• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Russian (genocidal) internal propaganda and goals about Ukraine

IsThisTheLife said:
What is my point, would you say?
Click to expand...

I have no idea.
What was the point of your post.
Which of those articles, to you, indicates the Ukraine needed to be invaded, it's population killed and Russia allowed free reign in deciding what should happen to their neighbors?
 
IsThisTheLife said:
Of course. There has never been any inconsistency in the reporting of events in Ukraine. You can always depend on the corporate media to form your opinions for you.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have done some minimal level of research before mindlessly cutting and pasting random nonsense.
 
Incidentally...what is this chimera called "corporate media"? For me, corporate media would be something like the Times of India group here that actually provides a biased news and PR service across all their media platforms for a price...like a sort of subscription service. Many major companies and political organizations in India avail of this service. Is The Guardian known to do this?
 
Susheel said:
Incidentally...what is this chimera called "corporate media"? For me, corporate media would be something like the Times of India group here that actually provides a biased news and PR service across all their media platforms for a price...like a sort of subscription service. Many major companies and political organizations in India avail of this service. Is The Guardian known to do this?
Click to expand...
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
 
IsThisTheLife said:
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
Click to expand...

So, which "corporation" owns The Guardian?
 
IsThisTheLife said:
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
Click to expand...

Well, apart from the parts of the mainstream media which are publicly owned.

Of course, just because a media outlet is corporately owned doesn't necessarily mean that it is factually inaccurate or that it's pushing a particular agenda.

Then again, a media outlet which isn't corporately owned doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't factually inaccurate or that it isn't pushing a particular agenda. My experience of the "alternative media" where it differs significantly from the mainstream media (or at least the parts of it that value factual accuracy and comparative lack of bias) is that it is often much less factually accurate and is definitely pushing a particular agenda
 
IsThisTheLife said:
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
Click to expand...

Which media is the media you say we should follow?
 
IsThisTheLife said:
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
Click to expand...

Communicating poorly then rolling your eyes when someone asks what you meant doesn't actually make you look like the clever one in the conversation.
 
IsThisTheLife said:
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
Click to expand...

Boring. You don't actually have an argument here, by the look of it. The comparison picture that you've shared and your follow up earn you an F for quality of argument. While it is certainly true that "corporate media" is problematic in a bunch of ways and there is fairly certainly much agreement to be had when you're appropriately identifying such, this attempt is utter crap all around.
 
IsThisTheLife said:
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
Click to expand...

you might have a point ... if you also put in the MSM headlines about Russia, and they looked better than Ukraine.

But this "Ukraine isn't perfect, ergo it's bad" BS is just plain Russian Propaganda.
 
The actual Nazis were racist, homophobic, probably transphobic (although there were few trans people back then to persecute), and of course, anti-Semitic.

Yet somehow the nation with the Jewish president, with black and gay people volunteering in its armed forces, the one that just enlisted a transgender reporter, - is the Nazi nation.

And the one with increasingly overt antisemitism in its propaganda, the one that cites the presence of black people serving in the Ukr military and the existence of gay/trans pride parades in Ukraine all as justification for the war, is actually the one fighting the Nazis?

If you believe that, I've got a bridge in Crimea to sell to you.

With Kyiv being bombed again, they're also starting up (again) on the rumors of Zelensky fleeing the capital. Astute readers with a memory span greater than that of a goldfish will remember that the pro-Russian idiots ran with that rumor every day for about the first three months of the war. Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
 
Childlike Empress said:
You don't understand the situation. Nobody in Russia still believes that propaganda victims in "the West" are reachable. The "Western" propaganda stunts by the usual suspects don't reach the Russian population. They know that the grass isn't greener on the other side.
Click to expand...

It seemed to me that ThePrestige was taking more about you than people in Russia*.

I am not in Russia. You are not in Russia. I'd be surprised if anybody reading this thread is in Russia. The stuff you keep vomiting up isn't working on us because we don't have the benefit of Russian state controlled media to give us the real facts.

You need to find propaganda that will work on us. We all have a distrust of the Russian government and Putin in particular, so there's no point in quoting his words here: we all think he's an unscrupulous liar with no principles except Putin first. Sorry, but that's what we've been fed and we believe it.

Similarly, we don't look on Russian media's connections with the government as a good thing. We don't trust the Russian media because it has connections to the government. So there's no point in quoting them at us either. We think they're shills for the aforementioned alleged unprincipled liar.

We've all been taken in by our corrupt Western media that runs rampant spreading lies with no proper government oversight. It doesn't matter that you are right and we are wrong. Your postings here are not working. They only serve to make you look bad in our evil Western imperialist eyes.

*accepted that I might be seeing something that isn't there.
 
Yeah, I was asking CE why they keep shoving propaganda messages that are clearly intended for Russians and tankies, rather than propaganda tailored to western audiences.

I understood their answer to be, "[non sequitur], but also we don't have any propaganda for western audiences because we believe westerners are already a lost cause."

I was tempted to ask why, then, waste time telling tankie in-jokes here, where they're doomed to fall flat? But then I realized that for some people, the heckling is the juice, and anyway I try not to spend too much time each day on jelly-nailing.
 
Last edited:
IsThisTheLife said:
The fact that you can't even acknowledge the obvious reality that the entirety of 'mainstream media' is corporate owned (hence 'corporate media') bespeaks the state of denial you live in. The tap-dancing you did here just leaves me going "huh?".
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
The Guardian is owned by a trust, but then facts get in the way of Putinista rants....
 
theprestige said:
Yeah, I was asking CE why they keep shoving propaganda messages that are clearly intended for Russians and tankies, rather than propaganda tailored to western audiences.

I understood their answer to be, "[non sequitur], but also we don't have any propaganda for western audiences because we believe westerners are already a lost cause."
I was tempted to ask why, then, waste time telling tankie in-jokes here, where they're doomed to fall flat? But then I realized that for some people, the heckling is the juice, and anyway I try not to spend too much time each day on jelly-nailing.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's how I understood CE's position, but I was enjoying composing my previous reply so much I decided to ignore it.

That does lead to the question of why CE is bothering to post at all, of course.
 
jeremyp said:
That does lead to the question of why CE is bothering to post at all, of course.
Click to expand...

I have a half-formed theory about that. However much the bombing, shelling and outright murdering of Ukrainian civilians makes me despise Russia, somehow there's always a propaganda slant on it that makes it even worse. A lot of Putin's remaining power seems to be based on playing to deep rooted Russian paranoia and pushing the message that the evil West wants nothing more than to destroy the concept of a Russian nation. The more irritating the Russian propaganda and the more revolting the actions of Russia, the more the natural revulsion of other nations makes it easier to sustain that narrative. Russian propaganda is so transparently false not to try to convince the gullible, but to disgust the moral. I have no evidence for this, of course, but I think it's a point of view worth considering.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
I have a half-formed theory about that. However much the bombing, shelling and outright murdering of Ukrainian civilians makes me despise Russia, somehow there's always a propaganda slant on it that makes it even worse. A lot of Putin's remaining power seems to be based on playing to deep rooted Russian paranoia and pushing the message that the evil West wants nothing more than to destroy the concept of a Russian nation. The more irritating the Russian propaganda and the more revolting the actions of Russia, the more the natural revulsion of other nations makes it easier to sustain that narrative. Russian propaganda is so transparently false not to try to convince the gullible, but to disgust the moral. I have no evidence for this, of course, but I think it's a point of view worth considering.

Dave
Click to expand...

Maybe. Still, it's probably safer and more reliable to view it like much of the rest of authoritarian... everything - it's about projecting and exerting power.
 
Dave Rogers said:
I have a half-formed theory about that. However much the bombing, shelling and outright murdering of Ukrainian civilians makes me despise Russia, somehow there's always a propaganda slant on it that makes it even worse. A lot of Putin's remaining power seems to be based on playing to deep rooted Russian paranoia and pushing the message that the evil West wants nothing more than to destroy the concept of a Russian nation. The more irritating the Russian propaganda and the more revolting the actions of Russia, the more the natural revulsion of other nations makes it easier to sustain that narrative. Russian propaganda is so transparently false not to try to convince the gullible, but to disgust the moral. I have no evidence for this, of course, but I think it's a point of view worth considering.

Dave
Click to expand...

If you'd ask me if that's a thing the West should do BEFORE the Ukrainian invasion by Russia I would've thought that's pretty damned nuts. Now... yeah lets make each oblast its own country. 46 weak "Russias" sounds good to me. So good job Putin on scoring yet another own goal.
 
catsmate said:
:rolleyes:
The Guardian is owned by a trust, but then facts get in the way of Putinista rants....
Click to expand...

which has never been able to keep it afloat financially, hence the begging pop-ups on their "News Website Of The Year" - if they tried to put cringe like this;
Fiercely independent, we keep pressure on government and business to mitigate, decarbonise, go green. We report relentlessly on the climate crisis – its causes, consequences, casualties – as the world gets hotter and weather patterns turn more destructive, more deadly. We’ve rejected fossil fuel advertising and carbon investments, and are cutting our own emissions.
Click to expand...
... behind a pay-wall no one would read it.

Anonymous benefactors have saved them from bankruptcy to the tune of £10's of millions on multiple occasions. You'll have to excuse my cynicism about who they might be and their motivation.
 
IsThisTheLife said:
Of course. There has never been any inconsistency in the reporting of events in Ukraine. You can always depend on the corporate media to form your opinions for you.
Click to expand...

I think we should all leave it as an exercise to you to hilight and discuss the logical fallacies you committed there. This is really from the early classes of "Skepticism 101".
 
IsThisTheLife said:
which has never been able to keep it afloat financially, hence the begging pop-ups on their "News Website Of The Year" - if they tried to put cringe like this;

... behind a pay-wall no one would read it.

Anonymous benefactors have saved them from bankruptcy to the tune of £10's of millions on multiple occasions. You'll have to excuse my cynicism about who they might be and their motivation.
Click to expand...

LOL
Too much a coward to admit that media being "corporate" is not your beef after all. You just don't like media that are skeptic of your favorite dictatorships.


Darat said:
Which media is the media you say we should follow?
Click to expand...

I notice IsThisTheLife did not dare to answer this, so repeated. IsThisTheLife, which media is the media you say we should follow?

Perhaps we could break it down by kind of ownership:

Owned by a private corporation
Owned by a public or public law entity
Owned by a private individual
Owned by a trust
Not owned at all (like a free of salary cooperatrion of many enthusiasts; think Wiki)

If CNN is no good, how about the BBC? If CNN and the BBC are no good, how about Fox? If CNN, BBC and Fox are no good, how about the Guardian? If CNN, BBC, Fox and the Guardian are no good, how about Wikipedia? If all of these ar enot okay, who IS okay? Russia Today? Pravda? The Russian MoD Twitter channel?
 
The Guardian is a disgusting propaganda outlet staffed by some of the most loathsome metropolitans on the planet.
 
Oystein said:
LOL
Too much a coward to admit that media being "corporate" is not your beef after all. You just don't like media that are skeptic of your favorite dictatorships.




I notice IsThisTheLife did not dare to answer this, so repeated. IsThisTheLife, which media is the media you say we should follow?

Perhaps we could break it down by kind of ownership:

Owned by a private corporation
Owned by a public or public law entity
Owned by a private individual
Owned by a trust
Not owned at all (like a free of salary cooperatrion of many enthusiasts; think Wiki)

If CNN is no good, how about the BBC? If CNN and the BBC are no good, how about Fox? If CNN, BBC and Fox are no good, how about the Guardian? If CNN, BBC, Fox and the Guardian are no good, how about Wikipedia? If all of these ar enot okay, who IS okay? Russia Today? Pravda? The Russian MoD Twitter channel?
Click to expand...

Nuts much?
 
Oystein said:
If CNN is no good, how about the BBC? If CNN and the BBC are no good, how about Fox? If CNN, BBC and Fox are no good, how about the Guardian? If CNN, BBC, Fox and the Guardian are no good, how about Wikipedia? If all of these ar enot okay, who IS okay? Russia Today? Pravda? The Russian MoD Twitter channel?
Click to expand...

The blog of the crackhead that works at the local coffee shop. Unfortunately, he lacks the funds to send reporters to Kyiv. Bloody typical.
 
IsThisTheLife, which media is the media you say we should follow?
 
crescent said:
The actual Nazis were racist, homophobic, probably transphobic (although there were few trans people back then to persecute), and of course, anti-Semitic.

Yet somehow the nation with the Jewish president, with black and gay people volunteering in its armed forces, the one that just enlisted a transgender reporter, - is the Nazi nation.

And the one with increasingly overt antisemitism in its propaganda, the one that cites the presence of black people serving in the Ukr military and the existence of gay/trans pride parades in Ukraine all as justification for the war, is actually the one fighting the Nazis?

If you believe that, I've got a bridge in Crimea to sell to you.

With Kyiv being bombed again, they're also starting up (again) on the rumors of Zelensky fleeing the capital. Astute readers with a memory span greater than that of a goldfish will remember that the pro-Russian idiots ran with that rumor every day for about the first three months of the war. Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the Unicorn Battalion
 
IsThisTheLife said:
You can always depend on the corporate media to form your opinions for you.
Click to expand...

Coming from someone who reposts Chinese state propaganda, this is priceless. Thank god you got such a good trustworthy source to base your opinions on, unlike us mindless sheeple.
 
Last edited:
Myriad said:
IsThisTheLife, which media is the media you say we should follow?
Click to expand...

The Global Times is apparently a trustworthy enough "media" for IsThisTheLife to consider it important enough to share. For those who are not aware, "The Global Times" is official Chinese state propaganda. They don't even pretend it's anything else.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom