Google to Derank Russian Media Sites

[Megalith]

Eric Schmidt, Executive Chariman of Alphabet, says the company is working to ferret out Russian propaganda from Google News after facing criticism that Kremlin-owned media sites had been given plum placement on the search giant’s news and advertising platforms.

“We’re well aware of this one, and we’re working on detecting this kind of scenario you’re describing and deranking those kinds of sites,” Schmidt said, after being asked why the world’s largest search company continued to classify the Russian sites as news. “It’s basically RT and Sputnik,” Schmidt added. “We’re well aware and we’re trying to engineer the systems to prevent it.”

 

[Krazy925]

Anyone know of a good news aggregator other than Google News? I tried Flipboard a couple years ago and that thing was a POS.

 

[GandraZz]

Are I'm one only who thinks, that western world is digging grave for it self? in all fronts.

They didn't have real enemy/boogeyman for long time, so started inventing their own.

 

[katanaD]

Anyone know of a good news aggregator other than Google News? I tried Flipboard a couple years ago and that thing was a POS.

i like fark.com


so.. they are starting to delist propaganda websites?? then when are they delisting fox news, cnn, etc?? it seems nowadays most of the major "news" sites is propaganda based for which other political party they represent. you had better start delisting them all then

 

[jardows]

Anyone know of a good news aggregator other than Google News? I tried Flipboard a couple years ago and that thing was a POS.

drudge?

 

[Delicieuxz]

The US claims to believe in democracy... yet overthrows any government it doesn't like, even when the government was democratically-elected.
The US claims to believe in justice... yet threatens, invades, takes the resources of, and runs propaganda campaigns against any country that doesn't do explicitly what the US wants, or whose sovereign choices are expected to impede US profits in some manner.
The US claims to believe in freedom of speech... yet does everything it can to prevent the voices being heard of those who shine light on the things that US media won't, and which the US wishes would not be looked at.
The US claims to believe in freedom of the press, yet forces news agencies that use their freedom to report on things the US doesn't like to register as foreign agents, restricting their press rights.

The US is probably the foremost disingenuous, duplicitous, and hypocritical country in the world.

And RT is fair more honest, fair, and objective than any major mainstream US news source.

 

[gusphase]

I like how nobody gave a shit about hacking, fake news, etc until Trump won. NOW we have to make sure that it never happens again. According to the Stanford study, it's unlikely "fake news" had any impact one way or another. Meanwhile Twitter actively tried to censor and bury the Podesta emails hashtag, and that' perfectly okay.

 

[Neslepax]

And RT is fair more honest, fair, and objective than any major mainstream US news source.

...and RT is funded by the Russian government. A government which likes to interfere in the politics of all of its neighbors, tried to throw the Ukrainian election, annexed Crimea with rather sketchy methods, supports Assad and Syria, eliminates any meaningful political opposition to the ruling party (either with imprisonment or just disappearing someone), made protesting illegal, etc. Now, I am not saying that the United States is innocent. We have our own bag of goodies when it comes to domestic and global activities. But don't pretend that Russia or RT is "holier than thou." The real difference, that I think pisses a lot of people off, is that the United States has a significantly bigger stick than everyone else and no one is really capable of doing anything about it (including US citizens).

 

[Delicieuxz]

...and RT is funded by the Russian government. A government which likes to interfere in the politics of all of its neighbors, tried to throw the Ukrainian election, annexed Crimea with rather sketchy methods, supports Assad and Syria, eliminates any meaningful political opposition to the ruling party (either with imprisonment or just disappearing someone), made protesting illegal, etc. Now, I am not saying that the United States is innocent. We have our own bag of goodies when it comes to domestic and global activities. But don't pretend that Russia or RT is "holier than thou." The real difference, that I think pisses a lot of people off, is that the United States has a significantly bigger stick than everyone else and no one is really capable of doing anything about it (including US citizens).

So what if RT is funded by the Russian government? The BBC is funded by the UK government, the CBC is funded by the Canadian government, France24 is funded by the French government, Deutsche Welle is funded by the German government, Euronews is funded by European governments.

Oh, and: Alhurra, Broadcasting Board of Governors, Voice of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty... are all funded by the US government, and they, in turn fund a ton of other news broadcasters, which are all US propaganda.

And the Washington Post is funded by the US government.


Government-funded news media is the norm in Western democracies.

A government which likes to interfere in the politics of all of its neighbors

Nothing to the extent that the US does:

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usne...nterfered-in-foreign-elections-multiple-times
https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/03/us-cuban-twitter-zunzuneo-stir-unrest
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-us-intervention-foreign-elections-20161213-story.html
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-6433af2c1dd6f271c8aa20edd8e99a1b-c
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-sent-taxpayer-money-oust-netanyahu/







The US interfered in Russia's elections when it worked to get Yeltsin elected (who then appointed Putin as his successor). And today the US spends over $50 million a year to influence Russia's politics: http://freewestmedia.com/2017/09/23...pend-millions-to-influence-russian-elections/


Additionally, the US was spending $200 million a year on social media troll farms, to spread propaganda around the world, in 2011.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/mar/17/us-internet-morals-clumsy-spammer
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...er-army-doesnt-belong-to-russia-idUSKCN10F1H5

Imagine how much the US is spending on social media propaganda in 2017.

And in 2012, the US made propaganda against its own citizenry legal:
http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5



So, hearing someone from the US cast accusations of anyone else interfering in governments is pretty rich, and hypocritical, since the US is the world's #1 interferer, overthrower, invader, meddler, in other countries.

I mean, does illegally invading Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, totally destroying their countries, causing the murders of over 1.5 innocent people, and spawning and causing the proliferation of international terrorism ring a bell? Yeah. That wasn't Russia, that was the US. Russia actually put a stop to it in Syria, for which the Syrian people are grateful.

supports Assad and Syria

And? Russia supports Assad because he is the legitimate head of the Syrian state, and the Syrian people overwhelmingly support him. Meanwhile, the US supports ISIS in Syria. The BBC just confirmed what the Russian government has been saying for a while, which is that the US allows ISIS to leave Iraq and enter into Syria. The BBC just reported that the US transported over 4,000 ISIS members with their families into Syria, from Raqqa, Iraq:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/raqqas_dirty_secret

Now, I am not saying that the United States is innocent. We have our own bag of goodies when it comes to domestic and global activities. But don't pretend that Russia or RT is "holier than thou." The real difference, that I think pisses a lot of people off, is that the United States has a significantly bigger stick than everyone else and no one is really capable of doing anything about it (including US citizens).

A lot of the stuff you and other criticize Russia for are actually US offences: The US illegally invaded the M.E. and caused the creation of ISIS, and purposefully destabilized Syria and sponsored terrorists in Syria. Russia cleaned the mess the US created up. Russia is the 'good guy' there, the US is the 'bad buy' there, if there are those things.

Regarding the regions of former Ukraine, the US orchestrated the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of former Ukraine, which supported better relations with Russia. In the aftermath of the US' violent and bloody coup, Russia lawfully accepted the application submitted by Crimea's government for accession to Russia. Russia was, again the 'good guy', only reacting to and mitigating the mess that the US created, while the US was the 'bad guy,' responsible for the chaos in the first place.

Had Russia not protected Crimea (which Russia did not do via any invasion, BTW, but through use of the troops Russia lawfully had in Crimea at the time of the US-sponsored coup in Kiev), then West Ukraine would surely have unilaterally invaded and attacked Crimea, just as West Ukraine has done to East Ukraine, in an attempt to force East Ukraine to submit to the illegal government in West Ukraine through use of threats and violence.

tried to throw the Ukrainian election, annexed Crimea with rather sketchy methods

No. Russia did not try to interfere in the Ukrainian government (which was already pro-Russia before the US-sponsored coup - which is WHY the US organized a coup of the Ukrainian government), and the next elections weren't for another 10 months. The US overthrew the Ukrainian government via a planned illegal coup, which violated and ended the Budapest memorandum by overruling and nullifying former Ukraine's constitution, which in turn disintegrated all former Ukrainian government, laws, territories, and treaties, which led to Crimea rightfully calling for a referendum on whether to reunify with Russia, after which Crimea's democratically-elected government formally applied to Russia's government for accession.

And Russia did not annex Crimea - that's just US propaganda. An annexation is the forceful taking of one territory by another, whereas an accession is the mutually agreed-to unifying of one territory with another.

Guess which one Crimea's return to Russia was an example of?

United Nations Development Programme polling of Crimeans on whether they would like Crimea to reunify with Russia:

Quarter Yes No Undecided

2009 Q3[38] 70% 14% 16%
2009 Q4[38] 67% 15% 18%
2010 Q1[39] 66% 14% 20%
2010 Q2[39] 65% 12% 23%
2010 Q3[39] 67% 11% 22%
2010 Q4[39] 66% 9% 25%
2011 Q4[40] 65.6% 14.2% 20.2%


“We adopted the declaration of independence to make the upcoming referendum legitimate and transparent. Now we declare ourselves the Republic of Crimea, we don’t add ‘autonomous’. Crimea won’t be a part of Ukraine even if the ousted president, Viktor Yanukovich, returns to power. The country where we lived doesn’t exist anymore. We are going our own way and we’re trying to do it quickly.”

- Vladimir Konstantinov, speaker of the Supreme Council of Crimea


"Crimeans have repeatedly told us to hold a referendum on joining Russia and on the status of Crimea’s autonomy. And of course we’ve been guided by the interests of our electorate. In various regions of the Crimea, the members of our parliament hold regular meetings with the voters, who have frequently asked to make the ultimate decision given the current situation in Ukraine: either to seek full autonomy, meaning an ability to adopt our own state laws; or to opt for secession, since the situation in Kiev has been spinning out of control."

- Sergei Aksyonov, chairman of the Crimean Council of Ministers

 

[OnceSetThisCannotChange]

With posts like these [H] will be listed as a Russian propaganda site by PropOrNot soon, just as Ron Paul was.

 

[Delicieuxz]

With posts like these [H] will be listed as a Russian propaganda site by PropOrNot soon, just as Ron Paul was.

Unfortunately, the US' definition of "Russian propaganda" is 'truth that doesn't support US propaganda.'

Also, check out Prop or Not asking people to help US propaganda by not talking about the US giving arms to terrorists in Syria:



BTW, the journalist who covered the story that the US was giving arms to terrorists lost her job after being harassed by her nation's (Bulgaria) security forces.

https://trud.bg/350-diplomatic-flights-carry-weapons-for-terrorists/
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...d-story-linking-cia-and-syria-weapons-flights

 

[tetris42]

i like fark.com


so.. they are starting to delist propaganda websites?? then when are they delisting fox news, cnn, etc?? it seems nowadays most of the major "news" sites is propaganda based for which other political party they represent. you had better start delisting them all then

You don't understand, they have lots of money for ads.

 

[haste.]

I like how nobody gave a shit about hacking, fake news, etc until Trump won. NOW we have to make sure that it never happens again. According to the Stanford study, it's unlikely "fake news" had any impact one way or another. Meanwhile Twitter actively tried to censor and bury the Podesta emails hashtag, and that' perfectly okay.

So where are you in Russia? Mainland or old Soviet Bloc? You have never posted on an article that isn't similar to this and spew the same things...

 

[scan13]

The US claims to believe in democracy... yet overthrows any government it doesn't like, even when the government was democratically-elected.
The US claims to believe in justice... yet threatens, invades, takes the resources of, and runs propaganda campaigns against any country that doesn't do explicitly what the US wants, or whose sovereign choices are expected to impede US profits in some manner.
The US claims to believe in freedom of speech... yet does everything it can to prevent the voices being heard of those who shine light on the things that US media won't, and which the US wishes would not be looked at.

The US is probably the foremost disingenuous, duplicitous, and hypocritical country in the world.

And RT is fair more honest, fair, and objective than any major mainstream US news source.

It looks like [H] should start filtering russian trolls out... They're literally everywhere lately, pretty easy to spot though.

 

[Madoc]

Censorship: it's what's for dinner.

 

[Neslepax]

So what if RT is funded by the Russian government? The BBC is funded by the UK government, the CBC is funded by the Canadian government, France24 is funded by the French government, Deutsche Welle is funded by the German government, Euronews is funded by European governments.

Oh, and: Alhurra, Broadcasting Board of Governors, Voice of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty... are all funded by the US government, and they, in turn fund a ton of other news broadcasters, which are all US propaganda.

Government-funded news media is the norm in Western democracies.




Nothing to the extent that the US does:

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usne...nterfered-in-foreign-elections-multiple-times
https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/03/us-cuban-twitter-zunzuneo-stir-unrest
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-us-intervention-foreign-elections-20161213-story.html
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-6433af2c1dd6f271c8aa20edd8e99a1b-c
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-sent-taxpayer-money-oust-netanyahu/







The US interfered in Russia's elections when it worked to get Yeltsin elected (who then appointed Putin as his successor). And today the US spends over $50 million a year to influence Russia's politics: http://freewestmedia.com/2017/09/23...pend-millions-to-influence-russian-elections/


Additionally, the US was spending $200 million a year on social media troll farms, to spread propaganda around the world.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/mar/17/us-internet-morals-clumsy-spammer
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...er-army-doesnt-belong-to-russia-idUSKCN10F1H5

Imagine how much the US is spending on social media propaganda in 2017.

And in 2012, the US made propaganda against its own citizenry legal:
http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5



So, hearing someone from the US cast accusations of anyone else interfering in governments is pretty rich, and hypocritical, since the US is the world's #1 interferer, overthrower, invader, meddler, in other countries.

I mean, does illegally invading Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, totally destroying their countries, causing the murders of over 1.5 innocent people, and spawning and causing the proliferation of international terrorism ring a bell? Yeah. That wasn't Russia, that was the US. Russia actually put a stop to it in Syria, for which the Syrian people are grateful.



And? Russia supports Assad because he is the legitimate head of the Syrian state, and the Syrian people overwhelmingly support him. Meanwhile, the US supports ISIS in Syria. The BBC just confirmed what the Russian government has been saying for a while, which is that the US allows ISIS to leave Iraq and enter into Syria. The BBC just reported that the US transported over 4,000 ISIS members with their families into Syria, from Raqqa, Iraq:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/raqqas_dirty_secret





A lot of the stuff you and other criticize Russia for are actually US offences: The US illegally invaded the M.E. and caused the creation of ISIS, and purposefully destabilized Syria and sponsored terrorists in Syria. Russia cleaned the mess the US created up. Russia is the 'good guy' there, the US is the 'bad buy' there, if there are those things.

Regarding the regions of former Ukraine, the US orchestrated the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of former Ukraine, which supported better relations with Russia. In the aftermath of the US' violent and bloody coup, Russia lawfully accepted the application submitted by Crimea's government for accession to Russia. Russia was, again the 'good guy', only reacting to and mitigating the mess that the US created, while the US was the 'bad guy,' responsible for the chaos in the first place.

Had Russia not protected Crimea (which Russia did not do via any invasion, BTW, but through use of the troops Russia lawfully had in Crimea at the time of the US-sponsored coup in Kiev), then West Ukraine would surely have unilaterally invaded and attacked Crimea, just as West Ukraine has done to East Ukraine, in an attempt to force East Ukraine to submit to the illegal government in West Ukraine through use of threat violence.





No. Russia did not try to interfere in the Ukrainian government (which was already pro-Russia before the US-sponsored coup - which is WHY the US organized a coup of the Ukrainian government), and the next elections weren't for another 10 months. The US overthrew the Ukrainian government via a planned illegal coup, which violated and ended the Budapest memorandum by overruling and nullifying former Ukraine's constitution, which disintegrated all former Ukrainian government, laws, territories, and treaties, which led to Crimea rightfully calling for a referendum on whether to reunify with Russia, after which Crimea's democratically-elected government formally applied to Russia's government for accession.

And Russia did not annex Crimea - that's just US propaganda. An annexation is the forceful taking of one territory by another, whereas an accession is the mutually agreed-to unifying of one territory with another.

Guess which one Crimea's return to Russia was an example of?

United Nations Development Programme polling of Crimeans on whether they would like Crimea to reunify with Russia:

Quarter Yes No Undecided

2009 Q3[38] 70% 14% 16%
2009 Q4[38] 67% 15% 18%
2010 Q1[39] 66% 14% 20%
2010 Q2[39] 65% 12% 23%
2010 Q3[39] 67% 11% 22%
2010 Q4[39] 66% 9% 25%
2011 Q4[40] 65.6% 14.2% 20.2%


“We adopted the declaration of independence to make the upcoming referendum legitimate and transparent. Now we declare ourselves the Republic of Crimea, we don’t add ‘autonomous’. Crimea won’t be a part of Ukraine even if the ousted president, Viktor Yanukovich, returns to power. The country where we lived doesn’t exist anymore. We are going our own way and we’re trying to do it quickly.”

- Vladimir Konstantinov, speaker of the Supreme Council of Crimea


"Crimeans have repeatedly told us to hold a referendum on joining Russia and on the status of Crimea’s autonomy. And of course we’ve been guided by the interests of our electorate. In various regions of the Crimea, the members of our parliament hold regular meetings with the voters, who have frequently asked to make the ultimate decision given the current situation in Ukraine: either to seek full autonomy, meaning an ability to adopt our own state laws; or to opt for secession, since the situation in Kiev has been spinning out of control."

- Sergei Aksyonov, chairman of the Crimean Council of Ministers

Many of these things I did not know, and I appreciate you providing sources for your information. I will definitely be reading these things later. However, my initial point still stands that I do not accept that Russian-funded RT is any less bogus or tainted than any other mass media outlet in the United States. They simply carry a different narrative and message and answer to a different master.

 

[westrock2000]

I have never read a Sputnik article. But RT has some good shit on it. They cover things in foreign markets that our news media won't touch. They also provide good alternative perspective to things that happen here.

I have never read an article on RT or watched a Ruptly video on YouTube and thought "hmm, that sounded like propaganda". I have thought "I could see how they would see it that way".

The way Crimea was handled here in the States was propaganda.

 

[westrock2000]

No. Russia did not try to interfere in the Ukrainian government (which was already pro-Russia before the US-sponsored coup - which is WHY the US organized a coup of the Ukrainian government), and the next elections weren't for another 10 months. The US overthrew the Ukrainian government via a planned illegal coup, which violated and ended the Budapest memorandum by overruling and nullifying former Ukraine's constitution, which disintegrated all former Ukrainian government, laws, territories, and treaties, which led to Crimea rightfully calling for a referendum on whether to reunify with Russia, after which Crimea's democratically-elected government formally applied to Russia's government for accession.

And Russia did not annex Crimea - that's just US propaganda. An annexation is the forceful taking of one territory by another, whereas an accession is the mutually agreed-to unifying of one territory with another.

You forgot the most important part.....that no one ever mentions. Why Crimea? Why just this one part in particular? It's not even on the border. I'll give a hint.....it goes back to 1783 and has something in common with the southern coast of Cuba.

 

[mstaab]

Oh I like this discussion a lot as someone who has been following this and the Kaspersky issue since the beginning. I am also an avid RT watch that turns it on every morning before work and have been viewing since before they had the Abby Martin on there and it has gotten progressively better since.

I do not even like Lee Camp that much but this is the best and explains everything in this post:

"Why Crimea?"

Crimea has a major Russian port on the Black sea

 

[theBrownLlama]

ironically, FB is the best news aggregrator, IF you only follow sources you like and click on them often in App. Then with some AI aid , your feed becomes all News. Lol . (like mine)

 

[FrgMstr]

I’m buying new water blocks because of you guys

At least we are still doing something right. Congrats on the Threadripper. epeen +10
Worthy of a Thanksgiving week poof!

 

[Delicieuxz]

It looks like [H] should start filtering russian trolls out... They're literally everywhere lately, pretty easy to spot though.

You gotta be careful with that confirmation bias.

Despite Russia reportedly funding online trolls, they're neither the first, or second to do so, nor are they the most prolific at it.

In the sea of state-sponsored troll-farm operations, any Russian trolls are vastly outnumbered by anti-Russia paid propaganda trolls:

Israel (confirmed by 2008):
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/31/british-army-facebook-warriors-77th-brigade

USA (confirmed by 2010 - 2011):
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/mar/17/us-internet-morals-clumsy-spammer
http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-e...er-army-doesnt-belong-to-russia-idUSKCN10F1H5

Canada (semi-confirmed by 2011):
https://i.imgur.com/Y4V9koa.png
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/information-services-staff-has-grown-15-under-harper-1.1319930
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/com...octor_payroll_rivals_that_of_the_commons.html
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/polit...millions-of-dollars-spent-on-media-monitoring

UK (confirmed by 2015):
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/31/british-army-facebook-warriors-77th-brigade

Ukraine (confirmed by 2015):
http://www.newsweek.com/35000-volunteers-sign-ukraines-information-army-first-day-310121

Poland (confirmed by 2017):
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201710111058132063-poland-cyber-army-analysis/
http://www.thenews.pl/1/9/Artykul/329648,New-‘cyber-army’-for-Poland


Heck, even my own Canada was likely doing it before Russia.

And, if wanting to have some kind of balance, to bring appearances closer to the truth, then I'd say that any Russian trolls should be let be, to help counter-balance against the far greater number of anti-Russia trolls.

 

[Deleted member 204526]

Are I'm one only who thinks, that western world is digging grave for it self? in all fronts.

They didn't have real enemy/boogeyman for long time, so started inventing their own.

The Russians surely engage in clandestine activities, but so does every country in the modern civilized world. The attitude towards Russia by lefties in the West has become insanely xenophobic, all in the name of scapegoating their own failures.

It's also their new tactic to try and wiggle out of a losing debate. Lefties used to accuse people of being racists and whatnot as a quick escape button during a debate, but they overplayed that to such a degree that it's lost its effectiveness. Now they just call you a Russian bot/troll, even if the subject at hand in no way touches on Russia.

 

[jh24]

Delicieuxz No person would go to so much trouble digging up links and graphs to prove something without having something to gain from it. Overloading your posts with "proof" no one has even asked for shows you have an agenda. I see people like you everywhere on the net, luckily you and your obvious agendas are easy to pick up.

Just like with the German election and the far-right AfD in September. There were so many posts and comments supporting the AfD everywhere you would think they would have become the biggest party with ease.

In any case, I gave RT.com a chance but they're ridiculous. I can live with their news as it's good to see points of view from the other side. But they barely post anything negative about their own problems in Russia. They seem obsessed with the USA, Britain and Europe in general, support any kind of (far)right party during western elections, and their commentary sections are one of the most toxic, racist and anti-jew places I've ever seen on the web.

Those people commenting deny the Holocaust, but then openly call to gas and kill all jews. They want a genocide on the Americans and the West, they believe Russia and China are the new beacons of freedom for the entire world. RT.com is disgusting for allowing that kind of vitrol and hate to persist and that's the main reason I can never take them seriously as a news site.

 

[Delicieuxz]

Delicieuxz No person would go to so much trouble digging up links and graphs to prove something without having something to gain from it. Overloading your posts with "proof" no one has even asked for shows you have an agenda. I see people like you everywhere on the net, luckily you and your obvious agendas are easy to pick up.

You gotta be careful with that confirmation bias.

My agenda is the full substantiation of the truth. Why would I half-ass a response and leave many details unaddressed when I know the full details that conclude the subject? You're basically saying that you consider people who take subjects and comments seriously are suspicious for actually caring. And that's kinda f'ed up, IMO.

You also sound like you think the subject matter is merely good for a quaint sentiment that people might be interested in experiencing for a brief moment while perusing topics online, before switching mental channels to another subject while leaving the matter open to float around in an undefined state for no particular reason. It's actually something that will or won't lead to increased prejudice, wars, people being killed or being treated unjustly for years to come.

And if you think I have an agenda beyond saying something because it's the truth, then you've discovered that you're over-estimating your own perception skills and judgment.

 

[Neslepax]

Delicieuxz No person would go to so much trouble digging up links and graphs to prove something without having something to gain from it. Overloading your posts with "proof" no one has even asked for shows you have an agenda. I see people like you everywhere on the net, luckily you and your obvious agendas are easy to pick up.

I actually appreciated that Delicieuxz provided sources for his material and arguments. I do not claim to have all the information about everything, and there is only so much time to read about things, but I do try to take constructive counter-arguments into consideration when forming future opinions. The typical argument/counter-argument post usually goes down the rabbit hole of "who can scream the loudest" without ever providing any source material. In fact, the more extreme the claim, the less likely people are to source it. Delicieuxz did nothing more than provide enough material to support his claims. I am not saying that he is right or wrong, and I will need to read through the material and come up with my own opinion based on it, but I never picked up on some obvious "agenda" aside from wanting to make a solid argument.

 

[jh24]

I actually appreciated that Delicieuxz provided sources for his material and arguments. I do not claim to have all the information about everything, and there is only so much time to read about things, but I do try to take constructive counter-arguments into consideration when forming future opinions. The typical argument/counter-argument post usually goes down the rabbit hole of "who can scream the loudest" without ever providing any source material. In fact, the more extreme the claim, the less likely people are to source it. Delicieuxz did nothing more than provide enough material to support his claims. I am not saying that he is right or wrong, and I will need to read through the material and come up with my own opinion based on it, but I never picked up on some obvious "agenda" aside from wanting to make a solid argument.

I'm glad you're able to keep an open mind. I did the same as you for years. But I gave up about a year ago after years of wasted and bitter discussions. Those discussions always ended with me being accused of being a "western lapdog," a Merkel fanboy, a Muslim and immigrant lover, being blind to the anti-Russian propaganda, it always ended being overloaded with endless amounts of graphs and quotes from a wide variety of sources. Posting negative news about western leaders and the decay of the West while supporting the more radical parties like Le Penn or AfD.

I know you need to keep an open mind but after years I can just pick up those kind of people from a distance. They post so much, post so often on different media. Often you can even pick it up in their writing or their way with (complicated) words.

Call me bitter or jaded, but those discussions never got me anywhere, and I began to feel over time they're just an organized effort to weaken and demoralize the west. We are not perfect, far from it. We have our own problems. But I don't trust Putin at all. I have personal experience with the MH17 tragedy back in 2014 above Ukraine. (I'm from the Netherlands, so many poor people died on that plane, and many from my country as well) The only thing coming from Russia ever since are lies, cover-ups and spreading misinformation. I'll never, never forgive Russia for that. (Ukraine is not innocent either) We've seen Russia's involvement in Ukraine, we've seen their role in Crimea.

Russia constantly says we in the West are biased against them. Did they ever wonder why? Did they never even ask themselves that it may have been their own actions and meddling that created an anti-Russian sentiment in the West in the first place?

Am I bitter? Am I jaded? Yes, I am. I don't deny it. I'm done being nice and trying to understand Russia's point of view. Too much has happened for that. I've seen it in my country as well. Russia's meddling and constant spread of propaganda has to stop. And it has to stop now.

 

[Delicieuxz]

I'm glad you're able to keep an open mind. I did the same as you for years. But I gave up about a year ago after years of wasted and bitter discussions. Those discussions always ended with me being accused of being a "western lapdog," a Merkel fanboy, a Muslim and immigrant lover, being blind to the anti-Russian propaganda...

What it sounds like you're saying is that your solution has been to become the same as the people who called you those things, as that's what you're insinuating about me and my post, now.

I know you need to keep an open mind but after years I can just pick up those kind of people from a distance. They post so much, post so often on different media. Often you can even pick it up in their writing or their way with (complicated) words.

Call me bitter or jaded, but those discussions never got me anywhere, and I began to feel over time they're just an organized effort to weaken and demoralize the west. We are not perfect, far from it. We have our own problems. But I don't trust Putin at all. I have personal experience with the MH17 tragedy back in 2014 above Ukraine. (I'm from the Netherlands, so many poor people died on that plane, and many from my country as well) The only thing coming from Russia ever since are lies, cover-ups and spreading misinformation. I'll never, never forgive Russia for that. (Ukraine is not innocent either) We've seen Russia's involvement in Ukraine, we've seen their role in Crimea.

Russia constantly says we in the West are biased against them. Did they ever wonder why? Did they never even ask themselves that it may have been their own actions and meddling that created an anti-Russian sentiment in the West in the first place?

Am I bitter? Am I jaded? Yes, I am. I don't deny it. I'm done being nice and trying to understand Russia's point of view. Too much has happened for that. I've seen it in my country as well. Russia's meddling and constant spread of propaganda has to stop. And it has to stop now.

Well, you've drawn yourself into a figment. I'm Canadian, and so I'm Western, and the information I've presented is a Western viewpoint. PM me if you'd like to receive a link to my Facebook page so that you can contact me there and verify for yourself.

I guess the lesson is, the things you take to be signs of somebody being a foreign propagandist aren't really there. That's why I linked to the Wikipedia page on confirmation bias.

And the information that I posted above is solid, all government or first-hand sources, well-known pollsters, and not conjecture, speculation, conspiracy, opinion...

 

[jh24]

What it sounds like you're saying is that your solution has been to become the same as the people who called you those things, as that's what you're insinuating about me and my post, now.



Well, you've drawn yourself into a figment. I'm Canadian, and so I'm Western, and the information I've presented is a Western viewpoint. PM me if you'd like to receive a link to my Facebook page so that you can contact me there and verify for yourself.

I guess the lesson is, the things you take to be signs of somebody being a foreign propagandist aren't really there. That's why I linked to the Wikipedia page on confirmation bias.

And the information that I posted above is solid, all government or first-hand sources, well-known pollsters, and not conjecture, speculation, conspiracy, opinion...

Don't talk to me like i'm a little kid who doesn't know anything. For years I'm following the news from different sources like CNN, BBC, Fox, RT.com, Sputnik, Al-Jazeera, Chinadaily/Xinhua, PressTv, etc.

I've looked at information myself, especially about MH17 (of which we still don't know who did it, and we probably never will) I've always been open to different viewpoints, and I've still been able to make my own judgements. It's like your insinuating that when I look at your information my view on the West will change and that somehow Russia was the "good" guy all along.

But tell me something. What is driving you? What is your motivation? The fact that you post so much information, graphs, links and sources shows that this is not just a simple discussion for you. Collecting all this info must have been a lot of work and I can respect that. But why? Why coming in this thread with a list about what the United States did wrong? Why stating that RT.com is more honest then western news media? (Which already creates the wrong impression)

Why should we trust RT and Putin above the West?

 

[OnceSetThisCannotChange]

Why should we trust RT and Putin above the West?

I can help you with this one.

For the same reason why you would trust western media more in Russia than Russian media.

They are not connected to the power structures, and are therefore allowing more diverse sets of opinions to be aired.

In other words, in US or UK it would be wise to check out RT, in Russia CNN/BBC.