran.
Apples and Oranges.
RT is state sponsored propaganda. It is provocative because it broadcasts falsehood intentionally, and is far from unbiased. It has a position. That position is almost universally the same position as the Putin government.
BBC Persian is publicly funded (but no longer Grant-in-Aid FCO funded) unbiased broadcasting of facts. It is provocative because it provides truthful and factually verified information, in Persian, that Iran's rulers would rather its people didn't hear. It contradicts the 'state line' and casts doubt on the honesty of Iran's rulers.
Yes - the British Government initiated the formation of the BBC Persian TV service (and previously funded the BBC Persian radio services for decades) - but the British Government have always taken the view that unbiased broadcasting is a better advert for British values, than propaganda. The government sees the benefit of Britain being seen as having a free broadcast media by those living in countries without any.
The government is directly funding some new language services, but the existing World Service operation is now funded by the licence fee. The FCO does have an input into the regions the BBC broadcast in - but not what the BBC broadcasts. That's the key and vital difference that people like to ignore.
RT is state controlled, World Service was state funded. They are not the same...