Democracy Putin Style

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by tomahawk6, Apr 21, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. No other western democracy could get away with closing down a newspaper that defied the government.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,351860,00.html

     
  2. Well they could, they would just receive the same slating that Putin is undoubtable facing.

    I've long been of the opinion that media that steps out of line should incur a publication ban for a period; freedom of the press? Bollox, they've stood behind that for far too long when making some peoples life a misery.
     
  3. T6 this paper was closed by its owner not the State, Russia is an Eastern Democracy not a Western one and Russia has a strict tradition of the lives of its Politicians remaining private, quite rightly in my opinion. Would a Lincoln, Roosevelt or Churchill be allowed into power these days or would trivialised, vicious press destroy their careers before they even started.

    Look at the quality of political debate in the majority of US press - pressing issues like 'Obama is so sexy', Hilary's lesbian affairs and her husband’s taste for blow jobs, McCain fondles goats etc. WTF has that got to do with the price of Gas, the Nations deficit or the lack of manufacturing jobs?

    What would the founding Fathers think eh?

    Check out what Frank Rich in the NYT thinks

    http://www.nytimes.com/pages/opinion/index.html

    Dinger is right, the Press increasingly engages in lazy, dumbed down, out right falsehoods to boost circulation. News as entertainment not what freedom of the press is about, the quality of mainstream press reporting has never been so poor or so corrosive to society.
     
  4. Sir, let's recall one story happened just before the start of Iraq war.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Donahue

    It is an exapmle of democracy Bush style.
     
  5. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    I can understand why the newspaper got shut down - Putin was quite clearly slandered with an untruth.

    For those of you who saw the fishing photo's with Putin doing his 'village people' pose, it's quite obvious why the story of him being about to marry ANY female is obviously a lie . . . cor, my coffee is glowing . . . should it do that?
     

  6. lol Sergey,

    Your nuts if you think Bush had anything to do with Phil Donahue getting canceled. Thanks for the chuckle this morning. I needed it.

    These shows are paid for by advertising. That advertising is seen as a form of endorsement. The companies paying the money for the advertising are the ones that drive the show. If they do not like the direction the show is going, they stop advertising and the show loses money no matter how many people still watch it.

    It's obvious some NBC execs got nervous with his rhetoric and decided to pull him before the sponsors pulled their advertising.

    Money > George Bush

    > = (is greater than)

    You want to see western democracy in action.

    http://shop.comedycentral.com/Lil--Bush_stcVVcatId481586VVviewcat.htm?campaign1=DEP:google:Comedy:Lil_Bush&s_kwcid=little%20bush|786340897&gclid=CPHg15Cq7JICFRkyFQodv0Aw4Q

    Someone would get shot (or poisoned with some radioactive isotope) in your country if they made a show about putin like that.
     
  7. Agreed, there was a great Russian spitting image-type program (rubber puppet carictures of the famous type-comedy for those outside the UK) I remember from the 1996 and 2000 elections. Went off air after that though, can't think what changed...
     
  8. It is exactly my point. Not ordinary citizens but big business really determine what the citizens have to watch on TV, what news, what comments should they hear.

    Is it a democracy?

    By the way big business is dependent for the Administration, its decisions. So corporations that sponsor 'wrong' programmes, shows would have many problems, wouold be voided profitable contracts and so on.

    So, in fact the Administration has big influence on American mass media.

    There is a weekly program 'Realpolitik' on NTV. There are cartoons in the program where leading politicians (and not only Russian) are depicted. However the program is not very interesting, Putin's face always is not visible. The main source of 'humour' is Putin's vocabulary that is very close to one used by ordinary Russians. Sometimes 'egg-headed' aides understand Putin in the wrong way.
     
  9. I think you're thinking about this the wrong way. I would argue that the administration has less influence on the media than almost any other country on the planet.

    It's public opinion that these advertisers fear. Fear of being associated with the views of a particular show, whether they be political, social, or religious.

    Donahue is one show out of thousands that this happens to and 90% of them have no political purpose like cartoons, reality shows, soap operas, and/or sitcoms. I think by picking one that had a political edge to it puts an unfair characterization to the process and really takes the process out of context.

    Whoever the main advertiser was for *that particular show* apparently didn't like what he was saying for whatever reason. It does not mean that the current administration has a policy of shutting down tv shows with opposing views. 20 minutes clicking through American TV will show you how far off the mark your assumption is.

    And, as far as Donahue is concerned:

    almost 30 years is time to retire anyway, don't you think?


    It would be interesting to see something like that. I watched lil' Bush a few times. Laughed out loud when they depicted Dick Cheney's father as Darth Vader.