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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

cthulu2016

(10,960 posts)

4. Two points. First, the hosts know this is not offered for the truth of the article

Reply to quinnox (Reply #1)

Wed Apr 16, 2014, 03:31 PM

Apr 2014

They are not stupid. It is an examination of the journalistic similarity of Russian propaganda from state-run media and the drivel from American psychos like Alex Jones, not presenting Infowars rantings as something for people to read for the credible information they include..

Second, the point of the post, and the similar post yesterday, is that GD is deluged with vomit from Russia Today while Infowars is obviously too crazy to post. It is noting an irony.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

RT or Infowars? II (You be the judge...) [View all] cthulu2016 Apr 2014 OP

I think there is a hard restriction on linking to info wars site quinnox Apr 2014 #1

It appears to be being used as an example of poor journalistic standards. herding cats Apr 2014 #2

Two points. First, the hosts know this is not offered for the truth of the article cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #4

Ok, but if you feel that strongly, maybe use ask the admin forum quinnox Apr 2014 #8

I do not seek a ban, at all. cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #10

Ok, but just realize that some can understand that, and still not write off RT completely quinnox Apr 2014 #11

Of course there are some valid things cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #12

rt is no worse than our msm questionseverything Apr 2014 #9

As soon as I saw "NATO boss" I had it figured for IW. NuclearDem Apr 2014 #3

Yes, as with yesterday's "NATO's Pet Nazis," the name-calling gives it away cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #5

Regarding the seperation of government and private business. Tommy_Carcetti Apr 2014 #6

Not me! I get all my news from Radio Marti. cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #7

Why would anyone cite Ron Paul as an authority on difficult points of international law? muriel_volestrangler Apr 2014 #13

Thanks. I guess they really can't be told apart! cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #14