Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Uncle Joe

(58,328 posts)
2. That's just one source and the question you should be asking, is their report factually correct?
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 12:50 AM
Jun 2016

I believe it is, that doesn't mean I believe everything that RT says.

This came out in 2013 and I believe today it's more like five mega conglomerates control the U.S. media, of course neither five or six corporate owners is healthy for American Democracy.

 

uhnope

(6,419 posts)
3. LOL. Putin TV. Maybe when they remove that actual neo-Nazi fake-expert from their website...
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 04:15 AM
Jun 2016

...we'll start to consider to think about some day entertaining the proposal to take RT's advice on the media controlling perceptions.


RT's neo-nazi fake-expert on Ukraine, still proudly on RT's website
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/rts-regular-air-german-host-manuel-ochsenreiter-exposed-neo-nazi-editor-1441605

You don't get it. First of all, as analysis, "factually correct" doesn't cut it--it's the spin, the lies embedded in the "factually correct", and yes, the source. Putin has closed down the independent news in Russia. Russian TV news is like FOX TV on every channel. The newspapers likewise are under his thumb. Journalists are being assassinated, beaten and jailed. The media perception is Russia is tightly controlled by the government--and you want us to listen to Putin TV lecture the USA on the subject?

BTW You folks that post RT vids on DU always defend them the same way, some variation on "but is it factually correct" or "don't judge the source, judge the info." Be careful, you don't want to be mistaken for a paid troll.



 

sulphurdunn

(6,891 posts)
6. Either the information is factual or it is not.
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 10:29 AM
Jun 2016

The source bears no logical relationship to it. If the Devil says it's raining outside and it is, then it's raining. It is not false because the Devil told you.

 

uhnope

(6,419 posts)
7. lol. That's the dumbed-down logic for gullible simpletons
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 11:24 AM
Jun 2016

like the kind that drink the Putin TV koolaid when, to use your metaphor, the devil tells them it's raining koolaid

 

sulphurdunn

(6,891 posts)
9. Simple logic requires no brilliance, only average intelligence.
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 12:31 PM
Jun 2016

Here goes anyway: An ad hominen fallacy is an argument or dismissive reaction directed against a person or institution rather than the position taken either before or after having falsely assumed that the argument bears a necessary relationship to the arguer.

Example: RT is a an outlet owned by the Russian government. Alexander Putin heads the Russian government. Putin is a liar. Therefore everything on RT is a lie.


Dustlawyer

(10,494 posts)
5. Say what you want, but they are 100% correct!!!
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 07:05 AM
Jun 2016

BP advertised so heavily on the Gulf Coast that nothing about the victims or the rigged litigation have been able to get out! They bought up all documentaries about the spill.

I bet you thought the "20 billion dollar fund" took care of everyone too! By the way there was never 20 billion dollars in a fund.

This is a problem up there with the purchasing of our politicians!

mdbl

(4,973 posts)
4. None of these facts are new
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 05:46 AM
Jun 2016

It's just sad that one of the only places you can hear them is on RT. The US public is so used to bad journalism that it doesn't even seem to matter to most of them.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»6 Corporations That Contr...