this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2026
-23 points (33.8% liked)
World News
41929 readers
397 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Is spamming russian propaganda a nice hobby?
"Propaganda" according to? Western "media"? LMBO yeah, the empire NEVER lies! libs...
On the off chance that you are ignorant rather than disingenuous:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)
the holy scripture of liberalism
Yeah because wikipedia certainly isn't influenced by CIA and western imperialist propaganda
No one "accused" RT of being state media here.
They "accused" RT of being media (of course media is propaganda lol).
Unless you think only state media can be propaganda, and corporate media can never ever be propaganda. In which case, you'd be an ancap. Bears > ancaps.
And what if it's state media? BBC is state media. All bourgeoisie media in the west all serve capital.
This is your media
How did they report on the genocide in Palestine?
It is hilarious that you appear to have a notion of RT not serving capital. Who owns capital in Russia?
If you're going to pretend to be an 'enlightened centrist' while uncritically parotting RT then you should go look in the mirror and remove your clown outfit before attempting to converse with adults.
There's an obvious split between capitalist factions in Russia and the rest of the West.
RT serves Russian capital, not Western capital. Western media serves Western capital, but not Russian capital. Duh?
No shit, Sherlock? That was the entire point of how silly it is to take the word of Russia's state media with regard to their war of conquest in Ukraine.
I don't look to centrist, right-wing, or capital protective media outlets to learn about the genocide in Gaza either, because I have more than two brain cells to rub together.
'Serving capital' isn't some abstract strawman that can handwave away literally every criticism of any media outlets. It means something specifically, in the context of the motivations for the outlet.
And yet you still assume that the narrative of "conquest" must be true, because of what you've been told by Western media.
Please share with the class the independent journalism that would illustrate how Russia's "special military operation" in Ukraine is justified and not simply a dick-measuring exercise for Putin.
You can GTFO with any dumbass memes about Nazis throwing salutes, if a decade-long war was launched against every country that has Nazis then no country would be able to get their britches on in the morning.
Do I need to show you the history of Western meddling in elections and color revolutions and coups? Or the Western ambition towards conquering Asia? I think those are pretty well known and speak for themselves.
With that history in mind, we can't dismiss Russia's claims about Maidan being a Western-backed coup. Even if you don't want to assume Russia's side of the story is true, you're making an additional leap by assuming the Western "conquest" narrative.
Previously:
Previously:
Previously:
i suspect that such a thing doesn't exist anymore -- it's all either state mouthpieces like rt that were created to dispense propaganda or it's propaganda laundered through american state department backed ngo's that dispense it tiny pieces on wikipedia, cnn, npr, cbc, abc, bbc, le monde, der speigel, etc. in the same way that fox news dispenses conservative think-tank "studies" to maga.
If you were critical towards media then you wouldn't be having such a kneejerk reaction to a Russian source while being completely silent towards the unbelievable amount of western media who are complicit in genocide. They are constantly posted everywhere in reddit or .world uncritically and you never see such a kneejerk reaction to those sources.
Do some introspection and stop talking like a redditor.
EVERY source is "influenced," which is why it's so important to diversify your sources to get a better picture of the full story. Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it does a hell of a job trying to be as impartial as is possible when humans are involved. If you still don't trust them, that's fine - but don't trust your preferred side to give you the full story, either - or not try to slant the story towards propaganda to take advantage of confirmation bias for their own purposes.
Who counts as "humans" in this sentence?
Apparently not you, in all your glorious perfection.
Who else doesn't count as humans in your holy scripture?
People who confuse "holy scripture" with reality, as you just did.
You dropped your mask too early. Boring.
LOL
Wow. Such an impressive intellectual "rebuttal" - incredibly well researched, and thoughtful.
🙄 Pathetic.
it has all the effort it deserves
FTFY