Support NeoGAF

[Captain Smoker]

I often wonder how popular RT actually is. On their YouTube account, almost all of their 'most popular videos' are viral videos and nothing to do with politics.

Problem is that smaller rightwing outlets and internet blogs / facebook pages share their bullshit and quote them as a source and mix it with other bullshit.

Internet is full of their shit, literally.

 

[Yaboosh]

I'd feel better if it were Rotten Tomatoes doing it.

 

[Maxim726X]

RT America is the only palatable media channel and I'm on board with this. The WP gaffe of quoting PropOrNot is a much more egregious example of shoddy journalism

Of course you would think this... Of course.

 

[Boney]

It's not independently financed, though, is it? Isn't it financed almost entirely by Russia?

Right. They are 100% financed by the Russian state. Public Broadcasting Service in America also recieves funds from government agencies, it is not unusual for countries to fund public media, especially television due to the high infrastructure costs and good accountability practices has allowed them to act like the 4th state as they should be.

So can the information be trusted if there's an agenda behind it? I think it depends on the information and one shouldn't rush to judgement. Same as the Wikileaks, the information provided shouldn't be brushed over to cover for power because of whatever intent of the organization.

RT serves part of Russia's soft power, no question. But the network has been able to find it's footing by significantly dialing back on the manufactured propaganda and instead has been able to shift towards what is marginalized on television.

No. They have some good stuff scattered messily throughout but they're as bad as US media. Difference being that one is a puppet of a foreign hostile state and the other is a puppet of big business and their own government's political establishment.

You still have to filter that shit out.

I don't watch it live, but since hosts I follow from other means also have shows there I get to see the logo pop out in their shows. Personalities like Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Jesse Ventura and to a lesser extent Larry King have a track record that is able to legitimize their shows.

I think TeleSur and Al Jazeera are/were networks that provide the same type of critical coverage.

 

[Moose Biscuits]

I'm enjoying this arms race of Fake News leading to Fake News Checkers, then that leading to Fake Fake News Checkers. Will we have independent reviewers to tell us which Fake News Checkers are Fake? Will that lead to the growth of Fake Fake Fake News Checkers?

 

[Boney]

If I want good, incisive programming that speaks truth to Western power but also isn't directly serving the interests of a dictator, I can listen to NPR, PBS, Democracy Now, a zillion podcasts, and even the BBC.

I'm sure FakeCheck will tell us all about which stories about Trump are made up by sore loser Democrats, and which stories about Putin are smear jobs by Western imperialists who want to take down a local superhero that just wants to stick up for traditional values.

Democracy Now is my go to news channel. NPR and The Real News complement them well enough by having good discussions and guests. RT is very distant on my list and I don't actively follow them, but what I do see doesn't really clash with the former networks.
For example, they've been 100% critical of Trump in literally everything I've seen, as opposed to sycophants like Van Jones on CNN praising Trump as Presidential because apparently he can read above a 4th grader.

On CNN, Amy Goodman has raised how different CNN International has to be to be able to compete with the likes of the BBC, because outside America, viewers aren't as guillable. Corporate Media in American undermines democracy in the same way Russia Today does in Russia, and like CNN International, RT America has some stark differences.

 

[CarpeDeezNutz]

My fears are assuaged comrade.

 

[Clefargle]

Lol RT

 

[maquiladora]

lol...Troll level : Maximum

OP includes no link because RT is banned on NeoGAF.

 

[Sickboy007]

They're really quite good at muddying the waters.

 

[Palette Swap]

Of course they would. When dumb chain mails are disproved by news, you do fake news, when fake news are disproved by fact checking, you do fake checking.

This is an arms race where "truth" is weaponized.

 

[jelly]

They're really quite good at muddying the waters.

Yeah, it's quite something. How do you fight it. Feels like we've lost already unless people's lives get so shit and join the dots.

 

[KernelPanic]

They're trying to pivot people from MSM(hardly flawless) to BS propaganda sites.

Scary shit.

 

[WillyFive]

I often wonder how popular RT actually is. On their YouTube account, almost all of their 'most popular videos' are viral videos and nothing to do with politics.

They were huge in Facebook among the elderly.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Yeah, it's quite something. How do you fight it. Feels like we've lost already unless people's lives get so shit and join the dots.

That, unfortunately, is how I feel a lot of the time with stuff like that. I really don't know how in the world you fight this new age of disinformation. That's why it feels like there's not even a point in fighting or living anymore. It's like the war was lost, and most of us are just remnants of the losing side who refuse to accept the outcome.

 

[Vincent Grayson]

Problem is that smaller rightwing outlets and internet blogs / facebook pages share their bullshit and quote them as a source and mix it with other bullshit.

Internet is full of their shit, literally.

Yup. My friend who is all in on Trump, conspiracy theories, etc is *constantly* posting RT links about total bullshit.

 

[spwolf]

I love how the site injects its own political slant (and how) instead of coldly fact checking it.

But hey, at least it's better than the Russian Foreign Ministry's fact checking tool, which is a total riot as far as sourcing and decency go.


Shit, I'm already convinced.

they started with ministry, moved to RT... pretty obvious.

 

[Pedrito]

Yeah, it's quite something. How do you fight it. Feels like we've lost already unless people's lives get so shit and join the dots.

There was a poll released this week showing that 65% of people in Canada don't trust the media. In Canada...where nothing controversial or major has happened. It's hopeless.

 

[gaugebozo]

Arrrrre we at war with Russia?

 

[Boney]

That, unfortunately, is how I feel a lot of the time with stuff like that. I really don't know how in the world you fight this new age of disinformation. That's why it feels like there's not even a point in fighting or living anymore. It's like the war was lost, and most of us are just remnants of the losing side who refuse to accept the outcome.

I think local resistance, which is anemic after half a century of repression is the only answer. Which is funny that it's coming out on this thread since (I'm rechecking it at the moment) On Contact had an episode where they briefly covered Saul Alinsky, father of community organizing and conducted an interview with one of his students Micheal Geecan on his book 'Going Public: The community guide to organizing citizen action'.

Urban decay can sap the determination—not to mention the soul—of anyone who experiences it. But there are forces that can and do reverse it. They are not spectators, or critics, or occasional demonstrators. They are groups of citizens, encouraged and trained to take power with dignity and creativity and unrelenting determination, and to make it work for them, day by day, month by month, and year to year.

For more than twenty-five years, Michael Gecan has been a professional organizer with Industrial Areas Foundation, which has trained thousands of little-known community groups from Brownsville, Texas, to Brownsville, Brooklyn. Having grown up witnessing at close range the destructive effects of political patronage on powerless, disenfranchised Chicago communities, Gecan knows from experience that strong relationships in the public sphere and sustained and disciplined organizing can spark the public and private alchemy necessary to achieve sidewalks, parks, schools, housing--and the collective renewal that results.

Full of good advice and entertaining accounts of success, Going Public is the story of those who, says Gecan, ”succeed in unexpected ways and in unexpected places."

It's a perfect example of the rich content that is possible outside traditional media landscapes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wodOZ-VZCUE

 

[PsionBolt]

I'd feel better if it were Rotten Tomatoes doing it.

Yeah, that's the way that my brain reads "RT" at first glance. I actually paused for a second before concluding that no, no matter how I think about it, the Rotten Tomatoes style of evaluation is sadly not appropriate for news.

 

[besada]

It's a perfect example of the rich content that is possible outside traditional media

Michael Gecan does Op-Eds for the NYT. If I want to hear what he has to say, I hardly have to look outside the traditional media, much less to RT.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

What I'm saying is that their editorial shows are good content, and like any other media one has to be able to discriminate the content offered.

RT America (not Russia Today) offers content that you won't find in corporate media. There's an intellectual push that gives air to conversations about the death of the arts and public displays of violence like poverty or prostitution. Corporate Media has been consolidated into the hands of a handful corporations with their own interests and are rife with yellow journalism.

Hook line and sinker. How'd that bait taste?

 

[a.wd]

Hey Americans!

Russia is running rings around you when it comes to propaganda n shit.

They have effectively and comprehensively destabilised your government, society and authoritative standing in the world.

You look silly as fuck and that's coming from a Brit in the middle of this brexit bullshit.

Please sort your shit out, this wave of right wing nonsense is sweeping the world and pretty soon no one is going to fight shit.

Cheers

The rest of the fucking world.

 

[Boney]

Michael Gecan does Op-Eds for the NYT. If I want to hear what he has to say, I hardly have to look outside the traditional media, much less to RT.

What a weird issue to raise. The fact that this particular individual writes columns for the NYT should provide a good precedent for the type of content On Contact provides. The more meaningful voices reverberate on our media, the better. The risk of exposing oneself to contaminated information in RT also has to acknowledge the contaminated information that permeates the Times, mostly through omission. So with that in mind, one shouldn't be quick to rely on prejudice which ironically mostly comes through propaganda, and instead focus on the individual journalists that have the precedent of doing and continue to be doing good work in other outlets.
Print media and visual media are also inherently different. The language of television is completely different, it has to adapt to short cliches and sound bites to be able to operate. Michael Gecan could not have a 30 minute interview on CNN, less mention something Sennett's structure of power. A conversation between two intellectuals can bring forth some new ideas. So again, having valuable information should be celebrated since lord knows there's a dearth of it, especially in a format that is tailored for easy consumption yet doesn't dumbs it down.

 

[Sickboy007]

I'm in the 'it's hopeless' camp right now. I hope something changes but it really does seem like the wave of the future.