RT

Ofcom spokesperson: “The Russian news channel RT broadcasts in the UK under licences issued by Ofcom as the broadcasting regulator.

“Ofcom has an ongoing duty to be satisfied that all broadcast licensees are fit and proper to hold a licence.

“We have heard the Prime Minister’s statement in the House of Commons this afternoon and we await her further statement on Wednesday. We will then consider the implications for RT’s broadcast licences.”

| from …….. | OFCOM.ORG.UK | 12-Mar-2018 @ 18:56 |

I beg your pardon from across the Channel, but what were the statements spoken by Theresa May about RT in the House of Commons? Thank you. ^_^"

Not that this will have any major impact on RT's fledgling audience in the UK. The diehards will still watch the channel on YouTube or the website.

From the Guardian's live politics blog:

17:49


18:06

You go after one - you have to go after all. And if you dig deep enough, with that vauge 'wishy-washy' Daily Mail and Telegraph pleasing statement, then you would shut down numerous channels.

I know that RT is funded by the Kremlin, but is it's editoral policy dictated by it as well - in the same way Pravda was during the Soviet era? Well, take a look at any given news bully. In the few I've watched, if there's been a direct statement out of the Red Square press office and onto to Kevin or Bill's RT autocue, it's been very well diluted.

Well propaganda is usually subtle, not explicit

Cue the child like tweets of RT's Margarita Simonyan if RT UK is pulled off linear tv later this week.

Yes. RT reporters in the field are effectively scripted from Moscow (have had this confirmed by people who work alongside them) - and the whole narrative they spin is entirely driven by the Kremlin propaganda machine.

They have a very specific role in the West, to sew seeds of doubt, to suggest that domestic news providers are somehow not telling 'the whole truth'. It's more sophisticated than 'Russia Good, West Bad' - it's more about spinning 'there isn't one truth' kind of narratives...

It's insidious and there is absolutely no way I would work for them. I'd leave the industry if they were my only employment option.

Though doesn't every international state backed broadcaster do that to some extent, including some would argue the BBC. It is why so many states are willing to bankroll international news channels. Propaganda is probably as prevelent as it's ever been.

"Some people say" is a classic technique straight out of the RT (and Fox News) book though... No need for facts - just report other people saying something fictitious...

The BBC editorial team - whether domestic or World Service - don't have their running orders and 'news lines' dictated to them by Number 10...

RT's editorial links to the Kremlin in being told the 'party line' are well known. RT reporters are amazed that BBC field reporters are allowed to broadcast what they know to be true, live. RT reporters are told by Moscow what to say and how to spin it, before they are allowed on-air...


Yes - the BBC World Service has been the most honourable example of this. It's there to promote British values of free and objective reporting, independent of government influence. That kind of soft power is worth a lot more in reputational terms for a country, and a system of government, than propaganda outlets.

Also one of President Trumps favorite lines.

It's no co-incidence that some of the mannerism's of RT/DT/RE are similar.