LL
London Lite
Founding member
EL
Alan, there’s a difference between a story from a particular point of view and outright fabricating details which are then debunked by independent fact checkers.
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
LL
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
It's become trendy to bash the West including the broadcasters. RT have capitalised on this as part of their propaganda.
RT America have used activists like Abby Martin in the past when it was part of the course to bash Obama, but when she refused to go to Crimea after Russia 'invaded' a territorial part of Ukraine based on an alleged rigged referendum where they wished for Russian rule, Ms Martin left the channel after it all died down. RT I believe was the only channel that claimed Russia had no involvement in the Crimean coup while other broadcasters were reporting the facts.
London Lite
Founding member
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
It's become trendy to bash the West including the broadcasters. RT have capitalised on this as part of their propaganda.
RT America have used activists like Abby Martin in the past when it was part of the course to bash Obama, but when she refused to go to Crimea after Russia 'invaded' a territorial part of Ukraine based on an alleged rigged referendum where they wished for Russian rule, Ms Martin left the channel after it all died down. RT I believe was the only channel that claimed Russia had no involvement in the Crimean coup while other broadcasters were reporting the facts.
LL
Which is why it's more important than ever that we maintain our impartiality rules in the UK. Otherwise Sky News would be as partisan as Fox News is in the states and to an extent, Sky News Australia since Murdoch took over.
London Lite
Founding member
This partisan view of the world we have these days is dangerous because it means we can’t always be aware of our own psychological biases which guide and lead our actions and our thoughts.
Which is why it's more important than ever that we maintain our impartiality rules in the UK. Otherwise Sky News would be as partisan as Fox News is in the states and to an extent, Sky News Australia since Murdoch took over.
JO
You see, elmarko, I do actually have sympathy with what you're saying. You'll note that I have never defended RT or any other broadcaster in my arguments.
Where you're losing me is about the independent fact checkers. There's a website called BBC Watch which "monitors BBC coverage of Israel for accuracy and impartiality." This website is obviously pro-Israel and seems to criticise everything the BBC does as it gets its "facts" wrong "intentionally" through bias, anti-Semitism, etc.
In a situation like Israel + Palestine, the truth is very fluid depending on your point of view and it would be easy for either side to accuse the BBC or anyone else of lying or misrepresentation and provide evidence for it.
I love the BBC and understand why people wish to defend it. However, its news operation is an arm of the British government, consistently takes a pro-establishment line and has made plenty of mistakes that you and other defenders would call an accident and others would call deliberate lies. That said, it's not really that different to other news outlets but the music is a bit nicer.
johnnyboy
Founding member
Alan, there’s a difference between a story from a particular point of view and outright fabricating details which are then debunked by independent fact checkers.
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
You see, elmarko, I do actually have sympathy with what you're saying. You'll note that I have never defended RT or any other broadcaster in my arguments.
Where you're losing me is about the independent fact checkers. There's a website called BBC Watch which "monitors BBC coverage of Israel for accuracy and impartiality." This website is obviously pro-Israel and seems to criticise everything the BBC does as it gets its "facts" wrong "intentionally" through bias, anti-Semitism, etc.
In a situation like Israel + Palestine, the truth is very fluid depending on your point of view and it would be easy for either side to accuse the BBC or anyone else of lying or misrepresentation and provide evidence for it.
I love the BBC and understand why people wish to defend it. However, its news operation is an arm of the British government, consistently takes a pro-establishment line and has made plenty of mistakes that you and other defenders would call an accident and others would call deliberate lies. That said, it's not really that different to other news outlets but the music is a bit nicer.
CI
You see, elmarko, I do actually have sympathy with what you're saying. You'll note that I have never defended RT or any other broadcaster in my arguments.
Where you're losing me is about the independent fact checkers. There's a website called BBC Watch which "monitors BBC coverage of Israel for accuracy and impartiality." This website is obviously pro-Israel and seems to criticise everything the BBC does as it gets its "facts" wrong "intentionally" through bias, anti-Semitism, etc.
BBC Watch are not fact-checkers. They're a right wing pro-israel group.
Alan, there’s a difference between a story from a particular point of view and outright fabricating details which are then debunked by independent fact checkers.
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
This idea that because the West doesn’t always act well that Russia can't also act bad is hilarious. People think they are literally blameless.
You see, elmarko, I do actually have sympathy with what you're saying. You'll note that I have never defended RT or any other broadcaster in my arguments.
Where you're losing me is about the independent fact checkers. There's a website called BBC Watch which "monitors BBC coverage of Israel for accuracy and impartiality." This website is obviously pro-Israel and seems to criticise everything the BBC does as it gets its "facts" wrong "intentionally" through bias, anti-Semitism, etc.
BBC Watch are not fact-checkers. They're a right wing pro-israel group.
UK
I love the BBC and understand why people wish to defend it. However, its news operation is an arm of the British government, consistently takes a pro-establishment line and has made plenty of mistakes that you and other defenders would call an accident and others would call deliberate lies. That said, it's not really that different to other news outlets but the music is a bit nicer.
You’ve just demonstrated your wilful ignorance of the BBC, whether now or throughout its history. Don’t hide behind ‘some people’ - if you genuinely think the BBC has (and presumably continues to) broadcast ‘deliberate lies’ come out and say it.
I love the BBC and understand why people wish to defend it. However, its news operation is an arm of the British government, consistently takes a pro-establishment line and has made plenty of mistakes that you and other defenders would call an accident and others would call deliberate lies. That said, it's not really that different to other news outlets but the music is a bit nicer.
You’ve just demonstrated your wilful ignorance of the BBC, whether now or throughout its history. Don’t hide behind ‘some people’ - if you genuinely think the BBC has (and presumably continues to) broadcast ‘deliberate lies’ come out and say it.
Last edited by UKnews on 25 September 2017 2:10pm - 2 times in total
CI
It's all part and parcel of the very nature of RT. They've based their whole schtick on not being a part of the mainstream media, but their own biases are so obvious, and yet some people continue to hold up RT as some becaon of truth and honesty, when they aren't any different to the likes of CCTV, CGTN and Press TV.
Somebody split all those rants about media bias off into another thread already!
It's all part and parcel of the very nature of RT. They've based their whole schtick on not being a part of the mainstream media, but their own biases are so obvious, and yet some people continue to hold up RT as some becaon of truth and honesty, when they aren't any different to the likes of CCTV, CGTN and Press TV.
SI
At least Max Keiser isn't that bad. He's pretty hilarious compared to CNN's, Richard Quest for a journalist/economist and with his wife, the show is better than the fake news on BBC and CNN 
Now, although I am a bit of a conspiracy theorist, I have to painfully admit that there's probably a bit of Russian state propaganda to all his , anti-establishment, anti-central bank currencies, anti-Wall Street rants.
Still better than the news on CNN International. If the conspiracies that the main media broadcasters are churning out 'half truths' and scaring us with the terrorism propaganda, then it's probably better to watch interesting but most likely fake conspiracies than depressing and fake news. Just my 0.02 cents.
Now, although I am a bit of a conspiracy theorist, I have to painfully admit that there's probably a bit of Russian state propaganda to all his , anti-establishment, anti-central bank currencies, anti-Wall Street rants.
Still better than the news on CNN International. If the conspiracies that the main media broadcasters are churning out 'half truths' and scaring us with the terrorism propaganda, then it's probably better to watch interesting but most likely fake conspiracies than depressing and fake news. Just my 0.02 cents.
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
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...