Mass media wars with 'foreign agents'

Washington forced RT to register as a foregn agent. Was it a right decision?

  • It is not sufficient. RT must be closed and removed from US mass media space completely

    Votes: 3 12.0%
  • Absolutely right decision and Moscow's counter measures are not justified

    Votes: 3 12.0%
  • Right decision and Russian move was something expected.

    Votes: 8 32.0%
  • Both sides are not right

    Votes: 3 12.0%
  • Washington is not right and Moscow's replay is logical

    Votes: 1 4.0%
  • The best solution is to stop this 'foreign agents' games in the name of freedom of speech

    Votes: 7 28.0%

  • Total voters
    25
#1
Russia prepares to label US media as 'foreign agents' | News | DW | 10.11.2017
Russia may require US media to register as a 'foreign agent.' It comes in response to similar moves by Washington against Kremlin-backed media.
The US Justice Department has ordered RT to register as an agent of a foreign government by November 13, its editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan said Thursday. Simonyan said that RT will comply, otherwise she could be arrested and the news outlet's accounts frozen.
Deputy speaker of Russian Parliament Pyotr Tolstoi (btw, descendant of famous Russian writer Lev Tolstoy) said
"Reciprocal measures will be taken to impose the same limitations that Americans are trying to impose on Russian media based on the 1938 law on foreign agents,"
The measures could apply to US government funded Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, as well private broadcaster CNN.
OSCE watchdog slams Unites States, Russia for "foreign agent" media laws
The OSCE’s media watchdog said on Thursday moves by the United States and Russia to force some foreign media to register as “foreign agents” were unacceptable and dangerous.
“Branding media entities as ‘foreign agents’ is a dangerous practice, as it can narrow the space for freedom of the media,” said Harlem Desir, media freedom chief of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
Prominent Russian lawmaker and journalist mr.Pushkov ridiculed the OSCE.
Where were you before? Pushkov ridiculed the OSCE for criticism of the media law-registered as a foreign agent – Russia news today
The head of the Federation Council Commission on information policy Alexei Pushkov sharply commented on the call for the OSCE to terminate the registration of Russian and American media as registered as foreign agents
«When the United States forced RT to registration noagenda, the OSCE was silent. When Russia decided to give the status of the US media, woke up. And before that where were you?», — wrote the MP.

Within two months the OSCE did not respond to the US actions against RT and commented just now. Alexei Pushkov explains that «call back number safer.»
I sincerely believe that it is important and serious issue closely connected to the freedom of speech principle and I hope to see only serious, thoughful comments.
 
#2
The title should be read 'Mass media wars ... '
The word media was erased by mistake
 
#3
See? This is what happens when you don't have topless weather forecasters. You can't say you weren't warned, take a leaf from Mexican or Italian TV and get your tits out for the sunny spells.
 
#4
RT was the media arm of the Russian government in the USA, and here as it happens.

As long as you recognise this all is well.
 
#5
RT was the media arm of the Russian government in the USA, and here as it happens.

As long as you recognise this all is well.
And what is your attitude to the call from OSCE?
 
#7
The title should be read 'Mass media wars ... '
The word media was erased by mistake
Then edit the title. It's your thread.
I sincerely believe that it is important and serious issue closely connected to the freedom of speech principle and I hope to see only serious, thoughful comments.
You (and Russia) once again fail to differentiate between agitprop and media bias. For example, please point me to a dozen articles on RT and Sputnik extracting the urine from Putin much as many US media outlets are doing on Trump.

When you find the RT and Sputnik articles, you may find the difference between agitprop and media (biased or otherwise)
 
#8
Then edit the title. It's your thread.
I don't know how it could be done.
You (and Russia) once again fail to differentiate between agitprop and media bias.
It is an interesting theoretical question. I mean definitions. What is agitprop and what is media bias?
And if agitprop uses only proven facts then should it be banned? And on what ground?
If biased mass media source uses lies, present allegatins as facts then is it acceptable.
For example, please point me to a dozen articles on RT and Sputnik extracting the urine from Putin much as many US media outlets are doing on Trump.
It's simple. There are political elites in the USA that in fact control main MSM. Mr.Trump was elected by American people despite their objections and enormous efforts (including loud campaign in MSM). The informational war in the USA continues and we see how it goes.
By contrast, in Russia main mass media are controlled by Putin's clan. So one could no expect the same 'media battle'.
When you find the RT and Sputnik articles, you may find the difference between agitprop and media (biased or otherwise)
However, try to formulate it. Give definitions, please.
 
#9
I don't know how it could be done.
Go to the first post. Click on 'Thread tools' then 'Edit Title'
It is an interesting theoretical question. I mean definitions. What is agitprop and what is media bias?
And if agitprop uses only proven facts then should it be banned? And on what ground?
If biased mass media source uses lies, present allegatins as facts then is it acceptable.
Avoidance and obfuscation
It's simple. There are political elites in the USA that in fact control main MSM. Mr.Trump was elected by American people despite their objections and enormous efforts (including loud campaign in MSM). The informational war in the USA continues and we see how it goes.
There's a great many media outlets in the US. Most are biased one way or another, but that is generally left and right wing. I know of no media outlet in the US which pushes wholly for the US agenda in world affairs and never has a critical word to say about those actions and/or POTUS be it Trump or any predecessors.
By contrast, in Russia main mass media are controlled by Putin's clan. So one could no expect the same 'media battle'.
Of course not. A pity your countrymen believe it. Moscow Times appears to be one of the few sites which some truth is mentioned on.
However, try to formulate it. Give definitions, please.
Agitprop is your (as in Russian) word. You like Wiki definitions when it suits you. Find the dozen articles by RT and Sputnik on Putin extracting the urine and disagreeing with Russian policy if you really need it widening.
 
#10
Go to the first post. Click on 'Thread tools' then 'Edit Title'
Thanks.
STATEMENT BY SASC CHAIRMAN JOHN McCAIN ON RUSSIA MOVING CLOSER TO DESIGNATING INTERNATIONAL MEDIA OUTLETS AS FOREIGN AGENTS - Press Releases - United States Senator John McCain
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, released the following statement today on the Russian lower house of parliament's unanimous approval of a bill today allowing the government to register international media outlets as foreign agents:
“Vladimir Putin’s Russia is moving closer to designating international media outlets as ‘foreign agents,’ supposedly in retaliation for the U.S. Department of Justice’s request that RT, which the U.S. intelligence community has called ‘the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet,’ to register under the Foreign Agents Restoration Act.
“As a champion for free speech and free press around the world, the United States must be very clear: there is no equivalence between RT and television networks such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, CNN, or the BBC. The journalists that work for these networks seek the truth, debunk lies, and hold governments accountable. RT’s propagandists debunk the truth, spread lies, and seek to undermine democratic governments in order to further Vladimir Putin’s agenda.
“Vladimir Putin needs no excuse to crack down on foreign media outlets, just as he needed no excuse to murder countless journalists and political opponents over the last several years. Putin knows that the greatest threat to his dictatorship is the truth and the willingness of true Russian patriots to speak and act upon it.
“The United States should not shirk defending our democracy by calling RT what it is—a propaganda network—and requiring its U.S. channel to register as a foreign agent. At the same time, together with our allies in the Free World, we should continue to support the right of the Russian people to access media willing to report the truth.”
 
Last edited:
#11
#12
Even Google thinks RT and Sputnik are agitprop trash, not news.
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...rmation-alphabet-chief-executive-eric-Schmidt

“We’re working on detecting this kind of scenario ... and de-ranking those kinds of sites,” Schmidt said, in response to a question at an event in Halifax, Canada. “It’s basically RT and Sputnik. We’re well aware and we’re trying to engineer the systems to prevent it.”
I have another point of view. Too many Americans use to watch RT to be aware about alternative coverage, alternative point of view, about unpleasant facts and details (unpleasant for ruling elites). It doesn't mean that regular RT users each time agree with everything. But they have more information to make own judgment.
RT became an influental mass media outlet in the USA and it is the true cause for Washington to brand it as 'foreign agent' and thus to build obstacles to its normal functioning.
 
#13
No problem
STATEMENT BY SASC CHAIRMAN JOHN McCAIN ON RUSSIA MOVING CLOSER TO DESIGNATING INTERNATIONAL MEDIA OUTLETS AS FOREIGN AGENTS - Press Releases - United States Senator John McCain
I agree with McCAIN:
Sen John McCAIN said:
“The United States should not shirk defending our democracy by calling RT what it is—a propaganda network—and requiring its U.S. channel to register as a foreign agent. At the same time, together with our allies in the Free World, we should continue to support the right of the Russian people to access media willing to report the truth.”
What's your point?
 
#15
No problem
I agree with McCAIN:

What's your point?
You quote this fragment from sen.McCain's statement

1.The United States should not shirk defending our democracy by calling RT what it is—a propaganda network—and requiring its U.S. channel to register as a foreign agent.
2. At the same time, together with our allies in the Free World, we should continue to support the right of the Russian people to access media willing to report the truth.

1.Inside the USA Washington is free to do whatever it wishes. But other countries have the same right. Propaganda is not forbidden in the USA. And Washington propagandist outlets are free to continue their propagandist activity in Russia.
2.At the same time Voice of America terminated radio broadcasting in Russian and BBC made the same move. The cause is very simple - there are too few listeners. Washington's propaganda is too primitive and ineffective.
 
#16
I have another point of view. Too many Americans use to watch RT to be aware about alternative coverage, alternative point of view, about unpleasant facts and details (unpleasant for ruling elites). It doesn't mean that regular RT users each time agree with everything. But they have more information to make own judgment.
RT became an influental mass media outlet in the USA and it is the true cause for Washington to brand it as 'foreign agent' and thus to build obstacles to its normal functioning.
You have many points of view. Whatever your puppetmasters tell you they are today.
And they are mostly lies.

Which is the problem, isn't it?
 
#18
Not that influential - RT even lies about its own viewing figures

Putin’s Propaganda TV Lies About Its Popularity


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe 'lies' is a wrong word in this context. There are some estimates, allegations and anyone could or could not accept them.
Anyway 'foreign agent' story rather supports view that RT is too popular in the USA. If RT has just a handful of listeners then it would be forgotten by Washington.
As we see many politicians in the USA (sen.McCain) regard RT as a serious threat to their interests.
 
#20
You quote this fragment from sen.McCain's statement

1.The United States should not shirk defending our democracy by calling RT what it is—a propaganda network—and requiring its U.S. channel to register as a foreign agent.
2. At the same time, together with our allies in the Free World, we should continue to support the right of the Russian people to access media willing to report the truth.

1.Inside the USA Washington is free to do whatever it wishes. But other countries have the same right. Propaganda is not forbidden in the USA. And Washington propagandist outlets are free to continue their propagandist activity in Russia.
2.At the same time Voice of America terminated radio broadcasting in Russian and BBC made the same move. The cause is very simple - there are too few listeners. Washington's propaganda is too primitive and ineffective.
Once again you are confusing two issues. One which is your agitprop and you have still failed to find any evidence of them extracting the urine on Putin or on Russian govt policies (as I widened it for you just to help).

Comparing it with US Media which is happy to criticise POTUS depending on who is in power and their bias.

That's the issue and your obfuscation speaks volumes
 

Similar threads

Top