Press TV Shutdown

[Yahweh]

That's a shame (for Ken Livingston and Lauren Booth).

 

And George Galloway the friend of Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.

[HeadingNorth]

To be honest, I didn't find it too interesting. Their bias was so obvious it was pretty embarrassing at times.

 

The only time it was worth watching (was) when it's reports were coming in from the Occupied Territories, and how the Palestinians were treated on a daily basis at the hands of the brutal IDF.

 

Given their embarassingly obvious bias, what made you think that those reports would be accurate even though almost nothing else was?

[mj.scuba]

And George Galloway the friend of Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.

 

Good one, forgot about Galloway. How can they (Galloway, Booth, Livingston et al) put themselves on the payroll of a government that executes homosexuals and adulterers, they must be devoid of morals.

[anywebsite]

Given their embarassingly obvious bias, what made you think that those reports would be accurate even though almost nothing else was?

 

All media is biased. They just had a different bias to the rest of the UK news media. If it's an obvious bias then that makes it easier to account for, you already know their agenda. You should listen to many different news organisations with a different and/or opposing bias to make up your own mind.

 

No matter how biased their stories are there is usually some element of truth in there.

[plekhanov]

All media is biased. They just had a different bias to the rest of the UK news media. If it's an obvious bias then that makes it easier to account for, you already know their agenda. You should listen to many different news organisations with a different and/or opposing bias to make up your own mind.

 

No matter how biased their stories are there is usually some element of truth in there.

Golden mean is a fallacy.

 

"Bias" is one thing propaganda is another, the only thing you learnt from press TV (or Pravda) is what the Iranian regime (or USSR) would like people to believe.

[anywebsite]

Golden mean is a fallacy.

 

"Bias" is one thing propaganda is another, the only thing you learnt from press TV (or Pravda) is what the Iranian regime (or USSR) would like people to believe.

 

I never mentioned golden mean. Whether it's propaganda or news is down to your own opinion (or bias). One person's propaganda is another's important news, it's a bit like the distinction between freedom fighter or terrorist.

 

A lot of Iranians think the BBC is all propaganda.

 

All media is biased, it's impossible to create an unbiased news organisation, even if they make sure that they're only reporting facts they have to select what to report on or not.

 

Some things that aren't reported on by most UK media the Iranians will report & vice versa. If they're reporting on the same thing then they're likely to have a different perspective on it. It's good to hear as many different views as possible, even if you don't agree with them all. Even if it's completely & verifiably false propaganda it's good to know what those governments (or organisations) want their people to believe, you don't have to believe it yourself.

 

I read Pravda, Xinhua, Al Jazeera, Wall Street Journal, Kavkaz, NY Times & lots of other foreign news, as well as the usual UK news organisations.

 

In short, don't believe everything you read in any newspaper.

[hard2miss]

War on Iran seems more likely now (i.e. no reporting from the actual country when it happens)...

I totally agree, the first strike is always on communication and the ability to create propaganda.

 

This although seemingly insignificant maybe a major step in the bigger picture of war against THE major Islamic ideologically ran country.

 

It get scary only if you know what to look for, nice post CXC3000.

[anywebsite]

I totally agree, the first strike is always on communication and the ability to create propaganda.

 

This although seemingly insignificant maybe a major step in the bigger picture of war against THE major Islamic ideologically ran country.

 

It get scary only if you know what to look for, nice post CXC3000.

 

War is certainly more likely, but only slightly.

 

They weren't shut down by the UK government because of what they broadcast, or because they're Iranian. It was shut down by the Iranian government not applying for a proper license to broadcast here. They'd probably decided to stop funding it, but wanted the propaganda value of being shut down by the UK government.

[plekhanov]

I never mentioned golden mean.

You didn't need to consciously or not your post reeked of it.

 

Whether it's propaganda or news is down to your own opinion (or bias). One person's propaganda is another's important news, it's a bit like the distinction between freedom fighter or terrorist.

 

A lot of Iranians think the BBC is all propaganda.

 

All media is biased, it's impossible to create an unbiased news organisation, even if they make sure that they're only reporting facts they have to select what to report on or not.

 

Some things that aren't reported on by most UK media the Iranians will report & vice versa. If they're reporting on the same thing then they're likely to have a different perspective on it. It's good to hear as many different views as possible, even if you don't agree with them all. Even if it's completely & verifiably false propaganda it's good to know what those governments (or organisations) want their people to believe, you don't have to believe it yourself.

 

I read Pravda, Xinhua, Al Jazeera, Wall Street Journal, Kavkaz, NY Times & lots of other foreign news, as well as the usual UK news organisations.

 

In short, don't believe everything you read in any newspaper.

This is just laughable, whilst there is no objective difference between a terrorist and freedom fighter there is an objective difference between a propaganda organisation & a news organisation.

 

As to your pathetic retort that "A lot of Iranians think the BBC is all propaganda" so what? People in nations without free speech, subject to government propaganda can obviously be made to believe all manner of objectively false things.

 

By all means if you've got the time read every news story in 20 different sources (including those you acknowledge to be propaganda machines) and then engage in your abject golden mean drenched attempts to average it all out to find the truth. I'll stick to devoting whatever time I have to trying to find out what's happening in the world from as good a source as I can find.

[anywebsite]

Then you'll only be influenced by that one source, believe everything they say & wouldn't know if it was propaganda or not, just like the people in countries where they don't have the freedom to use multiple news sources. If you keep arguing against having the freedom to read whatever news sources you want before you know it we'll just have a Soviet Pravda style BBC.

 

You can only see that most of what PressTV broadcast is a laughable attempt at propaganda because you've had more exposure to a wider variety of news sources than your average Iranian. The only reason UK media isn't just as bad as them is because we have access to lots of different sources & can cross check them.