Russia Today (News)

[just_words]

I did agree it was bias but brings a bit of balance to the shiite churned out by our news chanels.

They do cover stories of corruption in the country and accept it's a problem.

 

Yeah, to the level of the first phone hacking inquiry here, "oooh a free dinner, yep forgotten!"

[Arguendo]

RT may be biased; it may give out questionable & propaganda type news reports, but to be fair so does the Western media outlets, the UK, USA as well as many other countries dish out vast amounts of propaganda, for example, the Murdoch empire in the UK, for the last few years the conservatives have been the best thing since sliced bread, where as Labour has been portrayed as being evil reincarnated, quite recently we had newspapers & tv stations broadcasting that Libya had come in from the cold, we had members of the royals, senior politicians sitting in tents shaking Gadafis’ hand, handing back terrorists, signing trade deals, everything was positive within the media, then when it didn’t suit he suddenly becomes a terrorist again, papers were spouting old news about arms/explosives given to the IRA, the obscenities of showing a released dying terrorists celebrating going home, everything in the media concerning Libya & Gadafi is now so negative. Media outlets within our own country are just as bad, the difference being we believe the crap their telling us, because hey western media doesn’t lie does it.

[just_words]

RT may be biased; it may give out questionable & propaganda type news reports, but to be fair so does the Western media outlets, the UK, USA as well as many other countries dish out vast amounts of propaganda, for example, the Murdoch empire in the UK, for the last few years the conservatives have been the best thing since sliced bread, where as Labour has been portrayed as being evil reincarnated, quite recently we had newspapers & tv stations broadcasting that Libya had come in from the cold, we had members of the royals, senior politicians sitting in tents shaking Gadafis’ hand, handing back terrorists, signing trade deals, everything was positive within the media, then when it didn’t suit he suddenly becomes a terrorist again, papers were spouting old news about arms/explosives given to the IRA, the obscenities of showing a released dying terrorists celebrating going home, everything in the media concerning Libya & Gadafi is now so negative. Media outlets within our own country are just as bad, the difference being we believe the crap their telling us, because hey western media doesn’t lie does it.

 

To some extent I don't disagree, but concerning Gadafi, well, he is a prat and he did say he'd changed then kicked off again, no lies there!

 

But RT does it in such a way where our media would just not be tolerated if they did the same. Personally from what i've seen Iran is shocking, various other countries will show executions in the daytime, mmm lovely tv (er propaganda)

 

Here's something for ya!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reporters_Without_Borders_2009_Press_Freedom_Rankings_Map.svg

[flamingjimmy]

Do you mean because they reported on The Bilderberg group,Bohemian Grove and have given airtime to campaigners for 9/11 truth ?

 

No, I mean the way they reported on those things, I've read several of their stories and watched a few of their videos, you conspiracy dudes are always linking to it, that's how I became aware of it.

[Arguendo]

To some extent I don't disagree, but concerning Gadafi, well, he is a prat and he did say he'd changed then kicked off again, no lies there!

 

But RT does it in such a way where our media would just not be tolerated if they did the same. Personally from what i've seen Iran is shocking, various other countries will show executions in the daytime, mmm lovely tv (er propaganda)

 

Here's something for ya!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reporters_Without_Borders_2009_Press_Freedom_Rankings_Map.svg

 

The point is, he’s always been a prat, a dictator in a country whose history post world war two has been controversial, but our media, especially our own state TV BBC, only air what’s in the countries best interests, he continually moved from being respected to despised, I also remember when the BBC aired the WMD stories, when they stepped out of line with the Dr Kelley incident, politicians were in uproar, many were crying how can a state owned media outlet, broadcast anti government stories, they were soon fetched back into line with the threat of deregulation & withdrawal of public funding. I agree our media as does the US do it in a way which I would say is in a more concealed way and yes they wouldn’t get away with how RT go about it. As for countries showing distasteful images of executions, although I find it repulsive; unfortunately that’s their way of life, as long as they don’t show it here then I have no interest in those countries, leave me alone & I’ll leave you alone that’s my policy.

[donkey]

There are different types of journalist in any country. There are the ones who tell it like it is because they care about such ridiculous concepts as truth and justice, and then there are the assorted toadies, rats, and the rabid attack dogs who will always blindly support the most popwerful. In Russia, the first category don't have a good life expectancy. Over here, they are a lot freer, but unfortunately, most the public seem to find the toadies and rats more entertaining and the rabid dogs more in tune with their own political outlook (if you can call mindless worship of the alpha male cult a political outlook.)

 

So in short, whether it be Moscow, Tehran or London, most journalists are a bunch of crapheads, and that is the way most people seem to like it.

[andygardener]

RT is very clear about what it is, kleptocracy propaganda for putin and his cronies.

 

Anyone who takes it seriously is a congenital idiot.

[just_words]

The point is, he’s always been a prat, a dictator in a country whose history post world war two has been controversial, but our media, especially our own state TV BBC, only air what’s in the countries best interests, he continually moved from being respected to despised, I also remember when the BBC aired the WMD stories, when they stepped out of line with the Dr Kelley incident, politicians were in uproar, many were crying how can a state owned media outlet, broadcast anti government stories, they were soon fetched back into line with the threat of deregulation & withdrawal of public funding. I agree our media as does the US do it in a way which I would say is in a more concealed way and yes they wouldn’t get away with how RT go about it. As for countries showing distasteful images of executions, although I find it repulsive; unfortunately that’s their way of life, as long as they don’t show it here then I have no interest in those countries, leave me alone & I’ll leave you alone that’s my policy.

 

I think your missing the point!

 

There is a difference of keeping a party line to a degree, and the way RT pushes and leads is offensive in it use of persuasive language.

 

Note how you mention that some did go against the mainstream and there was a lot more than just WMD and had been going on for years before the naive public were forced to look at the situation and do something.

[upinwath]

Is it me or is RT a little bit biased about America.!

 

It is biased and it is state sponsored.

Just like the voice of America, you have to take it with a pinch of salt but it is handy sometimes. It reported recent riots in Israel where the BBC and other news services totally ignored them.

Caveat - Most of that coverage was clearly very anti Israeli and the riots were hardly shown but widely talked about.

The Soviet (Yer - it still acts that way) news agency is very anti America and supports Palestine because of that rather than any actual interest in the people of that embattled state.

[vResistance]

It is biased and it is state sponsored.

Just like the voice of America, you have to take it with a pinch of salt but it is handy sometimes. It reported recent riots in Israel where the BBC and other news services totally ignored them.

Caveat - Most of that coverage was clearly very anti Israeli and the riots were hardly shown but widely talked about.

The Soviet (Yer - it still acts that way) news agency is very anti America and supports Palestine because of that rather than any actual interest in the people of that embattled state.

 

They also reported the fact Gadaffi had offered to have elections (Billions of pounds worth of bombs ago),but wasn't accepted by NATO or as far as I,ve seen reported by our main media.

Why would they want to keep that quiet ?

 

http://rt.com/news/interview-gaddafi-libya-usa/

“We told them ‘You want elections? OK – let’s do elections. We will bring observers from Russia, from America, from the African Union, from the European Union, from the United Nations to supervise the elections. And if we win – you should accept the results, if we lose – congratulations.’ They answered ‘no.’," Saif al-Islam Gaddafi went on. "Our goal is to march to Tripoli. We have to march to Tripoli and occupy Tripoli. By force. So, you want to fight? OK, we will fight. And you will lose. And soon, because you have no chance. You have 40 ships in front of our coast, you have hundreds of airplanes, you have 17 satellites from America and France, you have everything, but you are losing every day. Why? Because the people are not with you."