General Discussion

Chan790

(20,176 posts)

102. RT as a state-news organization is more on par with US state-run news organizations.

Sun Oct 6, 2013, 08:30 AM

Oct 2013

Some examples of US state-run news organs are Armed Forces Radio Network, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio y Televisión Martí and Al Hurra.

I live in DC and like that I get AFR over public airwaves...but let's just say that I wouldn't have turned to them for honest coverage of the My Lai massacre or believed their reporting in the aftermath accusing NLF irregular militants of having actually been behind the attack without confirmation from another source unrelated to a state-run news organ of the US government.

Frankly, since this is the fourth or fifth different group or people RT has accused of this attack, their credibility therein was shot long ago...all RT coverage of this attack should be considered too suspect to stand on DU unless verified and reported by another news entity from sources unrelated to RT's citations.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

145 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Saudi black op team behind Damascus chem weapons attack � diplomatic sources. [View all] dipsydoodle Oct 2013 OP

*cough* BULLSHIT *cough* Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #1

Most RT is treated as such here these days dipsydoodle Oct 2013 #6

That's because it's not an independent news source. pnwmom Oct 2013 #23

Shhhh!!! zappaman Oct 2013 #27

+1 nt arely staircase Oct 2013 #33

Well observed! Not like CNN, BBC... JackRiddler Oct 2013 #70

RT is wholly owned by the Russian government. pnwmom Oct 2013 #72

The BBC Turborama Oct 2013 #99

I'm sure you can also write to RT with your complaint. JackRiddler Oct 2013 #104

I was wrong, the BBC has several ways you can make complaints, and escalate them Turborama Oct 2013 #106

It seems, unlike you, I watch BBC. JackRiddler Oct 2013 #107

RT as a state-news organization is more on par with US state-run news organizations. Chan790 Oct 2013 #102

One need only read RTs comments section to know how it should be treated. joshcryer Oct 2013 #88

Hey. If House Republicans can try to repeal the ACA 40+ times, then why not? Barack_America Oct 2013 #2

Riiight. Benton D Struckcheon Oct 2013 #3

RT? Is that some kind of creative outlet for Tom Clancy fanfiction? BluegrassStateBlues Oct 2013 #4

No, it' actually an excellent news source, watched now by far more people sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #7

it is an excellent source of anti-gay rights propaganda nt arely staircase Oct 2013 #8

Never watched it I see! They have done some great coverage of Russia's sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #11

great coverage arely staircase Oct 2013 #14

I think that would happen on most news channels dipsydoodle Oct 2013 #15

fair enough, I will concede that. arely staircase Oct 2013 #26

Yeah, OK. joshcryer Oct 2013 #84

Here's another video Ash_F Oct 2013 #135

Russia Today Airs Fake Footage of Rebels Using Sarin Gas in Syria Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #9

Lol, 'GAWKER'! sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #10

LOL. You crack me the fuck up Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #12

They aired footage which so far as I know has only be declared 'fake' right here on DU. sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #17

When you are disrespectful you lose your creditability. rhett o rick Oct 2013 #82

Fuck Ron Paul. n/t Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #83

I so agree. And Fuck Gen Clapper. nm rhett o rick Oct 2013 #86

Fuck Rand Paul. n/t Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #87

No one here has anything against Left. Benton D Struckcheon Oct 2013 #13

I think you are confusing them with one our Corporate Media outlets who used sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #16

Correction, it was the BBC that used Iraq footage from 2003 claiming it was sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #18

I don't remember the incident anymore, Benton D Struckcheon Oct 2013 #19

Well, I've watched RT consistently, along with other news media since they sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #32

you should really stop bragging about the fact arely staircase Oct 2013 #113

Rock on, Sabrina. polly7 Oct 2013 #115

I remember it well and I also remember being called a 'terrorist supporter' for sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #132

The other poster produced a citation for their counter claim. Ash_F Oct 2013 #95

Believe what you want, Benton D Struckcheon Oct 2013 #100

Yet you were invested enough to make an unsupported claim? /nt Ash_F Oct 2013 #119

Yes, OK? You got the last word. n/t Benton D Struckcheon Oct 2013 #122

Not trying to start a fight, but the irony is worth pointing out. Ash_F Oct 2013 #136

Heh, you believe whatever Putin tells you to believe. nt geek tragedy Oct 2013 #53

Still nothing to dispute the OP info. I do have info that proves RT is simply sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #57

The story is a lie, and your blind faith in geek tragedy Oct 2013 #110

Do you think John Kerry shares this 'blind faith in the Russian Government' also? sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #144

That's pretty lame. You dont have any creditable argument so you resort to childish rhett o rick Oct 2013 #85

Childish is believing everything that Papa Putin geek tragedy Oct 2013 #111

da, comrade dionysus Oct 2013 #54

Thanks for posting this. eom MelungeonWoman Oct 2013 #101

lol. "diplomatic sources" RT "News". cali Oct 2013 #5

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2013 #20

LOL! zappaman Oct 2013 #21

You are posting a piece of Russian government propaganda, pnwmom Oct 2013 #22

Who is the link to ? How would I otherwise identify the source ? dipsydoodle Oct 2013 #24

It's identified as such. And so? JackRiddler Oct 2013 #71

Where in the OP is it "identified as such"? pnwmom Oct 2013 #74

In the attribution to RT. JackRiddler Oct 2013 #105

That isn't enough. It's not comparable to independent news organizations pnwmom Oct 2013 #117

Everyone knows where RT comes from. JackRiddler Oct 2013 #127

No, everyone doesn't. And if you don't understand pnwmom Oct 2013 #129

Is CNN a legitimate news source? JackRiddler Oct 2013 #130

CNN isn't owned and operated by the US government. pnwmom Oct 2013 #131

RT is the Sean Hannity of news sources. nt sufrommich Oct 2013 #25

No, it is far from that. Our own Corporate media is more like Sean Hannity sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #34

liberal agendas stick out like a sore thumb these days reddread Oct 2013 #38

And you are basing that on what? nm rhett o rick Oct 2013 #36

Notice there is not a shred of anything substantial to back up these assertions. sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #39

why would you insult Sean Hannity like that dlwickham Oct 2013 #128

Also to blame for chemical attack are Moose and Squirrel. n/t Ian David Oct 2013 #28

Do you have something substantial to prove that the information in the OP is sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #40

Can you prove it wasn't Moose and Squirrel? My claim is equally valid. n/t Ian David Oct 2013 #103

Thanks, I didn't think so. Robert Parry has been following this story and yes, sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #143

"There is nothing that proves it false, and therefore it is true" - that's a massive logical black Dash87 Oct 2013 #141

Along with Boris and Natasha. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #52

As stated, Russia Today is at least partially controlled by the Russian government. Gravitycollapse Oct 2013 #29

UN has already picked up the oddity dipsydoodle Oct 2013 #30

So they had spent missiles, "pointing" to Assad's army position, but no Sarin found? Junkdrawer Oct 2013 #35

The U.N. has unequivocally placed blame where it belonged Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #46

The UN investigators did not identify the source. morningfog Oct 2013 #48

Cite your source. joshcryer Oct 2013 #90

Suuuuuuure it was, Mr. Putin jberryhill Oct 2013 #31

What does that mean? Do you have something to disprove the info in the OP? sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #41

The U.N. report Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #47

Link please! sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #49

Here you go Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #51

Here YOU go: sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #60

Wow. You are in serious denial Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #62

This is not about me. Could you try to stick to the issues? I provided with you sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #64

The UN never arrived at a conclusion that Syrian rebels Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #67

Really? I guess that is why it became impossible for the US to gather support sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #75

Now it was an invasion. Make up facts much? Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #77

Nailed it...nt SidDithers Oct 2013 #112

The report did not assign blame. former9thward Oct 2013 #61

Oh Reallly!!! Did they mention what conclusion the facts they uncovered Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #66

Really!!! "They" did not uncover any facts. former9thward Oct 2013 #68

You have no respect for the facts and evidence so Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #69

RT: Obama Birth Certificate "definitely fraudulent" jberryhill Oct 2013 #134

This is totally unbelievable propaganda Fumesucker Oct 2013 #37

Lol! n/t sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #42

Reminds me of Anthony Weiner's photo Coyotl Oct 2013 #44

This makes perfect sense. The Saudis are the moneybags behind the opposition. Coyotl Oct 2013 #43

That's a load of horse shit and you know it Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #45

Please post something that disproves the info in the OP. I keep asking but sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #50

Here you go again Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #55

Am I in the wrong thread? Is this a discussion of Morales, who btw, is a world sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #58

I provided link to respected newspaper publishing UN conclusions Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #59

See my post # 60. It is an established fact that the so-called 'rebels' in Syria sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #63

Thanks for ignoring that England and Europe rightly blame Assad for Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #65

Thanks for ignoring actual facts. This is a waste of time. When someone is not sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #73

We are done. The UN reported no such "facts" regarding Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #76

More: sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #80

The poster you are arguing with once told me that Anwar Awlaki was a non-violent cleric who msanthrope Oct 2013 #118

Listen here RT is objective and Russia has never been an advocate of Syria grantcart Oct 2013 #145

reagan lives reddread Oct 2013 #109

I thought it was the bloodthirsty islamophobe shitbags that are cluttering the place up? Scootaloo Oct 2013 #78

Islamaphobe? Lololol. Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #79

Yup, they're disruptors Scootaloo Oct 2013 #81

I truly wish this story added something to our factual understanding. It doesn't. eom leveymg Oct 2013 #56

Newswire posts anon source = bad. RT does it = objective fact. joshcryer Oct 2013 #89

And here I'd thought it was Colonel Mustard in the pantry with the candlestick cthulu2016 Oct 2013 #91

RT. LOL... SidDithers Oct 2013 #92

Here's all of yesterday news dipsydoodle Oct 2013 #93

Guys, this is nonsense. Ash_F Oct 2013 #94

That actually makes sense. Laelth Oct 2013 #96

not really, and not according to Juan Cole cali Oct 2013 #97

I trust Cole more, to be sure. Laelth Oct 2013 #98

While I am very skeptical about this, I am glad to view different sides of the issues. rhett o rick Oct 2013 #108

different side arely staircase Oct 2013 #114

So what do you propose? That the site be banned? nm rhett o rick Oct 2013 #116

It already is banned in LBN BelgianMadCow Oct 2013 #121

So you think it should be banned from DU altogether? Or what is your point? nm rhett o rick Oct 2013 #125

strawman much? arely staircase Oct 2013 #137

So I have to guess your point? You really, really dont like RT but cant tell rhett o rick Oct 2013 #138

+1 BelgianMadCow Oct 2013 #120

I am very disappointed in some DU posters that claim to be opened-minded "politically liberal" but rhett o rick Oct 2013 #126

Gasp! But, but Thom Hartmann werks fer Putin! raouldukelives Oct 2013 #139

The problem is that RT included the word .................... Russian. nm rhett o rick Oct 2013 #140

+1 uponit7771 Oct 2013 #142

StayPuft marshmallow man is about as likely ProdigalJunkMail Oct 2013 #123

More bullshit from RT...the communication branch of the FSB... Sand Wind Oct 2013 #124

RT: �Best Sex Ed is Russian literature� � children�s rights ombudsman -Putin's Commissioner. DevonRex Oct 2013 #133