General Scandal: So called journalists @ BBC and Reuters paid for Russia propaganda

[Sheepdog]

I remember when you used to post Russian state propaganda on here (e.g. Sputnik and RT).

It's funny that in a thread about the exposure of western propaganda targeting Russia you can only talk about Russian propaganda. They don't even have to try when people are so easily conditioned, do they?

Also, I shouldn't have to explain this to adults, but RT isn't always wrong, just like the BBC isn't always wrong. Both are state propaganda outlets and shouldn't be trusted - but reflexively dimissing their content as automatically false is also idiotic. Both target negative stories about the other, but it doesn't mean these stories are always untrue.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

It's funny that in a thread about the exposure of western propaganda targeting Russia you can only talk about Russian propaganda. They don't even have to try when people are so easily conditioned, do they?

Also, I shouldn't have to explain this to adults, but RT isn't always wrong, just like the BBC isn't always wrong. Both are state propaganda outlets and shouldn't be trusted - but reflexively dimissing their content as automatically false is also idiotic. Both target negative stories about the other, but it doesn't mean these stories are always untrue.

I don't watch enough BBC to speak on it with any sort of authority, but CBC won't be confused for state propaganda anytime soon. I can't say the same for RT.

 

[Sheepdog]

I don't watch enough BBC to speak on it with any sort of authority, but CBC won't be confused for state propaganda anytime soon. I can't say the same for RT.

LOL

 

[Toelocku]

Multiple links from RT and Sputnik.

I don't watch enough BBC to speak on it with any sort of authority, but CBC won't be confused for state propaganda anytime soon. I can't say the same for RT.

Lol what?

cbc is literally state propaganda...its not propaganda when my side does it *eye roll

 

[FINGERS]

It's funny that in a thread about the exposure of western propaganda targeting Russia you can only talk about Russian propaganda. They don't even have to try when people are so easily conditioned, do they?

Also, I shouldn't have to explain this to adults, but RT isn't always wrong, just like the BBC isn't always wrong. Both are state propaganda outlets and shouldn't be trusted - but reflexively dimissing their content as automatically false is also idiotic. Both target negative stories about the other, but it doesn't mean these stories are always untrue.

How is the BBC state propaganda?

Why would the government, until covid hit, be actively trying to disband it if this was the case? I have mentioned on the other BBC thread that they are guilty of towing the government line a little too thoroughly on covid but that's just my my opinion.

You shouldn't just throw out nonsense like that. You are way better than this.

Unless you have proof of said propaganda of course?

 

[Sheepdog]

How is the BBC state propaganda?

Why would the government, until covid hit, be actively trying to disband it if this was the case? I have mentioned on the other BBC thread that they are guilty of towing the government line a little too thoroughly on covid but that's just my my opinion.

You shouldn't just throw out nonsense like that. You are way better than this.

Unless you have proof of said propaganda of course?

You're literally posting in a thread about leaked evidence of collusion between the BBC and the UK government to engage in propaganda operations.

The BBC, CBC, and ABC can do decent work when it comes to domestic issues in their respective countries. They still report news in a way that suits the interests of power, but at least they are sometimes critical. But they are all transparent propaganda organisations when it comes to reporting on foreign issues. The BBC is the worst of the three too.

If you read the BBC's coverage of the Iraq War and the Syrian Conflict and thought it was perfectly objective and in no way pushing UK goverment interests, then simply, you lack critical thinking skills.

And I'm not quibbling about whether they are 'worse' than RT - I don't often subject myself to Russian propaganda, but I have seen accurate reporting on RT every now and then mixed in with its clear bullshit. I'm sure it is worse than Anglo state media, but I frankly don't give a shit. It's not the point.

Most of the cunts in these organisations actually believe the nonsense they peddle. This is why foreign reporting is particularly bad, because people in general are highly susceptible to nationalism and xenophobia.
Doesn't mean they are not reporting propaganda. And as we see, sometimes it goes beyond bias and self-censorship into outright collusion.

If you can't figure out how state-funded media outlets can be manipulated in many ways by the states that fund them, then I can't help you.

 

[FINGERS]

You're literally posting in a thread about leaked evidence of collusion between the BBC and the UK government to engage in propaganda operations.

The BBC, CBC, and ABC can do decent work when it comes to domestic issues in their respective countries. They still report news in a way that suits the interests of power, but at least they are sometimes critical. But they are all transparent propaganda organisations when it comes to reporting on foreign issues. The BBC is the worst of the three too.

If you read the BBC's coverage of the Iraq War and the Syrian Conflict and thought it was perfectly objective and in no way pushing UK goverment interests, then simply, you lack critical thinking skills.

And I'm not quibbling about whether they are 'worse' than RT - I don't often subject myself to Russian propaganda, but I have seen accurate reporting on RT every now and then mixed in with its clear bullshit. I'm sure it is worse than Anglo state media, but I frankly don't give a shit. It's not the point.

Most of the cunts in these organisations actually believe the nonsense they peddle. This is why foreign reporting is particularly bad, because people in general are highly susceptible to nationalism and xenophobia.
Doesn't mean they are not reporting propaganda. And as we see, sometimes it goes beyond bias and self-censorship into outright collusion.

If you can't figure out how state-funded media outlets can be manipulated in many ways by the states that fund them, then I can't help you.

Are you going to offer examples/proof or just just moan about certain stories that you found not perfectly objective in your opinion? I worked heavily on the second Iraq war. Won awards for it actually. I accept there were mistakes made. Although none come immediately to mind. Please show me examples so I can learn from them and educate my peers. It would genuinely help.

I accept spies are gonna spy but you are saying the BBC is a propaganda channel. That is incorrect. At least post proof when you spout 6th form debating theories.

thegrayzone.com isn't proof. Thier reporting is vaguer than anything the BBC will ever report

 

[FINGERS]

Some small, tiny fact checking on this website comes up with this...

US State Department accusation of China ‘genocide’ relied on data abuse and baseless claims by far-right ideologue - The Grayzone

The Trump and Biden administrations have relied on the work of a right-wing religious extremist, Adrian Zenz, for their "genocide" accusation against China. A close review of Zenz's research reveals flagrant data abuse and outright falsehoods. Both President Joe Biden and his Secretary of State...

thegrayzone.com

The US government’s accusation of genocide against China stems from a single source: a June 2020 paper by Adrian Zenz, a right-wing German researcher affiliated with the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and neoconservative Jamestown Foundation in Washington, DC.

Articles by the Associated Press, CNN, and BBC also relied on Zenz’s article to claim that plunging Uyghur birth rates and the application of birth control measures in Uyghur counties of the Xinjiang region were proof of a policy of “demographic genocide


Utter, utter bullshit. Your website is a crock of shit and anti BBC. It is lying to you. I'm not saying spies don't spy but what you are trying to say is utter bollocks.

I thought you were better than this.

 

[Sheepdog]

Are you going to offer examples/proof or just just moan about certain stories that you found not perfectly objective in your opinion? I worked heavily on the second Iraq war. Won awards for it actually. I accept there were mistakes made. Although none come immediately to mind. Please show me examples so I can learn from them and educate my peers. It would genuinely help.

I accept spies are gonna spy but you are saying the BBC is a propaganda channel. That is incorrect. At least post proof when you spout 6th form debating theories.

Again, read the story in the OP. You are also getting hung up on my lazy wording - I can't always be fucked writing out a thesis to converse with dipshits on an MMA forum - about being a 'propaganda channel'. It is not always reporting UK government propaganda. It just often does.

Study deals a blow to claims of BBC anti-war bias

Downing Street's complaints about anti-war bias within the BBC appear to be disproved by an academic analysis that shows the corporation displayed the most 'pro-war' agenda of any broadcaster. By Matt Wells.

www.theguardian.com

The BBC was not alone in cheerleading the Iraq War but it was among the worst.

 

[Sheepdog]

Some small, tiny fact checking on this website comes up with this...

US State Department accusation of China ‘genocide’ relied on data abuse and baseless claims by far-right ideologue - The Grayzone

The Trump and Biden administrations have relied on the work of a right-wing religious extremist, Adrian Zenz, for their "genocide" accusation against China. A close review of Zenz's research reveals flagrant data abuse and outright falsehoods. Both President Joe Biden and his Secretary of State...

thegrayzone.com

The US government’s accusation of genocide against China stems from a single source: a June 2020 paper by Adrian Zenz, a right-wing German researcher affiliated with the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and neoconservative Jamestown Foundation in Washington, DC.

Articles by the Associated Press, CNN, and BBC also relied on Zenz’s article to claim that plunging Uyghur birth rates and the application of birth control measures in Uyghur counties of the Xinjiang region were proof of a policy of “demographic genocide


Utter, utter bullshit. Your website is a crock of shit and anti BBC. It is lying to you. I'm not saying spies don't spy but what you are trying to say is utter bollocks.

I thought you were better than this.

The Grayzone is full of dipshits, yes. Focus on the leaks themselves, not the cunts writing about them. An esteemed award-winning journalist such as yourself should be capable of this.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

Lol what?

cbc is literally state propaganda...its not propaganda when my side does it *eye roll

Really? Then why did they actively campaign against a ruling party?

 

[ThatOneDude]

Jeez, could you imagine literally being a paid government shill. Embarrassing.

Spoiler

 

[FINGERS]

Again, read the story in the OP. You are also getting hung up on my lazy wording - I can't always be fucked writing out a thesis to converse with dipshits on an MMA forum - about being a 'propaganda channel'. It is not always reporting UK government propaganda. It just often does.

Study deals a blow to claims of BBC anti-war bias

Downing Street's complaints about anti-war bias within the BBC appear to be disproved by an academic analysis that shows the corporation displayed the most 'pro-war' agenda of any broadcaster. By Matt Wells.

www.theguardian.com

The BBC was not alone in cheerleading the Iraq War but it was among the worst.

Dude. That's slightly to a lot of reaching there


A detailed study of peak-time television news bulletins during the course of the Iraq war shows that the BBC was more reliant than any of its rivals on government and military sources.



The findings, by academics at Cardiff University, give little support to the deep-rooted suspicions in government circles that lie at the heart of the row with the BBC. Instead, ahead of the report by the foreign affairs select committee into the government's use of intelligence, they give comfort to the corporation.


The BBC can't win. The left think it's anti left, the government think it's anti government. It twists itself to be as impartial as it can. I know because I'm in the room.

So long as both think that it must be doing something right. As I say. I am finding it's simpering coverage on Covid less than world class atm. But I won't have it that it's a propaganda channel. Dipshit or not.

 

[ThatOneDude]

 

[FINGERS]

Jeez, could you imagine literally being a paid government shill. Embarrassing.

Spoiler

Could you imagine using your carers profession to jump the queue to get a covid jab above actual people in need?

Thats real scum behaviour. It's beyond embarrassing. In war times it would be criminal.

For shame.

 

[ThatOneDude]

I guess this shouldn't be surprising. The BBC had a history of fake news. Pretty gross behavior, especially considering how uppity they are.

When the BBC did fake news

In its attempts to dissect the global disinformation epidemic, the BBC handily forgets its own history of ‘fake news’.

www.aljazeera.com

 

[FINGERS]

I guess this shouldn't be surprising. The BBC had a history of fake news. Pretty gross behavior, especially considering how uppity they are.

When the BBC did fake news

In its attempts to dissect the global disinformation epidemic, the BBC handily forgets its own history of ‘fake news’.

www.aljazeera.com

You fucking moron. The last line says it all

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Stick to stealing old and vulnerable peoples covid jabs dumbo. Grown ups are talking.

 

[ThatOneDude]

Jeez, the more you look the more you see the BBC just churns out propaganda. Very very sad, seems they are right up there with fox news when it comes to shilling propaganda.

The brilliant subtlety of BBC propaganda

The week's news at a glance.

theweek.com

 

[ThatOneDude]

Just not a good look. I have to imagine a lot of people who think highly of themselves because they work for the BBC are going to have a hard day coming to terms with the reality of the situation.

The BBC has shown itself to be a state-sponsored arm of propaganda

THERE have been many visible casualties of the Brexit process to date in the United Kingdom. Faith in the established political parties and…

www.heraldscotland.com

 

[ThatOneDude]

What a sad sad day.

 

[Sheepdog]

Dude. That's slightly to a lot of reaching there


A detailed study of peak-time television news bulletins during the course of the Iraq war shows that the BBC was more reliant than any of its rivals on government and military sources.



The findings, by academics at Cardiff University, give little support to the deep-rooted suspicions in government circles that lie at the heart of the row with the BBC. Instead, ahead of the report by the foreign affairs select committee into the government's use of intelligence, they give comfort to the corporation.


The BBC can't win. The left think it's anti left, the government think it's anti government. It twists itself to be as impartial as it can. I know because I'm in the room.

So long as both think that it must be doing something right. As I say. I am finding it's simpering coverage on Covid less than world class atm. But I won't have it that it's a propaganda channel. Dipshit or not.

An argument to moderation is a fallacy.

Just because Blair attacked the BBC as anti-war (which plays to anti-BBC Murdoch-led sentiment) doesn't mean it actually was, as the academic study showed. Murdoch attacks on the BBC does not make it actually in any way 'left-wing'. Joe Biden is a communist if you take the right seriously.

Western propaganda is more sophisticated than its authoritarian state counterparts. It doesn't rely on strict control of all messaging or the overuse of outright lies because western states are more stable. Western governments know that people are mostly influenced by the volume of messaging they receive, and thus it does not need to eliminate critical perspectives, but just to overwhelm them. Of course, every now and then they must resort to the same crude tactics favoured by Saudi dictators, like slowly killing Julian Assange.

The British Government doesn't need to control everything the BBC does and doesn't need to suppress every critical voice in it to still successfully manipulate it into largely parroting its agendas, whether or not these are launching illegal wars based on lies or supporting Al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria. You know, innocent little endeavors that only the 'good guys' would do, unlike those dastardly Russians.

That the BBC was among the worst Iraq War propaganda offenders should not be a surprise to anyone with a functioning brain. It is state-funded media after all, whether or not it is 'better' than some other state-funded media outlets.

 

[ThatOneDude]

It is state-funded media

 

[member 1013]

Haha

 

[FINGERS]

An argument to moderation is a fallacy.

Just because Blair attacked the BBC as anti-war (which plays to anti-BBC Murdoch-led sentiment) doesn't mean it actually was, as the academic study showed. Murdoch attacks on the BBC does not make it actually in any way 'left-wing'. Joe Biden is a communist if you take the right seriously.

Western propaganda is more sophisticated than its authoritarian state counterparts. It doesn't rely on strict control of all messaging or the overuse of outright lies because western states are more stable. Western governments know that people are mostly influenced by the volume of messaging they receive, and thus it does not need to eliminate critical perspectives, but just to overwhelm them. Of course, every now and then they must resort to the same crude tactics favoured by Saudi dictators, like slowly killing Julian Assange.

The British Government doesn't need to control everything the BBC does and doesn't need to suppress every critical voice in it to still successfully manipulate it into largely parroting its agendas, whether or not these are launching illegal wars based on lies or supporting Al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria. You know, innocent little endeavors that only the 'good guys' would do, unlike those dastardly Russians.

That the BBC was among the worst Iraq War propaganda offenders should not be a surprise to anyone with a functioning brain. It is state-funded media after all, whether or not it is 'better' than some other state-funded media outlets.

You are just making stuff up now.

When did Blair 'attack the BBC as anti-war? So you are now saying the BBC is pro war? Wut?

Western propaganda is more sophisticated than its authoritarian state counterparts. It doesn't rely on strict control of all messaging or the overuse of outright lies because western states are more stable. Western governments know that people are mostly influenced by the volume of messaging they receive, and thus it does not need to eliminate critical perspectives, but just to overwhelm them. Of course, every now and then they must resort to the same crude tactics favoured by Saudi dictators, like slowly killing Julian Assange.

So you are still saying the BBC is a propaganda channel but now it's all done on a nod and a wink cos....You can't show me an example or proof of this?

The British Government doesn't need to control everything the BBC does and doesn't need to suppress every critical voice in it to still successfully manipulate it into largely parroting its agendas, whether or not these are launching illegal wars based on lies or supporting Al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria. You know, innocent little endeavors that only the 'good guys' would do, unlike those dastardly Russians.


So basically the British Broadcasting Corporation acts with a British slant? Colour me shocked. Panorama and Newsnight have made countless exposes on the Iraq war and illegal actions made by the government. It's kind of famous for it. The News reports on the stories of the day. It doesn't make the news. It reports it.

That the BBC was among the worst Iraq War propaganda offenders should not be a surprise to anyone with a functioning brain. It is state-funded media after all, whether or not it is 'better' than some other state-funded media outlets.


The article you quoted that quoted the inquiry did not make out that the BBC did anything wrong. It just used more government officials and military personnel than other channels. By a slender 11%. Is it that surprising that in times of war Government and military personnel would get more airtime on the national broadcaster? It's hardly a conspiracy.

You are seeing devils in shadows but its so dark you can't show anyone else these devils.

 

[ThatOneDude]

Don't forget to checkout dicksucking.org either.