Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Russia declares war on memes

Memes Russia

  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#21
cirdanx

cirdanx

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 200 posts
  • Location:Austria
  • Steam:cirdanx

 

 

so, they pass a new law because of a butthurt celebrity. that's so common, it wouldn't even make it in the news in the US and many other western countries

I must be misunderstanding, are you saying this type of event, which is clamping down on freedom of expression , is common in Western countries?

 

 

In case it's completely missed you, which it seems to have done, the issue is not merely about 'freedom of expression'. There are other issues at play. Libel and fraud being two of them, both of which are recognized in western law (to varying degrees depending on where you live).

 

As I said before, I can't read Russian so can't get at the finer points of the law, but as it's been represented, there actually may be little wrong with it, and very well might even stand up as a law in the U.S.. We have legislation on the books in regards to Libel and Fraud already, which, situationally could apply to memes. The thing about memes in the U.S. though is that it would generally be hard to prove who was responsible for it, one meme alone isn't usually damaging, and the people behind most of them are idiots without much money, so a civil suit is almost never going to be feasible because of these and other factors.

 

 

Very well said and i agree. In fact there isn´t that much difference in free speech if you compare russia and the west. The whole idea that everyone in the east is oppressed is realy nothing but a propaganda tool, too many people believe Russia today is still like the Soviet Union, well it´s not :p

 

Also, concerning free speech in the west...i always saw it more like a farce full of double standarts, but before i write another mega post i will just point to this article, which is a decent view on it, in my opinion: http://www.presstv.c...ern-free-speech



#22
cirdanx

cirdanx

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 200 posts
  • Location:Austria
  • Steam:cirdanx

So you support this move in Russia ?

 

Well i don´t think its any of my business. To me this is just another stupid law that doesn´t effect anything realy, it won´t stop memes, but by looking at the backstory, which DID cause people damage, i can see the intend. But it doesn´t change a thing, people will still look at memes and make them, just like people in the UK will still make and look at all the banned porn there (which is even more of a ridiculous law than this) ;)



#23
Valsuelm

Valsuelm

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 421 posts
  • Location:New York, USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

 

 

so, they pass a new law because of a butthurt celebrity. that's so common, it wouldn't even make it in the news in the US and many other western countries

I must be misunderstanding, are you saying this type of event, which is clamping down on freedom of expression , is common in Western countries?

 

 

In case it's completely missed you, which it seems to have done, the issue is not merely about 'freedom of expression'. There are other issues at play. Libel and fraud being two of them, both of which are recognized in western law (to varying degrees depending on where you live).

 

As I said before, I can't read Russian so can't get at the finer points of the law, but as it's been represented, there actually may be little wrong with it, and very well might even stand up as a law in the U.S.. We have legislation on the books in regards to Libel and Fraud already, which, situationally could apply to memes. The thing about memes though is that it would generally be hard to prove who was responsible for it, one meme alone isn't usually damaging, and the people behind most of them are idiots without much money, so a civil suit is rarely going to be feasible because of these and other factors.

 

So you support this move in Russia ?

 

 

General,

 

As I've tried to point out to you repeatedly, the world is generally not made up of black and white.

 

I don't support nor condemn this move in Russia as I've not seen the actual legal language myself. In my own nation, where I can read the laws, there are articles misrepresenting those laws all the time. Propaganda is everywhere, arguably even more so in regards to foreign nations. In the case of this situation it certainly is dishonest to say 'The Kremlin declares war on memes', but that headline serves to reinforce a narrative for the brainwashed, so it is used.

 

If I support any law at all I would support one that allows those reasonably damaged by fraud and libel (via meme or any other manner) to seek redress, ie: anti-Libel and anti-Fraud laws.


Edited by Valsuelm, 15 April 2015 - 01:35 PM.

  • cirdanx likes this

#24
Valsuelm

Valsuelm

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 421 posts
  • Location:New York, USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

 

 

so, they pass a new law because of a butthurt celebrity. that's so common, it wouldn't even make it in the news in the US and many other western countries

I must be misunderstanding, are you saying this type of event, which is clamping down on freedom of expression , is common in Western countries?

 

 

In case it's completely missed you, which it seems to have done, the issue is not merely about 'freedom of expression'. There are other issues at play. Libel and fraud being two of them, both of which are recognized in western law (to varying degrees depending on where you live).

 

As I said before, I can't read Russian so can't get at the finer points of the law, but as it's been represented, there actually may be little wrong with it, and very well might even stand up as a law in the U.S.. We have legislation on the books in regards to Libel and Fraud already, which, situationally could apply to memes. The thing about memes in the U.S. though is that it would generally be hard to prove who was responsible for it, one meme alone isn't usually damaging, and the people behind most of them are idiots without much money, so a civil suit is almost never going to be feasible because of these and other factors.

 

 

Very well said and i agree. In fact there isn´t that much difference in free speech if you compare russia and the west. The whole idea that everyone in the east is oppressed is realy nothing but a propaganda tool, too many people believe Russia today is still like the Soviet Union, well it´s not :p

 

Also, concerning free speech in the west...i always saw it more like a farce full of double standarts, but before i write another mega post i will just point to this article, which is a decent view on it, in my opinion: http://www.presstv.c...ern-free-speech

 

 

'Freedom of Speech' in many nations in the west does not now nor has ever really existed. It's a myth that it exists. A decent litmus test is to look up which nations outlaw questioning aspects of the 'Holocaust'. Where you have a nation that will put someone in jail  for questioning the 'Holocaust' you will find a nation that will put people in jail for other bits of speech as well. Those nations do not have true 'Freedom of Speech' enshrined in their culture or law. (tip: question anything and everything that any government ever outlaws discussion about).

 

Many nations have adopted anti 'hate speech' laws in recent years, which sometimes encompass questioning the 'holocaust'. ie: Canada

 

In the U.S. it does did exist. It's enshrined in the highest law of the land (which is increasingly ignored or perverted in some manner), and historically has been a fundamental concept in our culture. In modern times though that culture has been under fire and is deteriorating,  ie: the subversive cultural Marxist ambiguous concept of 'hate speech' landed here in the States in recent times and laws have been enacted against it, something which is entirely unconstitutional and doesn't bode well at all for the health of the nation.

 

To a large degree though you can get away with saying anything you want in the U.S.. Legally anyways. Just don't violate those unconstitutional ambiguous anti 'hatespeech' laws (which don't exist in every state), and end up before a judge which will put those laws above the constitution. For the most part though, you'll only find yourself violating those laws if you've violated some other law. They're generally just politicized laws designed to subvert the culture, and in practice generally just exacerbate a situation where someone is already getting charged for some other crime.

 

For example:

 

You can say 'i hope you die you mother ****ing *'N' word* all you want. You won't be convicted of a speech crime (at least not yet; you might get arrested by an idiot though).

 

You can't say that very thing though while beating a black person up without being charged with a 'hate' crime in some jurisdictions. Or beat a black person up after having said such a thing where others could hear you.

 

The insanity and evil of such laws, which largely amount to thought policing, is obvious to some but amazingly not to others (or they're just evil). And such things are on the rise. (The road ahead is getting darker as we go.)

 

Laws against libel and fraud exist of course, but generally don't land you in jail (especially in the case of the former) unless you've defrauded some 'official' government sanctioned thing. To a large degree these laws just allow people who have been damaged in a substantial way to seek redress against those who damaged them (if what was said was false). A jury gets to decide either way, most of the time (unless a plea/settlement deal is reached). ie: A recent somewhat famous example of this was Jessie Ventura's successful suit against the estate of Chris Kyle.


Edited by Valsuelm, 15 April 2015 - 04:06 PM.


#25
BruceVC

BruceVC

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4334 posts
  • Location:Johannesburg, South Africa
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

 

 

so, they pass a new law because of a butthurt celebrity. that's so common, it wouldn't even make it in the news in the US and many other western countries

I must be misunderstanding, are you saying this type of event, which is clamping down on freedom of expression , is common in Western countries?

 

 

In case it's completely missed you, which it seems to have done, the issue is not merely about 'freedom of expression'. There are other issues at play. Libel and fraud being two of them, both of which are recognized in western law (to varying degrees depending on where you live).

 

As I said before, I can't read Russian so can't get at the finer points of the law, but as it's been represented, there actually may be little wrong with it, and very well might even stand up as a law in the U.S.. We have legislation on the books in regards to Libel and Fraud already, which, situationally could apply to memes. The thing about memes in the U.S. though is that it would generally be hard to prove who was responsible for it, one meme alone isn't usually damaging, and the people behind most of them are idiots without much money, so a civil suit is almost never going to be feasible because of these and other factors.

 

 

Very well said and i agree. In fact there isn´t that much difference in free speech if you compare russia and the west. The whole idea that everyone in the east is oppressed is realy nothing but a propaganda tool, too many people believe Russia today is still like the Soviet Union, well it´s not :p

 

Also, concerning free speech in the west...i always saw it more like a farce full of double standarts, but before i write another mega post i will just point to this article, which is a decent view on it, in my opinion: http://www.presstv.c...ern-free-speech

 

 

Yeah,..,..there isn't much of a difference between freedom of speech in places like Russia or the USA ...except for the fact that is 
 
Putin has been actively involved in controlling the narrative in the country, RT ( Russia Today)is state owned...how can you seriously suggest that freedom of press is the same in Russia and West?  You do realize that the likes of  CNN, Sky or BBC are independent media houses that regularly criticize there own governments and presidents or prime ministers. You never hear this on RT ...its just a constant negative view of the West and a bias view of Russian activities 
 
 
How many Western Journalists have been killed or arrested in Western countries?
 
 
 
How much influence do Western governments have on the independence on media houses in there countries 
 
 
 
 
Self-censorship is rife in Russia because of the consequences if the news isn't what Putin likes to hear. Western media houses constantly undermine or question there own governments..because that's the strength and purpose  of a true free press. They are the watchdogs of a Democracy 
 
 
I get you have been  drinking the "Putin kool-aid "...thats you choice. But don't expect the rest of us to do the same. I can accept  the issue of Ukraine is nuanced and complicated but you go too far when you say things like " freedom of press is the same in Russia and The West"  

Edited by BruceVC, 15 April 2015 - 09:11 PM.


#26
Valsuelm

Valsuelm

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 421 posts
  • Location:New York, USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

General,

 

RT is not near as bad as you think. Many if not most of it's guests are American, and it hardly is just a 'constant negative view of the west'. It does however fairly constantly report stories that fly in the face of many myths you hold dear.

 

Russia is hardly alone in owning media outlets directed at nations other than itself. Many nations dabble in such matters, including the U.S., which has many media outlets for overseas propaganda purposes, and of course the U.K., that nation who supposedly no longer runs the world's largest empire but just so happens to own the world's largest propaganda.... oh sorry, I'll use the PC term you'll be more comfortable with:  largest international news network. It's a coincidence I'm sure.

 

The sad truth is that RT, PressTV, and Al Jazeera whom all you have railed against, generally are far more objective in the stories they do cover than any major western mainstream 'news' outlet.

 

Your list of journalists killed doesn't really amount to much. The wiki is as ever incomplete, and many of the deaths listed are the result of war. That said, of course the occasional journalist is snuffed out in Russia because of what they said or what they were investigating, but this also happens in the 'west' as well. You would dismiss such claims as 'conspiracy theory' though.

 

As for how much influence the governments of the 'west' have on media? Well, that varies quite a bit. In the U.S. for example no major network is outright owned by the government, though PBS and NPR get quite a decent chunk of government funding, and government agencies do exert some degree of influence over the mainstream media. In the U.K. there's the BBC, which is owned by the government. Australia also has a 'news' station owned by it's government.

 

In the 'west' however, it often is not so much how much influence the government has on the media but how much influence the puppeteers of the government have on the media, and the answer to that is one helluva lot.
 

So good General, I'm sorry to disappoint but you shot yourself in the foot, confusing it with a Russian foot. It's somewhat understandable, as they do look very much the same these days.

 

I have recommended you watch these before, and it's clear to me you haven't yet, but here again are some of my recommendations:

 

 


Edited by Valsuelm, 15 April 2015 - 11:47 PM.


#27
Valsuelm

Valsuelm

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 421 posts
  • Location:New York, USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

And two more for you good General,

 

 


Edited by Valsuelm, 15 April 2015 - 11:49 PM.


#28
BruceVC

BruceVC

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4334 posts
  • Location:Johannesburg, South Africa
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

General,

 

RT is not near as bad as you think. Many if not most of it's guests are American, and it hardly is just a 'constant negative view of the west'. It does however fairly constantly report stories that fly in the face of many myths you hold dear.

 

Russia is hardly alone in owning media outlets directed at nations other than itself. Many nations dabble in such matters, including the U.S., which has many media outlets for overseas propaganda purposes, and of course the U.K., that nation who supposedly no longer runs the world's largest empire but just so happens to own the world's largest propaganda.... oh sorry, I'll use the PC term you'll be more comfortable with:  largest international news network. It's a coincidence I'm sure.

 

The sad truth is that RT, PressTV, and Al Jazeera whom all you have railed against, generally are far more objective in the stories they do cover than any major western mainstream 'news' outlet.

 

Your list of journalists killed doesn't really amount to much. The wiki is as ever incomplete, and many of the deaths listed are the result of war. That said, of course the occasional journalist is snuffed out in Russia because of what they said or what they were investigating, but this also happens in the 'west' as well. You would dismiss such claims as 'conspiracy theory' though.

 

As for how much influence the governments of the 'west' have on media? Well, that varies quite a bit. In the U.S. for example no major network is outright owned by the government, though PBS and NPR get quite a decent chunk of government funding, and government agencies do exert some degree of influence over the mainstream media. In the U.K. there's the BBC, which is owned by the government. Australia also has a 'news' station owned by it's government.

 

In the 'west' however, it often is not so much how much influence the government has on the media but how much influence the puppeteers of the government have on the media, and the answer to that is one helluva lot.
 

So good General, I'm sorry to disappoint but you shot yourself in the foot, confusing it with a Russian foot. It's somewhat understandable, as they do look very much the same these days.

 

I have recommended you watch these before, and it's clear to me you haven't yet, but here again are some of my recommendations:

 

 

 

I have never rallied against Al-Jazeera, I consider them an objective source of news on most levels. They also have access to interviews that most Western media houses don't  have so they are offer an very relevant perspective that doesn't generally differ from the likes of CNN or BBC.

 

I have disdain for RT because they are funded and controlled by the Russian state yet claim to be objective, its not hard to understand the difference between RT and other international news channels that bring us global news 



#29
BruceVC

BruceVC

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4334 posts
  • Location:Johannesburg, South Africa
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

General,

 

RT is not near as bad as you think. Many if not most of it's guests are American, and it hardly is just a 'constant negative view of the west'. It does however fairly constantly report stories that fly in the face of many myths you hold dear.

 

Russia is hardly alone in owning media outlets directed at nations other than itself. Many nations dabble in such matters, including the U.S., which has many media outlets for overseas propaganda purposes, and of course the U.K., that nation who supposedly no longer runs the world's largest empire but just so happens to own the world's largest propaganda.... oh sorry, I'll use the PC term you'll be more comfortable with:  largest international news network. It's a coincidence I'm sure.

 

The sad truth is that RT, PressTV, and Al Jazeera whom all you have railed against, generally are far more objective in the stories they do cover than any major western mainstream 'news' outlet.

 

Your list of journalists killed doesn't really amount to much. The wiki is as ever incomplete, and many of the deaths listed are the result of war. That said, of course the occasional journalist is snuffed out in Russia because of what they said or what they were investigating, but this also happens in the 'west' as well. You would dismiss such claims as 'conspiracy theory' though.

 

As for how much influence the governments of the 'west' have on media? Well, that varies quite a bit. In the U.S. for example no major network is outright owned by the government, though PBS and NPR get quite a decent chunk of government funding, and government agencies do exert some degree of influence over the mainstream media. In the U.K. there's the BBC, which is owned by the government. Australia also has a 'news' station owned by it's government.

 

In the 'west' however, it often is not so much how much influence the government has on the media but how much influence the puppeteers of the government have on the media, and the answer to that is one helluva lot.
 

So good General, I'm sorry to disappoint but you shot yourself in the foot, confusing it with a Russian foot. It's somewhat understandable, as they do look very much the same these days.

 

I have recommended you watch these before, and it's clear to me you haven't yet, but here again are some of my recommendations:

 

 

 

I have never rallied against Al-Jazeera, I consider them an objective source of news on most levels. They also have access to interviews that most Western media houses don't  have so they are offer an very relevant perspective that doesn't generally differ from the likes of CNN or BBC.

 

I have disdain for RT because they are funded and controlled by the Russian state yet claim to be objective, its not hard to understand the difference between RT and other international news channels that bring us global news 



#30
Zoraptor

Zoraptor

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2468 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

General,

 

It's a Trap!


  • Monte Carlo and 213374U like this

#31
Tort

Tort

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 37 posts

I must be misunderstanding, are you saying this type of event, which is clamping down on freedom of expression , is common in Western countries?

 
In case it's completely missed you, which it seems to have done, the issue is not merely about 'freedom of expression'. There are other issues at play. Libel and fraud being two of them, both of which are recognized in western law (to varying degrees depending on where you live).
 
As I said before, I can't read Russian so can't get at the finer points of the law, but as it's been represented, there actually may be little wrong with it, and very well might even stand up as a law in the U.S..

Concerning that later, in Russia there many laws that might be constitutional on paper, but not in their actual application.

For example, recently Russia passed a law nominally strives to reduce internet child pornography, but in practice its vague language was used to silence opposition sites. Similarly while internet users rights (as they are) are presumably guarantied, the providers have to give all info without seeing any warrants. Add to that all the blunderbuss over opposition leaders etc.

That and the systematically trample of Russian freedom of expression, that we have seen over the last decade and IMO it is silly to assume that this law will be used against silly internet memes, which no can stop spreading, more likely it will be used against Russian opposition "press" to stifle criticism using caricatures and the like.

Edited by Tort, 16 April 2015 - 05:46 AM.

  • BruceVC likes this

#32
Tort

Tort

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Russia is hardly alone in owning media outlets directed at nations other than itself. Many nations dabble in such matters, including the U.S., [...]

Please stop with BS! This has been done to death:

Step one: Some disenfranchised kid claims the "west" just as bad as X in Y
Step two: Making a generic statement that is true for both
Step three: Appealing to ignorance, spamming their original research (usually with googled popular cases related just to the USA )
Step four: Repeat last Ad nauseam.
Alternatively: If all fails they cry "bias" against all the scientific data against you...


If you guys want to argue that there are issues with world media, western media or USA in particular please go ahead, but the constant deflection from Russia MAJOR issues pointing to anything related to the USA that you can find feels pathetic.

 

RT is not near as bad as you think. Many if not most of it's guests are American, and it hardly is just a 'constant negative view of the west'. It does however fairly constantly report stories that fly in the face of many myths you hold dear.

The only myth here is that "west" or its media are some sort of singular entity, like most of Russia's media. And Self criticism is a common place here, even in the USA there are many outlets that doing your so called myth busting. Which is in contrast to Russia, where RT (which can be compare to FOX news on steroids ) represent its full reportage, and the constantly report against western "Myth" mostly works as confirmation bias to the populace who is stuck behind.

Edited by Tort, 16 April 2015 - 06:47 AM.

  • BruceVC and Agiel like this

#33
BruceVC

BruceVC

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4334 posts
  • Location:Johannesburg, South Africa
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

 

I must be misunderstanding, are you saying this type of event, which is clamping down on freedom of expression , is common in Western countries?

 
In case it's completely missed you, which it seems to have done, the issue is not merely about 'freedom of expression'. There are other issues at play. Libel and fraud being two of them, both of which are recognized in western law (to varying degrees depending on where you live).
 
As I said before, I can't read Russian so can't get at the finer points of the law, but as it's been represented, there actually may be little wrong with it, and very well might even stand up as a law in the U.S..

 

Concerning that later, in Russia there many laws that might be constitutional on paper, but not in their actual application.

For example, recently Russia passed a law nominally strives to reduce internet child pornography, but in practice its vague language was used to silence opposition sites. Similarly while internet users rights (as they are) are presumably guarantied, the providers have to give all info without seeing any warrants. Add to that all the blunderbuss over opposition leaders etc.

That and the systematically trample of Russian freedom of expression, that we have seen over the last decade and IMO it is silly to assume that this law will be used against silly internet memes, which no can stop spreading, more likely it will be used against Russian opposition "press" to stifle criticism using caricatures and the like.

 

 

Well said, QFT 



#34
Monte Carlo

Monte Carlo

    Vorpal Panzerfaust of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 6713 posts
  • Location:England, This Blessed Plot
  • Xbox Gamertag:MonteCarlo
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Noam Chomsky epic fail.



#35
Valsuelm

Valsuelm

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 421 posts
  • Location:New York, USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

General,

 

It's a Trap!

 

 

There is no trap laid for the General. I wouldn't mislead him so.

 

The only traps appearing in this thread so far are the one's folks lay for themselves.



#36
Valsuelm

Valsuelm

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 421 posts
  • Location:New York, USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I have never rallied against Al-Jazeera, I consider them an objective source of news on most levels. They also have access to interviews that most Western media houses don't  have so they are offer an very relevant perspective that doesn't generally differ from the likes of CNN or BBC.

 

I have disdain for RT because they are funded and controlled by the Russian state yet claim to be objective, its not hard to understand the difference between RT and other international news channels that bring us global news 

 

 

I seem to recall otherwise in regards to your opinion on Al-Jazeera. Finding that thread though won't be easy, as it's quite some time back. If I'm mistaken, my apologies. If you like Al-Jazeera that's good. It's a step in the right direction.

 

Here's an example of hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance, or something of the like:
 

'I have disdain for the BBC because they are funded and controlled by the government of the United Kingdom yet claim to be objective, its not hard to understand the difference between the BBC and other international news channels that bring us global news.'

 

Obviously your disdain is your disdain. You hold the BBC in high regard, and RT in low regard. Some of the criticism you lay on RT however, is also applicable to your cherished BBC.

 

If one is to be capable of recognizing objectivity,  one must be objective themselves.



#37
Zoraptor

Zoraptor

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2468 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

 

General,

 

It's a Trap!

 

 

There is no trap laid for the General. I wouldn't mislead him so.

 

No, not from the general.

 

You appear to be taking seriously someone who writes that state sponsored channels are biased then immediately cites the BBC as an independent counterexample. He does that sort of thing all the time, it's a baited hook to get a a response- or alternatively, he's so incredibly un self aware that why bother anyway.

 

That's why I didn't use a gif for "It's a trap!", Ackbar would probably sue me in Russia for using him against such a weak effort.


  • Valsuelm likes this

#38
KaineParker

KaineParker

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2945 posts
  • Location:Houston, Texas
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

General,

 
It's a Trap!

That's transphobic.

#39
Amentep

Amentep

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5017 posts
  • Location:Fawcett City
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
Is there a meme for Russia shutting down memes yet?

#40
BruceVC

BruceVC

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4334 posts
  • Location:Johannesburg, South Africa
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

 

 

General,

 

It's a Trap!

 

 

There is no trap laid for the General. I wouldn't mislead him so.

 

No, not from the general.

 

You appear to be taking seriously someone who writes that state sponsored channels are biased then immediately cites the BBC as an independent counterexample. He does that sort of thing all the time, it's a baited hook to get a a response- or alternatively, he's so incredibly un self aware that why bother anyway.

 

That's why I didn't use a gif for "It's a trap!", Ackbar would probably sue me in Russia for using him against such a weak effort.

 

You so  insightful Zora....but not really

 

I normally just ignore your attempts when you accuse me of being a troll but I can see the possible confusion so this explanation is more for others

 

There is always the risk of state interference in a state owned media house like BBC, but this discussion is not just about RT or BBC. Its about the broader issue of freedom of speech and the Putin regimes influence in the media narrative within Russia . The BBC has many interviews and guests who criticize the British government and considering how seriously British journalists and broadcasters take there independence the suggestion that the BBC is just a mouth peace for the British government is  just scurrilous and absurd. If you disagree produce links that show how BBC journalists have resigned because they  got tired of  discussing a subjective view of the news when it was anti-Britain. Oh thats right, you can't because the don't really exist because the BBC is allowed to produce the news based on the actual news and not what the government tells them. And that is not the same thing as misinformation that everyone believed at the time and later was proven false like the reasons for the invasion of Iraq. And I can produce links  around RT and people  resigning due to interference in there job

 

 

Once again this is not the case with RT, so yes the two are different despite being state owned. This should be obvious to anyone who claims to have knowledge in global affairs and events. But no as usual you focus on one point, that I mentioned BBC, and everything else is forgotten and you say I not having this debate in good faith and I want to " trap people " 

 

You anti-Western bias actually blinds you to certain realities and perspectives, you really should work on this because its not a good way to view the world 


Edited by BruceVC, 17 April 2015 - 01:14 PM.

  • Ineth likes this





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Memes, Russia

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users