Features

Russia Today is Putin's weapon of mass deception. Will it work in Britain?

It looks like a news channel. It talks like a news channel. It says whatever Putin wants

6 December 2014

9:00 AM

6 December 2014

9:00 AM

Anyone making the journey to Westminster by public transport will be confronted by a series of posters warning them about the state of British media. The word ‘redacted’ is in large letters, and readers are advised to look up a website for ‘the ad we can’t show you here’. If you do, you see a picture of Tony Blair advocating war. ‘This is what happens when there is no second opinion,’ the webpage says, advising people to ‘question more’. This is how Russia Today, the Kremlin’s fast-growing English language broadcaster, is selling itself: as the challenger to an out-of-touch establishment. At a time when there’s a widespread distrust of political elites, it’s not a bad line.

unnamed

Russia Today advert at Westminster Tube station.

Unlike rival broadcasters, Russia Today — or RT as it has rebranded itself since 2009 — has a growing -budget; President Putin himself is said to have intervened to protect it against cuts. The network now claims a worldwide audience of 700 million, a figure the old Voice of Russia could only dream about. It is widely present in social media, having 1.4 million subscribers on YouTube, for instance. And it has achieved a largish cult following on the fringes of the left and the right in the West. Its audience seems to believe in RT’s marketing message — that the network covers the stories which the mainstream media ignores, such as Occupy Wall Street or WikiLeaks scandals.

But there are, of course, stories that Russia Today is not keen on covering — such as the reality of Russia today. Take this week’s economic crisis, which Anne Applebaum writes about: the plunging rouble, the forecast of a recession, the accelerating exodus of capital as investors head for the hills. The story was the fourth item on RT’s business page — under the heading of ‘Business Snaps’. The main news page, however, led on the vote by the French parliament to recognise a Palestinian state. The Russian politics page had only one financial story — a reassurance from President Putin that Russia won’t demand an early debt repayment from Ukraine because it doesn’t want to cause Kiev difficulties. And that was that. In short, something like Miss Prism’s instructions had gone out as editorial guidance: ‘The fall of the rouble you may omit or at least downplay. It is somewhat too sensational for a young network.’

Not that financial stories were avoided entirely. The UK page opened with a long story headlined ‘Anti-Austerity Protesters Besiege Downing Street Over “Disastrous” Economic Policies’. But this was less a report than an advert, written in advance, for the ‘People’s Assembly… a self-declared non-political campaign group… which rejects reactionary rhetoric peddled by austerity advocates etc., etc.’ This was vigorous stuff, accompanied by lively illustrations and helpful links, but it suffered from a familiar confused logic, arguing that the Tories had plunged Britain into a penal austerity by indulging in massive overspending and rising debt.

Still on finance, there was a link to a video of RT’s star financial columnist-anchor in London, Max Keiser, who held a freewheeling debate with his co-anchor on the not-very-burning question of whether the UK is about to lose its treasured position as a haven of political and economic security for investors (short answer: yes), interleaved with weird giggly speculation about what drugs George Osborne was on. Keiser is a fun anarchist provocateur with a background in finance and media who mixes financial analysis with aggressive hell-za-poppin’ humour. His views on Russia’s currency troubles — a major financial story of the day — would have been original and, just maybe, enlightening. He doesn’t shrink from denouncing bankers as terrorists. But he didn’t deal with the topic.

posters

Posters from RT’s advertising campaign

[Alt-Text]


That’s par for RT’s course today. It began somewhat differently in 2004 as an international news network aiming to be similar to the BBC or CNN, with the insertion of local stories showing Russia in a good light. That was acceptably defensive (and inoffensive) PR, but it buttered no parsnips. Besides, the Putin regime was embarking on a more aggressive foreign policy, and as part of Putin’s information apparatus, RT was inevitably dragged along in its wake. The turning point is generally agreed to have occurred in 2008, when Russia provoked the Georgian government into an attempt to recover its lost province of Ossetia and promptly responded with an invasion and occupation of parts of Georgia. RT gave Putin cover with a jingoistic campaign that denounced the Georgians as genocidal. That campaign in turn now looks like a dry run for RT’s reporting and commentary on the Ukrainian crisis, which depicted the Kiev government as bloodthirsty neo-fascists intent on ethnic cleansing etc. — while depicting actual bloodthirsty neo-fascists (and Russian soldiers) in eastern Ukraine as peace-minded democrats.

If that were all, RT would be as ineffective as Radio Moscow used to be. Simple ideological abuse alerts people that they are being manipulated. But as Peter Pomerantsev explains in his forthcoming book on modern Russia, Nothing is True and Everything is Possible, what makes RT more insidious is that it has most of the external features of legitimate western journalism:

Russia Today began to look and sound like any 24/7 news channel: the thumping music before the news flash, the earnest pretty newscasters, the jock-like sports broadcasters. British and American twentysomethings straight out of university would be offered generous compensation packages, where in London or Washington they would have been expected to work for free. Of course they all wondered whether RT would turn out to be a propaganda channel. ‘Well, it’s all about expressing the Russian point of view,’ they would say, a little uncertainly.

RT does cover genuine reports about legitimate stories, seriously and without obvious bias, which makes it seem at times like any other news network. Not everything is a façade of lies. But RT is about a great deal more than that — and less.

Western journalism is sometimes biased, usually unconsciously, but it is actuated by some concern for the truth which in major news organisations results, for example, in formal rules about sourcing. These rules are constantly examined and updated. Complete cynicism about such matters is rare and punishable — see, for instance, the fate of Stephen Glass, who invented stories out of whole cloth for the New Republic. But when Pomerantsev met the managing editor of RT in his office, he was told: ‘There is no such thing as objective reporting.’ And that mission statement goes far beyond a humble acceptance that reporting cannot overcome every bias; it treats the truth as something malleable in theory and determined by authority in practice.

A number of those American and British twentysomething recruits have discovered that unpleasant reality in the course of their reporting. Abby Martin, the host of RT America, protested on air at the support that RT gave to Russia’s invasion of Crimea. Reporter Liz Wahl resigned shortly afterwards for the same reason. Staci Bivens, another RT reporter, said that she had been ordered by editors to write a story arguing the absurd case that Germany was a ‘failed state’. (She refused, which led to her leaving the network.) Overall, past and present employees of RT described a workplace in which reporters and commentators might write original stories only to find them rewritten by senior Russian editors — not to clarify or correct them, but to suit obvious Kremlin interests.

Some of these editing decisions are very transparent in their intentions. RT is an enthusiastic reporter of almost any protest against fracking anywhere, reflecting the interest of the Russian state and Gazprom in discouraging competition and keeping energy prices high. More generally, its underlying pose is that while Russia is far from perfect, the West as a whole is just as bad, and the US a great deal worse — the fountain of all bad things.

Thus the network tries to highlight stories that show western countries in a bad or hypocritical light, such as the riots in Ferguson (though here the American media are giving RT stiff competition) or the deaths in the National Health Service. Or to tailor coverage to please and accommodate ‘protest’ groups such as the People’s Assembly or some extreme Eurosceptics — groups that would normally never be found in the same cheering corner — in ways that draw them into a conspiratorial anti-western outlook: thus, ‘cuts’ in UK public spending are the fault of Wall Street and the war in Ukraine was started by the European Union. Or, at the extreme, to embark on old-fashioned Soviet-style disinformation as in a recent report on Spanish-language RT that hinted the US might be behind the Ebola outbreak; or the attempts by RT to blame the shooting down of the Malaysian airliner on Kiev.

All this is then presented to the world with considerable professionalism, some sharp sarcastic wit on occasion, and clever rhetorical techniques that turn the West’s own arguments inside out. As David Remnick, editor of the New Yorker, put it: ‘RT is darkly, nastily brilliant, so much more sophisticated than Soviet propaganda.’

People are beginning to agree with Remnick that the ‘Russian point of view’ is generally Putin’s point of view. Now the British regulator Ofcom has reached the same conclusion: last month it accused RT of serious breaches of due impartiality and threatened sanctions against it. Margarita Simonyan, RT’s editor-in-chief, gave a nastily brilliant RT response: ‘We accept the decision of Ofcom to have held, in effect, that a government’s viewpoint must always be reflected and given due weight when it is criticised in the reporting of major political controversies.’

Those like me who are uncomfortable with official regulation of the media but nonetheless see RT as an example of Putin’s ‘weaponisation of information’ (as Pomerantsev and Michael Weiss name it in a recent report for the Institute of Modern Russia) need not despair. Networks and newspapers have a natural incentive to subject RT to sharp criticism as it is. That’s already happening — and fortunately in the Guardian, which has influence with RT’s anti-establishment and anti-American audience. Young journalists are already finding that a spell at RT is a handicap in getting jobs elsewhere. And though lying sometimes works, repeated lying — however darkly brilliant — is a recipe for lost viewers and listeners. The time will come when RT has to confine its clever inventions to a captive market: Russians.

John O’Sullivan is Director of the Danube Institute and a Fellow of the National Review Institute.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • brillopad1

    A state broadcaster pushing Government propaganda.
    Well I never.
    A propos of nothing, I was watching that BBC channel last night. Excellent stuff.

  • ian channing

    “Western journalism is sometimes biased, usually unconsciously”–Rubbish. It is consistently, knowingly and often appallingly biased, on a whole range of topics. No war involving Britain is reported objectively. The UK MSM are overwhelmingly liberal, pro-EU, and pro-mass immigration. They are also anti-SNP, anti-Russia, anti-Iran and anti-China, and their reporting is always designed to paint these ‘enemies’ in a bad light. The first time I read unbiased coverage of a Scottish independence demo was on the RT site. The first time I saw Nick Griffin being allowed to speak on camera (in a debate with Ian Dunt) was on RT. To find out what was really happening in Ukraine, because the MSM were so badly informed and so overtly biased (contrast their embarrassed silence over the horrible Odessa fire with the Putin hatefest after the airliner downing), you simply HAD to turn to RT.

    We all know RT is a propaganda channel, and make the due allowances. But it is not much worse than anything in Britain these days. It does carry solid content, offered from a fresh perspective. Like al-Jazeera, it handles a lot of topics no British media organization will touch or bother with now. I am grateful for the balance and the added value. If the western MSM were doing their job these alternatives would not be needed. But they are not doing their job.

    • AgeUke

      I knew UKIP would be mentioned within seconds of reading the first line

      • Hegelman

        And that’s all you will ever know. What a pity.

    • fuck nato

      Yes even if rt promotes any propaganda or funded by ‘Putin’, this article tries to make it seems like half of other western media isn’t funded by government and don’t spew their own lying brainwashing propaganda. @obamadictator

      • PUTINISCOWARD

        Nice education, sport. Putin has taught you well. I know, potatoes and vodka is heaven.

    • Richard Sanderson

      Don’t insult my intelligence, old boy. RT is far worse than any Western media broadcaster, even Fox News. Did you watch the farce that was RT during the MH17 coverage?

      I repeat, do NOT insult my intelligence again.

      • Cyril Sneer

        “I repeat, do NOT insult my intelligence again.”

        I think you do a good enough job of that without the help of anyone else.

      • Hegelman

        You have no intelligence for anyone to insult.

      • Gregory Mason

        Like how in hindsight it’s been found that it was actually the Ukrainians that shot it down? *clap clap clap* Farce? I think not.

        • Richard Sanderson

          Are you a liar, or an idiot?

          • Baron

            Richard, you should be guided by the Roman ‘cui bono’. It seldom fail to point to the real culprit, but then someone with your intelligence has no need for the wisdom of the past.

          • Richard Sanderson

            I take it you are an idiot, then.

          • Baron

            Is it all she told you, Richard?

        • Unenlightened_Commentary

          When was this discovered? It seems to have escaped the attention of everyone except BTL Kremlinbots.

      • davidgary1

        Western media insults my intelligence much more than RT. No one disputes RT is from a Russian perspective but the astonishing thing for me was that they hold the moral high ground on issue after issue in particular foreign policy ‘Syria comes to mind’. The West tries to portray Assad as an evil dictator when he is in fact a President with the support of his people trying to fight terrorism ‘which ironically is funded by the U.S’! The same goes for Putin who is continuously held in contempt by the Western media when in fact he is supported by a massive 82% of the people. As for MH17, it has become clear due to new evidence and witnesses that it was indeed the Ukrainian government behind it. http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-is-now-conclusive-two-ukrainian-government-fighter-jets-shot-down-malaysian-airlines-mh17-it-was-not-a-buk-surface-to-air-missile/5394814

        • Richard Sanderson

          The question comes down to the level of your ntelligence then. Do you enjoy the conspiracy theories on RT? MH17, “plane full of corpses”, etc.? Don’t given me any crap about RT holding any moral high ground, when they are a front for the right-wing nationalists at the Kremlin.

          Assad IS a brutal dictator, he has killed thousands of own civilians. I don;t need “Western media” to tell me killing thousands of your own civilians is “evil”. Thanks.

          I am not surprised you have fallen for RT conspiracy theories about MH17. You’re a gullible Putinbot. Follow the sheep, do you? You will keep on blaming bogeymen no matter how much evidence piles up against the pro-Russian rebels (who admitted it!!!) and their downing of MH17.

          You are a Putinbot, and Putinbots lie. So I will dismiss anything you have to say form now on.

          • davidgary1

            Your comment is laughable, especially the part where you talk about ‘blaming bogeymen’. Even you must see the irony. The West is notorious for creating bogeymen to further their agenda. As for Assad killing thousands of his own people. Many have died yes as a result of the ongoing war, like any war civilians die. However to state that Assad has deliberately killed his own civilians is one of the most outright ridiculous things that only brainwashed morons would believe. How in the name of God would Assad have the continued support of the vast majority of the Syrian population if he is killing them? The terrorists in Syria who have invaded Assad’s country are responsible for murdering innocent civilians, NOT Assad, hence why many of the initial anti government fighters have joined sides with the Syrian army. The mistake you make is that you assume that because I have a different take on world events than the western backed media I am malformed or bias when the reality is that unlike you who clearly have been brainwashed by the one sided western viewpoint I listen to BOTH sides of the story and using my brain come up with a more balanced and realistic viewpoint. I look at the facts and one of the crucial facts is that ISIS are being funded by Turkey and Saudi Arabia who are allies with the U.S and U.K. Open your mind and try to see the world outside of the small minded tiny narrative that the western media you so passionately defend has led you to believe. Afterall we can only learn from what we listen to on tv, radio or what we read. If you really believe that the West is incorrupt and does not have its own propaganda machine ‘much larger than RT’ then you really are naive. Watch this for starters and educate yourself. This is BBC which clearly has a bias against Assad and the questions are full of hypocrisy. However Assad defends himself with integrity.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiC4w7Erz8I

            Then watch this which is an interview with RT. I see no bias for or against Assad, simply a desire for information and truth ‘which media is supposed to be about’.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUmYnA22oI4

            I can find little or no fault in what Assad is saying and his points on the West having a tear in one eye and a rifle in the other over the Syrian refugees is 100% accurate. But you see I make up my own mind and come to a balanced viewpoint, I don’t believe everything in the western media like it is bible nor do I do the same with RT, the sooner people come to the awareness that there is a propaganda war on both sides the better. The U.S and U.K care nothing for the Syrian people anymore than they care for the Iraqi people ‘who have had over 2 million civilians killed since western invasion’. To believe their interest in Syria is about anything more than regime change and expanding their control over the middle east backed by Israel and the elitists is actually insane.

          • Richard Sanderson

            You linked to a known crank site (GlobalResearch) in your previous post, and then expect people to take you seriously. Troofers, Putinbots, and various other conspirloons will never be taken seriously.

            You then set about denying Assad’s war crimes. We know about him levelling towns and villages full of civilians, we know about the gas attacks, we know about the barrel bombs. You want to try and pretend all that doesn’t exist, because you are a conspiracy theorist.

            You ARE biased, despite what you claim, because you publicly linked to a known crank site that has a history of pushing conspiracy theories, and you mitigate Assad.

            I notice you also try and drag Israel into it – something that all anti-Semitic conspirloons always do. Don’t think we don’t notice.

          • davidgary1

            ‘Global research’ a crank site? Any site you disagree with is a crank site right? There are many sites repeating this same story and interviews with the Ukrainian Pilot who witnessed it. I could give you many more links but they are all lies right? http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/12/23/ukraine-pilot-reveals-kiev-plane-shot-down-mh-17-full-transcript/

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuoIw3jBV4g

            You really are uneducated and show more and more that you have little or no idea about world affairs. Assad’s gas attacks??? Are you serious? It is common knowledge even among much of the western media that the “Gas attack” was not done by Assad but was a false flag attack. Whether this was the Terrorists looking for support or something more sinister is yet to be clarified but it is well known that Assad did not carry these attacks out. I’m not even going to bother giving you links about this because even you should be well aware of these facts. False flag attacks have been consistently used throughout history to justify war or in this case regime change. The Gulf of Tonkin lie which gave the U.S an excuse to invade vietnam and kill countless people with chemical weapons. The ‘weapons of mass destruction lie’ lie in Iraq which killed another 2 million innocent Iraqi’s. Even Hitler used a false flag to gain power, ‘the reichstag fire’ ALL of these events are well documented NOT conspiracies! and the ‘gas attack by Assad was yet another false flag attempt ‘I say attempt because it didn’t work and the public didn’t fall for it, then the evidence showed it was indeed the terrorists who carried it out. And anti Semitic? Surely even you know there is a big difference between anti semitism and anti Zionism. I am anti murder of innocent people no matter who they are. For me a Muslim life has just as much value as an American life, or a Vietnamese life has just as much value as a British life and so on. We are all human beings. In the world today it happens to be the U.S, U.K and Israel who are at the top of the killing innocent people list, as well as Isis of course.
            Now in your ignorance you accused me of being anti semitic, so are these people anti semitic???

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMQ9C6vni0w

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awCOSRg-gks

            Funny, I don’t think it’s possible for a Jew to be anti Semitic, is it? These Jews represent countless who see the evil of Israel and have the wisdom to know there is a massive difference between Zionism and Judaism. These men and women are the true religious Jews who actually follow Yahweh and his teachings. NOT the genocidal Israeli military regime. Strange this was not shown on mainstream western media no??? A huge event like this? Oh but wait the western media is not biased right??? Maybe…maybe they just never knew about it taking place right?

          • Richard Sanderson

            Yes, GR is a crank site obsessed with conspiracy theories. Anybody with more than half a brain cell ignores it. Don’t insult my intelligence, conspirloon.

            All of the evidence points towards pro-Russian rebels downing MH17, and that is even without mentioning the fact that they admitted it.

            All conspirloons and Putinbots believe in the numerous and contradictory conspiracy theories surrounding MH17, and they also believe in the “false flag” theory with Ghouta. They also do – they are gullible sheep believing anything Alex Jones, Putin, Russia Today and GlobalResearch tells them to believe. Oh, and mentioning the “Gulf of Tonkin” does not make you clever, conspirloon. For every “false flag”, we can point to a thousand bogus conspiracy theories. For every “false flag”, we can point to a million conspiracy theory lies.

            You support theories that don’t have the evidence to support them, and like all conspiracy theorists, you subscribe to theories that are opposed by the evidence. That is the definition of a conspiracy theory. You are one.

            On to your anti-Semitism, and the horrific problem of racism in the conspirloon ranks. Linking a couple of YT links featuring two random people does not change the facts and the evidence. Most conspiracy theories are driven by anti-Semitism and racism.

            Yes, your rhetoric has all the hallmarks of an anti-Semite.

          • davidgary1

            No evidence? The gulf of Tonkin was a false flag and has been confirmed by the NSA to have been a false flag. Do not call me a conspiracy theorist unless you believe that Robert McNamara who was the U.S secretary of defense during the Vietnam war is one too. There is a big difference between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AaGVAipGp0

            As for your ‘anti semite’ accusation, if you had actually watched both youtube links I left in the last message you would have found that it was not 2 Jews but tens of thousands of Jews who gathered in New York in protest against the Israeli state. You should watch it and listen to what these Jews have to say. You might learn something. May I ask- Are they too anti semitic??

            As for the MH17 case. There is no definitive proof either way. You can argue one thing and I can argue another, you choose to believe one theory and I choose to believe another so let’s put that to bed.

            As for the Assad ‘chemical attacks’. It is similar however the evidence and logic strongly suggests that Assad did not carry out the attack. Firstly common sense would tell you that any leader who is not completely insane would not (a) attack innocent people with chemical weapons when U.N inspectors are visiting and are only a stone’s throw away from where the attack took place and (b) would not attack the very people he is fighting to defend. It makes absolutely no sense and anyone who is not a complete idiot would understand that this attack was an obvious false flag attempt. And (c) The German secret service have stated that it was not Assad. Also this is an extract from a Washington Times article by Shaun Waterman dated May 6, 2013: It’s from your ‘perfect’ Western media so maybe you will actually read it.

            Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.

            Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof,” that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.

            But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed. Here is the article in full
            http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/

            There is also an orgy of video evidence showing the Rebels firing rockets and handling chemical weapons.

            To be honest I think you only believe what you want to believe. For me people like are exactly why insane psychopathic entities like the Nazi’s and Hitler could rise to power. Joseph Goebbels ‘a Nazi leader’ stated “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Would you have been a German who listened to the state propaganda and looked at any outside alternative viewpoints as an ‘enemy of the state?’ Or would you have been a German who used his own brain and instincts to see the lies behind the masqueraded and distorted truth? It seems obvious to me that you would have been an obedient brainwashed puppet.

            You ignore the lie about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, you ignore the Gulf of Tonkin lie and you remain blind to the bigger picture in the middle east. You probably believe JFK was murdered by Oswald. Wake up man! Grow a brain! Who benefits with Assad gone? Who benefits with Saddam gone? Who benefits with Gaddafi gone? Certainly not the Syrian or Iraqi or Libyan people. Are you so blind not to see the pattern? This is NOT a conspiracy. The U.S benefits, Israel benefits. Do the research, do the maths. After Syria Iran would be the last piece of the middle east to topple then they have complete dominance of this entire region and all these states will be their puppet governments. This is not about who’s side we are on it is about the common good of humanity as a whole. We are all men, all human beings. Wake up man. Burst your bubble.

          • Richard Sanderson

            Re: Gulf of Tonkin. Read what I said again. I said this incident DOES NOT back up your contentions on other conspiracy theories – a mistake conspirloons make all the time. Your calculations do not include the millions of events that were not false flags. Whenever somebody mentions “Gulf of Tonkin” they reveal themselves to be conspirloons. It is a conspirloon trope.

            Re: YT link to Jews. Still irrelevant. Argument ad populum. I’m only interested in the evidence and facts.

            Re: MH17. I never mentioned “proof”. I stick to evidence, and all the evidence points to pro-Russian rebels, including their own admission. Occam’s Razor and logic also point in the same direction. Opposing this theory is a bucket-load of nonsensical Putinbot theories including planes full of corpses, and fighter jets.

            Re: Ghouta. Again, all the evidence points to Assad. Only he had the means and the ways and the motives at that time. Did her personally give the order? Who knows, but his forces are responsible. Only complete idiots think it was a “false flag” attack. Further, links to “Western media” are irrelevant, if they don’t stick to the facts and evidence. Further still, German secret services believe Assad’s commanders were requesting permission to use chemical weapons. What the German secret services SAID was that they don’t believe Assad himself gave the order. So, you are back to Assad’s commanders. Testimony from victims does not suggest it was a “false flag”, and they would not be in a very good position to analyse things objectively. Carla da Ponte has no evidence to back up her theory, and the evidence opposes her, and no, there is not “an orgy of evidence” pointing at rebels using the type of weapon delivery system needed. Only Assad’s forces had the means.

            Re: Reichstag. Again, irrelevant. Only a conspirloon would not believe that was not a “false flag”, because we have something called evidence. Conspirloons like you refer to events as “false flags” in the face of evidence, as you do with MH17 and Ghouta, and probably a hundred other conspirloon favourites. I only refer to a false flag if it is known to be a false flag and is backed by the evidence.

            Re: Weapons of mass destruction. I think it is irrelevant. You say it is evidence that governments lie. Everybody knows governments lie. Russia keeps on lying about Ukraine. I can point to the fact conspirloons like you lie all the time. That’s why I go on the evidence, facts, and logic, and not what governments or conspirloons say. Although you seem to want to believe the German secret services (picking and choosing!), even though they DON’T back your assertion about Ghouta.

            Re: “Who Benefits”. This is a standard conspirloon trope, where the conspiracy theory imagines which countries/powers stand to “benefit”. However, no logic is given as to why these countries would “benefit”. it is ALWAYS a chance for them to have yet another go at Israel. Because they are anti-Semites.

            Re: “do the research”, “do the maths”, “wake up”…blah blah blah. Again, these are standard conspirloon tropes and word salad terms that are dismissed with contempt. I do enjoy the fact that someone who think GlobalResearch is a credible source has the audacity to tell others to “wake up”.

          • Andrew Pate

            Have to seen this video by BBC after MH17 crashed in Ukraine that was removed later. Why does the BBC not believe eye witness accounts?

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgCuewzapnc

          • Richard Sanderson

            Yes, I’ve see it. Not interesting. Certainly not as “interesting” as some of RT’s conspiracy nonsense!

            The BBC does not believe eyewitness accounts which are are not backed by EVIDENCE. Same goes for me.

          • Andrew Pate

            So all the eye witnesses lied? I wonder why she never interviewed one that told the truth? Can you show me a picture of the vapour trail of the BUK from one of your TRUTHFUL WITNESSES?

          • Richard Sanderson

            Some of them lied. Some are mistaken. I don’t really care. All I care about is evidence, and the evidence does not support the those particular “eye-witnesses”.

            Are you really that gullible?

            Further, the onus is not on me to supply a very specific demand of a picture of a “vapour trail of the BUK”. That will be dismissed with complete and total contempt.

          • Andrew Pate

            I agree 100% with your comments and you did it without calling names not like the loser who is unable to think outside the square. Also you have put it in simple terms that even a child can understand.

    • Dr. Heath

      Some of RT’s reports are fine. Many more of Al Jazeera’s documentaries are well worth watching. The BBC and ITV, with their fondness for schlock and crisis-mongering, are regularly out-performed by both. RT, alas, routinely veers off the tracks with embarrassing and venomous propaganda that its producers stupidly imagine is as plausible to a foreign audience as it is to Russians. Al Jazeera has a sort of Islamist Lite slant to much of its reporting, and is perennially vexed about Al Sisi and his shutting down of the Muslim Brotherhood and jailing of Morsi, as though the many years of Arab Stalinism that the world first saw with Nasser and his UAR project were somehow new developments in the eyes of AJ’s Qatari proprietors. [AJ’s editorial take on Egypt pre-dates the kangaroo court trials and ogre-ish treatment of AJ’s correspondents.]

      • Hegelman

        This is a more or less accurate comparison of RT and Al Jazeera with their rival media thugs the BBC, CNN, Fox News and other slimy liars and bought propagandists.

        They are all scamsters. Only their masters are different.

        I know how contemptible the BBC is because I once worked for them. Corrupt from top to bottom.

        To find out something like the truth you have to compare the lying outputs of the rival scamsters with each other.

        • Sam

          I keep reading the comments, and it’s clear you are a paid troll. Every third comment is from you, in vicious slander of Western media and brown nose-level support of RT and Russia.

    • http://www.ukipforbritain.co.uk/ ukipforbritainwebsite

      Great comment. The BBC is absolute ____ (fill in the blank). Their omissions alone are dangerous – eg their coverage of events in Egypt, Libya, Ukraine and Crimea. RT is biased – but the BBC is off the scale – and not just with regards to news; their entertainment programmes are pure, unadulterated propaganda.

      • Ben Cottam

        Their coverage of the Ukraine crisis was fine – what on earth are you talking about? I have visited Ukraine 6 times over the last year due to my girlfriend being from Eastern Ukraine. Thus, I have first hand access to not only people from the region but also people who fought in it, The BBC coverage was well informed without bias. Please enlighten me as to how it wasn’t?

        • Gregory Mason

          I don’t remember the BBC mentioning that Kiev was shelling towns and cities in the East…. Or for pointing out that more people have died there than in the recent Israeli actions dealing with the terrorists Hamas.

        • Baron

          The BBC had on its website a report by its Ukrainian crew in which villagers near the crash scene were telling the BBC reporter they had seen a military jet near the ill fated MH17. The report was shelved within a couple of hours, nver screened. Give us your insight why it was dropped from the ‘fine coverage of the crisis’, will you please.

          • jamesmace

            Ummm- 35000′ is nearly 7 miles high – jet fighters simply are not visible to the naked eye at that distance.

          • Baron

            Who said the jet was 7 miles up? Ever heard of air-to-air missiles? The upgraded Su-25s the Ukrainian have are more than capable of launching them.

          • jamesmace

            You said it.

            You repeated the claim that the fighter was seen with the passenger plane and that is impossible given the passenger plane was at 35000 ft

            Also the shrapnel found in the passengers confirms the RUSSIANS on the ground shot it down

            Finally the Russian commanders and journalists on the scene bragged of shooting down the plane on various social media

          • davidgary1
          • saffrin

            Well the BBC failed to emphasise the West’s provocative attempts at expansionism for a start.

          • http://www.volgatrader.com Philip Owen, Volga Trader

            I saw it screened.

        • http://newfxgames.com Vinnie

          As Ukrainian citizen I can confirm that BBC is one of the best information sources in the world about Ukrainian conflict. RT is not some other view, very often RT tells uncovered lie.

          • Erika Bakonyi

            bullshit. For me enough: Crimean residents 96% WANTED to join to Russia!! They didn’t force it, they ask them legally! I believe rather in the RTtv then the liar mainstream media…many many reason why…people wake up

          • http://newfxgames.com Vinnie

            Austria wanted to join Germany in 1938. German nation was so proud to has such leader as Hitler. It seems you believe rather in the Goebbels TV then the liar mainstream media.. many many reason why.. people wake up!!

          • Stan_LS

            Cool story! Russian FSB Colonel Strelkov admitted that they were forcing people to vote in Crimea. What’s more – such referendums are illegal even in Russia! One gets up to 5 years in prison for calls to separatism.

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            Well, Russia sent in armed masked men. What were they suppose to do? I find it funny when people deny that Russia has any involvement in Ukraine. Yet, Russia just took a part of Ukraine with masked gunmen, lol. Now Russia is stationing nukes in Crimean? Why nukes? hahaha. Are you retarded? Or just another cheap escort?

          • davidgary1

            Ukraine is on Russias doorstep and historically has always been a part of Russia. The U.S however are bombing and murdering people all over the world yet you have a problem with Putin? Get a grip.

        • davidgary1

          Really? Like their coverage of the Syrian crisis? Big bad Assad, ‘even though he has the support of the vast majority of his people and is fighting terrorists who have been armed and funded indirectly by the U.S and U.K http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-is-now-conclusive-two-ukrainian-government-fighter-jets-shot-down-malaysian-airlines-mh17-it-was-not-a-buk-surface-to-air-missile/5394814

      • Terry Field

        Come off it. To equate RT with the BBC (yes it is very biased towards the Guardian) is absurd, and shows your lack of mature judgment.

        • pp22pp

          At least RT is pro-Russian. I respect that. The BBC is anti-British and its PC religion is morally obscene and logically absurd. The BBC is a disgrace. I would grant you it’s better than the Nodong Ilbo, but that’s not saying much.

          • citicrab

            It’s not pro-Russia, just pro-Putin. A huge difference. Russia is not a democracy, and you can not equate the regime and the people.

          • Terry Field

            You are a dork from the Essex boondocks. I am an alien. Your nonsense amuses us.

          • Erika Bakonyi

            Democracy?? haha usa whenever usa took their “democracy” to foreign country, that country started to dying. Usa took their gold, oil everything what they wanted to took. Is this what supposed to be democracy?? Bullshit.

          • Terry Field

            Try the indefinite article, you illiterate foul-mouthed little foreigner.
            ‘everything what they wanted to took’
            You are a joke- where did you learn to macerate ‘globish’ – the local ‘medicine man’.
            Ubuntoo bungy wungy!

          • Erika Bakonyi

            Hahaha painful truth. First of all, you say to me I’m foreign? 250 years ago you killed everybody in usa and took the land from native Americans. You are the real bloody foreign. Let me clear it because I see you and some more here are so painful low school. Of course because you watching the one sided mainstream media. Usa and Russia had a law which is said nato border end at Germany border. Now, the usa BROKE THE NATIONAL WAR LAW because they wanted to put nato base in Crimea. One question: would usa let to Russia to put their army base to Canada?? Hell, NOOO WAY usa would let Russia put an army base to the neighborhood! !! So now what?? Double standard! ! You guys think that usa have every right to do whatever they want to do all in the world? ?? But if another country dare to say NO you guys wondering? ? You and the others should learn more about how your own governments do experience on their own citizens: fluoride, “accidentally” dropping off a nuke in north caroline, 9/11, boston etc etc. You protect your government but your government will sacrifice you without a blink if the situation ask it to do when the economy starts to break down, they create a fake reason to attack a country for oil, gold, or other power research. I would not be so proud of this governments. In Europe more and more people can see what’s going on maybe because they don’t get that high dose of fluoride. ..

          • Terry Field

            You are funny – quite insane.
            You clearly need psychiatric help.

          • Erika Bakonyi

            Hmm..I call it a low educated answer. I didn’t wait nothing much. Do your research and not only from your side. Put them together, check the clear fact and after come back here. Also highly recommend Benjamin Freedman 1961 speech. Just a little fact how works the media brainwash system.

          • Terry Field

            How funny. I assume you are a Russian or somesuch eastern person. You exhibit the sort of failed, jealous dog-in-the-manger whining typical of Russia Today.
            Your society is a failure; it is dysfunctional, unproductive and violent. The Russian president is a dictator, and your broken, backward and isolated society loves dictators.
            You are primitive.
            Go away.

          • Erika Bakonyi

            Oh well, you perfect sociaty, in a democracy which is about: everybody have to accept your views but you don’t accept no one else view if it’s different from yours. Hmm..wake up the world is different. And on the world exist different nations, not only Usa. Why is so hard to understand? ? Why usa have to go and talk into everybody’s life?? Why Russia or French or Sweden don’t talk into usa business? ? Why usa plays God rule? ? But don’t be jealous, the world (expect usa citizens) waking up and see the fact: usa is country of devil. Liar, war maker, full fill with psychopath leaders. But you just continue to read your liar news and believe in a fairy tale. There’s 3 things you can’t hide: the Sun, the Moon, and the Truth.

          • Terry Field

            Barbarian.
            The USA is our guarantor against the barbaric violence of your primitive country.

          • Erika Bakonyi

            Lol exactly this act I was waited from an uneducated big head American. You forgot that the culture came from Europe you smart head haha what do you want your 250 years old culture? ? What u can teach for a 1100 years old culture? ? Why you love Mercedes, Bmw, Audi, Ferrari, Porche, why you love famous symphonic music, famous foods?? From barbaric countries? ? Look at yourself sick big head. You got your toilet from Europe haha. Idiot. All your answer is to insulting. You don’t have a healthy educated answer just only this: barbar, stupid etc etc. You are not an argument partner for an educated European lol sit down you failed haha.

          • Terry Field

            Better.
            Keep improving.
            BUT I am NOT an American.
            And Russia is NOT Europe

          • Erika Bakonyi

            Lol so then who is the little foreign? 😉 haha also who said I’m Russian? You are too funny…I’m not russian, I’m a human bean who hate the lies. And the mainstream media lies like crazy. And the stupid sheeps eat it. That’s why this civilization never gonna live in peace. Until one nation think they are the lord of the whole world and one nation think they have every right to talk into everybody’s life, creating fake news and fear in the people in the world always gonna fight. Usa not that peaceful country. Painful or not this is the truth. 9/11 was also an inside job, there’s many many evidence and proof. Painful decision 9/11 just watch that documentary. Or sott. net. I believe that the Americas feel offended themselves if someone there to criticize their country, but I ask: why they feel they can criticize another countries? ? Why they feel they are on higher level from everybody else in the world? We are the same! And there’s many many dirty secret what needed to show to the people because I don’t want nuclear war, I guess you don’t want too, but that 100 person wants just because they want to be lord of the whole world. But believe me, they have safe caves in that case if nuclear war coming. Do you have a safe place?? I guess no. So why you prprotect this liar governments? ??

          • Terry Field

            ”I’m a human bean who hate the lies”.

            A BEAN?????
            You grow up a POLE?????

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            Go sell your kidney or something!! However, how much for a BBBJ?

          • Wardy0

            I’m sorry but the USA is by far the most violent country. Can you remember the last time Russia invaded a country? Whereas the US invades countries on a yearly basis.

          • Terry Field

            What a joke; I suspect the eastern European countries occupied by the conquering Russians would disagree with you; as would the Finns, as would the Japanese, as would the African countries they raped and pillaged in the cold war. The West defends civilisation, and if it takes military capacity to do so, that’s the requirement. The world is full to the brim with barbarous regimes and thug ‘governmets’. Thank God for the West. You are a dreamer.

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            Actually, I can remember when Russia invaded a country. Isn’t that what they’re doing in Ukraine? Oh, you didn’t hear about the Russian masked gunmen in Crimea? Or the Russian masked gunmen now in Ukraine, lol. Those maksed gunmen sure do look a lot like those masked gunmen in Crimean, eh.
            Also, didn’t Russia just invade Georgia in 2008?

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            It’s obvious you live in Russia, hahaha. Because you’re probably watching the news and tv from the 1980s, lol. Miami Wice, number one hit tv show in Russia. Where’s the Beef.

          • Wardy0

            I live in England, never even visited Russia.

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            Cool story, bro!!

          • kayaboosha

            Why don’t you try actually answering a question instead of blindly insulting people that ask them? Oh that’s right, you can’t. For example when a previous commentator nailed you for calling her a foreigner when it is you who stole land off the indigenous people! I had the same garbage when I was in Texas for daring to say I supported British troops in Northern Ireland. The “good ole boy” told me I was an invader and to get the hell out of the country. I asked how long had his family been in America. End of conversation.

          • Terry Field

            You are a naughty little Russian lady and require a spanked bottie

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            You’ve never been to the USA. So stop talking garbage about a country you’ve never been too.

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            We did do our research, and Putin is hot garbage. And we also know our own Gov reaks of it as well. What do you want? Are you looking for a JR. GMAN BADGE? The World isn’t perfect, but at least the USA isn’t taking countries anymore. The last countries we took were from Spain during our war with them. Russia took Crimean clear as day with masked gunmen. Just like the masked gunmen in Ukraine, lol.

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            Please go back to your Gypsy Village. It’s obvious the World has treated you like a bowling ball: You’ve been picked up and fingered, and thrown down the gutter, yet you keep running back for more. Hence, that’s the story of your life in one paragraph.

          • Gabriel Flaubert

            I only will say that not because the “mainstream and ugly” media show abuse in a communist or not democratic country means that it is automatically lie.
            Ask yourself why there are large areas of Russian and Chinese in America

            Ask yourself why Cubans are thrown into the sea, infested with sharks, in rafts, only to flee from the island what the bastard fidel called “the sea of happiness”

          • Erika Bakonyi

            first of all hi. second. A few question. How can that be that the Russian people are in 90% love president Putyin? How can that be that Crimean people are LEGALLY voted to join Russia in 96%? (anyway Crimea was part of Russia, but Stalin played it out) Third. About who is breaking the law of war. In 1945 had a law which is saying: the NATO boarder NEVER leave the boarder of Germany. Now, USA wanted to put their army base to the island of Crimea. A meek question: would USA let to Russia to put their army base in Canada?? Hell, NO WAY!! In this case usa would bomd the hell out from Russia. No doubt. So why every mainstream media surprised?? Or this is the famous democracy?? What I can do, someone else can’t do?? huh? Or are you, americans so proud to be americans right? You guys love sooo much your country right? that’s nice, this is not a problem. But if someone else do the same and dare to love their own country immediately the mainstream media screams: terrorist, barbarian, or low school..hm. Freedom of speech right? It works if everybody say whay the USA and usa’s background little pit bull, Israel says, if someone else dare to be say what they want then they find out something reason (does not matter if your government sacrifice some of their own citizens like 9/11, Boston, etc etc) to go there and killing everybody? Why you think your mainstream media is a saint, and reading from the bible? Why you think you, american citizens have every right to live in this planet? Why USA can’t just keep that f*** dirty mouth inside their border and care their own problems? why they can’t give everybody free health care, take care of the veterans, or stop the inflation? Hm? why russian army, french army, Iraqi army, German army, Greek army NEVER come here and bomb the shit out from USA because they don’t like something what the USA do?? Why USA go and talking shit into everybody else business? Explain to me: how can that be that the world one of strongest concrete steel building what designed for resist to burn, resist to the strongest hurricane etc, after airplane hit, burned and collapsed within 1, and the other building within 2 hours?? And the explode could see from the space?? The steel melts 2500F, but the fire from kerosene CANNOT reach this temperature? The thermal imaging says the temperature was 3000F? Impossible that a natural fire reach this temperature! and how’s about that third building what your mainstream media covered up? that third building set down like a directional blast, even though there was no hit by NOTHING? And the evidence goes on endless in order to prove: your loved government did it, no doubt. And brainwashed americans still would die for this government, for that government who would sacrifice you without any blink…Sad..too sad how could be a people so blind like this. Your foods is poisoned, full with msg, highest rating all the world, your water is full fill with fluoride, your pharmacy is feeding you with meaningless meds (highest medication sales is in the USA) your mainstream media lie, and attack every country who dare to say: I banned your monsanto, your GMO product etc (Russia is the strongest resistant country in the world of the monsanto, that’s why USA so mad and hate that country) Europe doesn’t want GMO, that’s why USA try to make inner wars in every country. USA debt is the highest debt all in the world, if they can’t make wars they gonna die. you gusy already got a taste from inflation, but this is just start now. It’s gonna be more high, you gonna loose the wealth, after this you guys gonna wake up and ask: what the hell is going on?? good luck.

          • Erika Bakonyi

            anyway, did you know that according to the law the testing of environmental chemicals and drugs on American citizens allowed? Legal. All have to do is getting the major of the city approval. Nobody knows about it, but it’s verifiable. Search after it. Carefully hidden somewhere in the law, but it’s public. It’s all there. And there’s already done many many experience on the american citizens, (fluoride, foods, medications, injections etc etc) it’s all done. Are you sure you still proud of your government??

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            You’re a gypsy troll, hahahaha.

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            Can you actually read and write? What are you talking about? Your Anti American Generalization makes me feel sorry for you. Because America is nothing like that. China got all of the oil in Iraq. And the people in Afgan don’t have a lot of oil, either, lol. Newsflash: America makes its own oil and we’re now the largest producer, lol. Go out and earn more money from the johns so you can get a better education, kiddo.

          • kayaboosha

            Are you paid by the US government to write this shite? If I were them I’d want my money back. Very poor propaganda. China got all the oil in Iraq? Are you totally nuts?

          • PUTINISCOWARD

            You respect biased media? I’m sorry, kiddo, but I respect the truth and good luck finding it in the media.

      • PUTINISCOWARD

        Wow, I generally thought Limeys took up for the UK? Maybe you’re a Muslim? Because the UK is turning into a Muslim country. France is nearly there too, along with Holland. It’s a shame too!! Because the future King or Queen could be a Muslim Raghead, eh.

      • PUTINISCOWARD

        I truly like the UK, and London. But you couldn’t pay me to live there. I would rather live in Colombia, than live in the UK.

      • Rich

        RT is biased? Do you not think that is an understatement. You only have to read it to see it’s the most propagandist literature in the world? It even beats PressTV, Iran’s propaganda arm.

        Jeez!

    • http://twitter.com/#!/DavidWLincoln David W. Lincoln

      Time for distinctions.

      For Russia, one category for Putin & those who agree with him, and another for those who see him as being a net negative influence on their lives.

      For Iran, one category for Khameini, and those who agree with him, and another for folk like those in “My Stealthy Freedom”.

      For China, one category for the Beijing Politburo, and another for those like the demonstrating students, and others, in Hong Kong.

      Given the role of audience, and what the reporter produces has to show they believe what they right, and they know what they are talking about – it is possible to be sincere and disseminate propaganda.

      So, why not enforce a quarantine, so that they get the message that they are not delivering what the audience wants.

    • victor67

      This is true . Anything they say on Russia and direct interest take with a gigantic pinch of Salt, much the same as Aljazeera and Qatar. They are on the money however on many issues in the West.
      Compared with the State on BBC and the Murdoch owned SKY they offer a refreshing alternative.

    • jamesmace

      The world wide outcry after the Russian bombing of a plane with 300 innocents was a “hate fest”. Sorry mate, you lost me there.

  • AJAX

    I don’t trust RT on anything about the Kremlin’s actions, but it’s useful in its coverage of overseas news & some home news (like the out of control Square Mile) that HMG – & its bosses up on Capitol Hill – don’t want talked about, including their Lamestream media complex outlets like the BBC/ITN, etc.

    • Richard Sanderson

      Did you ever hear about Max Kaiser’s conspiracy theories on MH17? Lunatic.

      • AJAX

        Kaiser gets carried away sometimes, but that doesn’t mean he’s not worth listening to on Banksterism

      • Hegelman

        I have no use for conspiracy theories. No good Marxist ever does. We believe in the importance if economic and class forces, not the Harrogate Golf Club conspiring with the Pope and the Women’s Handball Association of Asuncion to assassinate the King of Bogmash etc.

        • Brimstone52

          The trouble with that attitude is that when the King of Bogmash is assassinated by a hit man hired on behalf of Harrogate Golf Club, the Pope and the Upper Soweto Lion Brewery and other unidentified parties, you end up looking more than a bit silly.

          Almost as silly as those who think the world revolves around economic and class forces.

        • Sam

          Is there such a thing as a “good Marxist,”? Experiments in Marxism never tend to go well.

    • Hegelman

      You got it completely right.

  • Blue_Frog

    And so what ? At least RT makes it quite clear that is echoes the Kremlin’s views, it makes it also very clear that is it funded by Moscow, and nobody expects it to deliver unbiased news. The same can’t be said for BBC, France 24 or CNN, which hardly admit that they also have their agenda too… Why what is admitted and accepted for Western news channels is seen as unacceptable when it comes to RT ?

    • Gabriel Flaubert

      Not strictly as you say.

      On CNN, for example, I can see all sides of the story; CNN in Spanish invited to speak to spokespersons of various communist regimes that have emerged in Latin America (Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua, followers of Cuba), (incidentally, that I’m not willing to discuss it, I live in Venezuela, I know what I mean, at least in the case of Venezuela, the hardest hit of all, Ecuador and others are not so bad (neither good), but remain disguised dictatorships).

      However in RT only praise these dictatorships, not invited to speak to spokesmen democratic alternative, do not even cover what they said at some point.

  • Hegelman

    “Western journalism is sometimes biased, usually unconsciously”

    That has to be the most grotesque understatement since the man who admitted Hitler was not beyond suspicion of anti-Semitism.

    Western journalism is the most sold, corrupt and savagely biased thing under the sun. It lies about every country, friend and foe. If the country is a friend, like Pakistan, it can expect a free pass on the utmost brutality until the day it is found red handed in cahoots with al-Qaeda. And in much of the media even longer than that.

    If the country is deemed an enemy or doubtful, like India, you cannot expect one positive report.

    Thanks for reminding me to look up Russia Today. I started to have some respect for it when I saw in it a ferociously anti-Semitic diatribe on Leon Trotsky that was immediately followed by a very competent defence of him. That seemed like fair play.

  • Bumble Bee

    so a bit like the BBC and SKYnews then?

    • Richard Baranov

      Just like the BBC. A corrupt left wing P.C. propaganda machine if ever there was one.

      • Dr. Heath

        And massively incompetent. The spelling in its subtitling alone would be bad enough but the Beeb has employees capable of telling viewers – to cite my favourite example of its lamebrain idiocy – that Lee Harvey Oswald was convicted and jailed for killing JFK and that JFK was the third American president to be asssassinated. Where the **** does our national broadcaster find pillocks like this?

        [FFS! LHO wasn’t even charged with killing JFK.]

    • Richard Sanderson

      No, much worse. If anybody can’t see that, they need a good slap.

      • Bumble Bee

        BBC and SKY are against their own people and push their enemies’ agendas, because of self loathing

        at least Russia is for Russians

        how is that worse?

        • Hegelman

          If their own people are anything like you there would be every reason in the world to be against them.

          • Bumble Bee

            hey Hegelman, time to post another post, you haven’t posted in 3 minutes!

            or take your meds

        • Chris Morriss

          And I can certainly see why you would be in favour of that. Say no more…

  • Doug

    “Western journalism is sometimes biased, usually unconsciously, but it is
    actuated by some concern for the truth which in major news
    organisations results, for example, in formal rules about sourcing.”

    Ah, so that’s why the Conservative party has done a deal with some major newspapers: it’s in the interests of “truth”.

  • Hegelman

    The best book for giving you an insight on the spirit of the Western media (the US and American are the worst) is “Scoop” by Evelyn Waugh. Follow it up by reading Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty Four” and you get a pretty accurate picture of what to expect.

    Big Brother is Watching You and he is called Rupert Murdoch.

    Of the better class of Western journalist it might be said, with a bow to Hilaire Belloc:

    You cannot bribe or twist
    Thank God, the Western Journalist
    But seeing what the man will do
    Unbribed there is no occasion to

  • Mc

    “‘People’s Assembly… a self-declared non-political campaign group… which rejects reactionary rhetoric peddled by austerity advocates etc., etc.’ ”

    Not being a close follower of the People’s Assembly and Owen Jones’s utterances, I’d be interested to know what their views are on Putin and RT.

  • Hegelman

    Why on earth is The Spectator giving free advertising to Russia Today? It is breaking the rule that dog eats dog.

    Many new followers will come to RT as a result of all the abuse of it by the corrupt Western media because people will welcome an alternative.

  • Hegelman

    “John O’Sullivan is executive editor of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.”

    Need more be said?

  • Hegelman

    “RT is darkly, nastily brilliant, so much more sophisticated than Soviet propaganda.’

    No it isn’t. I often find it clumsy.

    But the opposition – the obviously crooked Anglo-US media – is such a liar that it is easy to undermine by a word of truth here and there.

  • Dodgy Geezer

    Amongst other news outlets, RT is essential viewing. Because:

    … that the network covers the stories which the mainstream media ignores, such as Occupy Wall Street or WikiLeaks scandals. But there are, of course, stories that Russia Today is not keen on covering — such as the reality of Russia today….

    You try getting the BBC to cover the reality of Climate Change…

    …Western journalism is … actuated by some concern for the truth which in major news organisations results, for example, in formal rules about sourcing. These rules are constantly examined and updated. Complete cynicism about such matters is rare and punishable — see, for instance, the fate of Stephen Glass…

    BBC support for Guardian-type environmental scares is single-minded and unquestionable. Anyone deviating from their lies gets sacked.

    …All this is then presented to the world with considerable professionalism, some sharp sarcastic wit on occasion, and clever rhetorical techniques that turn the West’s own arguments inside out….

    In marked contrast to BBC propaganda, which is cumbersome, badly informed and badly argued…

    …And though lying sometimes works, repeated lying — however darkly brilliant — is a recipe for lost viewers and listeners…

    Perhaps that’s why the BBC has dropped from 30% to 20% viewing figures since 2000…?

  • Moputabee

    Putin’s RT is just a mouthpiece for Putin.

    Putin is only interested in keeping his many billions stolen from the Russian people by corruption and nepotism.

    Putin is in the process of burying Russia and its peoples, for self gain and to add to his billions due to misappropriation.

    Putin is a still a Soviet crook.

  • Hegelman

    John O’Sullivan says:

    “RT does cover genuine reports about legitimate stories, seriously and
    without obvious bias, which makes it seem at times like any other news
    network. Not everything is a façade of lies. But RT is about a great
    deal more than that — and less.”

    If this were said about the UK-US media it would be giving the latter massively undeserved credit.

    It’s the old problem: the Anglo-American world HATES competition…..

  • https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/home Dean Jackson

    “It looks like a news channel. It talks like a news channel. It says whatever Putin wants”

    In fact, RT does cover legitimate news items not discussed in the West, news items that depict the evil within the West. However, the evil residing in the West is a by-product of Marxist co-option of the West, and RT plays its role in highlighting such negative (though legitimate) news items for the same reason the political parties of the West initiate the evil policies RT covers–to weaken the West’s prominence at home and abroad.

    Watching RT is essential for real-time exposition of Marxist long-range policy to “liberate” the West…

    The failed socialist inspired and controlled pan-European revolutions that swept the continent in 1848 thought Marxists and socialists a powerful lesson, that lesson being they couldn’t win overtly, so they adopted the tactic of infiltration of the West’s political parties/institutions.

    Notice that not one political party in the West requested verification of the collapse of the USSR,* and the media failed to alert your attention to this fact, including the “alternative” media. When determining whether the “former” USSR is complying with arms control treaties, what does the United States do to confirm compliance? Right, the United States sends into the “former” USSR investigative teams to VERIFY compliance, yet when it’s the fate of the West that’s at stake should the collapse of the USSR be a ruse, what does the United States do to confirm the collapse? Nothing!

    It gets worse–the “freed” Soviets and West also never (1) de-Communized the Soviet Armed Forces of its Communist Party officer corps, which was 90% officered by Communist Party members;** and (2) arrested/de-mobilized the 6-million vigilantes that assisted the Soviet Union’s Ministry of the Interior and police control the populations of the larger cities during the period of “Perestroika” (1986-1991)!***

    The fraudulent “collapse” of the USSR (and East Bloc) couldn’t have been pulled off until both political parties in the United States (and political parties elsewhere in the West) were co-opted by Moscow & Allies, which explains why verification of the “collapse” was never undertaken by the West, such verification being (1) a natural administrative procedure (since the USSR wasn’t occupied by Western military forces); and (2) necessary for the survival of the West. Recall President Reagan’s favorite phrase, “Trust, but verify”.

    There can be no collapse of the USSR (or East Bloc nations) without…

    Verification, De-Communization and De-mobilization.

    The West never verified the collapse of the USSR because no collapse occurred, since if a real collapse had occurred the West would have verified it, since the survival of the West depends on verification. Conversely, this proves that the political parties of the West were co-opted by Marxists long before the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, since the survival of the West depends on verification.

    Back to RT…

    This pointing game the West and East play with each other, where one side advertises the negative side of the other party, is termed by Marxists as the “scissors strategy”…

    “Scissors Strategy”

    The dialectic often appears under other names. A December 30, 1961 report by the House Committee on Un-American Activities, entitled “The New Role of National Legislative Bodies in the Communist Conspiracy,” contained two crucial chapters from a book smuggled out of Czechoslovakia. Written by an official of that country’s Communist Party, the book described the dialectical method used to seize power in Czechoslovakia. Communists infiltrated key positions in the Czechoslovak government, while simultaneously organizing street demonstrations against that government. Those two arms of the dialectic, by pretending to fight each other, generated enough confusion among the general public that all genuine opposition was neutralized. The book used the terms coined by V.I. Lenin, first dictator of the Soviet Union, referring to thesis and antithesis as “pressure from above” and “pressure from below.”

    The Soviet KGB uses its own set of code words to refer to the dialectical strategy. According to former KGB staff officer Anatoliy Golitsyn, the official term for the dialectic is the “scissors strategy,” in which the blades represent the two falsely opposed sides that converge on the confused victims. Golitsyn, who is probably the most important Soviet ever to defect to the West, escaped in 1961. After more than two decades of trying to warn uninterested American leaders, he wrote the 1984 book New Lies for Old as a warning to the general public, exposing the role of the scissors strategy in global events.

    Golitsyn revealed that the Communist bloc had adopted a coordinated long-term strategy beginning in the late 1950s, created in part by Golitsyn himself, the purpose being to convince the West that international Communism was disintegrating. Phony dissidents, factions, and power struggles within Communist parties, splits or wars between Communist nations, and temporary freedoms within each country have become dialectical tools of deception, allowing people in the West to take sides in these controlled struggles and thereby succumb to the strategy. Golitsyn argued that the dialectic has succeeded because imaginary factions or splits among Communist rulers are perceived as real by the West.”

    http://www.attacreport.com/ar_archives/art_na_china.htm

    —————————————-
    *A verification process would have entailed hundreds of teams from the West going into the USSR and having unqualified access of all government files, searching for (1) indications that the collapse was a ruse; (2) secret Communist party agents/non-Communist Party agents placed into positions of authority; and (3) Russians to bring back to the West for questioning (with their families if deemed necessary, which would in itself be deemed an indication that the “collapse” was indeed a ruse), where the questioning can take place without fear of retribution should the collapse be a ruse.

    **A de-Communization of the Soviet Armed Forces would have seen the former USSR republics joining NATO and requesting the assistance of NATO to supervise a de-Communization process, the first stage of which would be the pensioning out of General officers, and full Colonels within the land combat regiments; and all Admirals, and Full Captains assigned to ships, pensioned out. The pensioned out officers would be replaced by NATO officers. NATO would take over schools that educate military officers, until such time that non-Communist Party native instructors were available.

    The Russian ICBM Triad would have been de-operationalized (until the necessary number of non-Communist Party member nuclear forces officers had graduated and attained ranks necessary to operate such nuclear weapon systems), pursuant to which the United States would have cut its nuclear ICBM Triad forces by at least two-thirds, since the only major threat now would be China. Russian Intermediate/Medium ballistic nuclear systems would fall under NATO operation, again until the necessary number of non-Communist Party member nuclear forces officers had graduated and attained ranks necessary to operate such nuclear weapon systems.

    ***Then we have to deal with the five-six-million vigilantes the Soviet Ministry of Interior used to control the population. The vigilantes would need to be de-mobilized and its leaders interned until the Russian economy came back to life via real free market policies. As the economy improved, those vigilantes interned and not serving sentences for serious crimes such as murder or rape, would be released on a staggered basis, where lower-level leaders are the first to be released into society…

    “On the initiative of the KGB, an army of Soviet vigilantes five million strong, the so-called ‘druzhiny’, was recruited from among the Komsomol activists. They have been patrolling and policing the streets of all the Soviet cities. Their primary task has been to prepare the Soviet people to ‘behave’ during the forthcoming ‘liberalisation’.” — KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn, March 1989.

    http://www.spiritoftruth.org/The_Perestroika_Deception.pdf

    • Gerschwin

      Nobody reads any of this.

      • https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/home Dean Jackson

        “Nobody reads any of this.”

        The Marxist Matrix reads every word, and with every word the game plan is divulged.

        Next on the agenda…

        Agenda for the re-claiming of the West and the defeat of world Communism:

        (1) Dissolve both co-opted political parties in the United States; and

        (2) form a new super political party, where (a) candidates have no substantive affiliations, past or present, with ANY political entity that now exists;* (b) candidates for the new super party are screened by lie detector tests; and (c) once the new super party is in-place, (i) fire all intelligence contractors; (ii) re-polygraph all intelligence community officers and all non-commissioned officers in the military who have security clearances; (iii) polygraph all military officers;** (iv) dissolve both the United States Secret Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation;*** (v) provide for an independent Justice Department, where the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, Associate Attorney General, and Solicitor General positions are filled by Justice Department employees elected by Justice Department Employees;**** and (vi) abolish the Federal Reserve and adopt a neutral money-supply/interest rate policy.

        Once the Federal government has been “cleansed” of Communist agents, then the following can take place…

        Rollback of the Communist World:

        (1) cease all trade with Communist nations;

        (2) prohibit travel to Communist nations;

        (3) prohibit travel out from Communist nations, unless the Communist nation is contiguous to another Communist nation;

        (4) intercept all Communist traffic outside of Communist territorial airspace/waters;

        (5) mine all Communist harbors;

        (6) neutralize all Communist sub-orbital/orbital space platforms; and

        (7) begin the slow rollback of Communist nations, beginning with Cuba and Mexico, then moving sequentially to (a) East Bloc nations; (b) Asia–Burma, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and North Korea; and lastly (c) simultaneous invasions of the USSR and China.

        This will be a slow task, which will ensure its success.

        —————————

        *Entailing running for elected office; elected to office; a permanent employee of/consultant to a political party, or is a direct family member of such a person.

        **Since polygraphs aren’t 100% reliable, all military-civilian officers/NCOs with intelligence clearances who fail the polygraph “process” (where failing two out of three tests is a “fail”) are to be pensioned out.

        ***Pension out agents.

        ****Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, Associate Attorney General, and Solicitor General positions are to be filled by those with at least five contiguous years on the job. Hiring outside of those Offices will be reserved to Division/Office/Law Enforcement Agencies heads; and budget apportioned equitably in accordance with a Division’s/etc. number of employees and previous year’s travel expenses.

        • William_Brown

          Get some sleep, make an appointment at the surgery and see if you can get some counselling to go along with the Prozac.

          • https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/home Dean Jackson

            “…see if you can get some counselling to go along with the Prozac.”

            I did. I took the red pill Morpheus offered me, which allows me to see a picture of Lenin’s head and four Soviet nationality emblems next to the masthead of the Russian Ministry of Defense’s official newspaper, which is STILL called “Red Star”…

            http://www.redstar.ru/

            I’m also now capable of seeing the Communist Party of the Soviet Union’s emblem–the distinctive Soviet Red Star emblem–still on Russian military aircraft and naval vessels…

            http://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia—Air/Sukhoi-Su-25SM/1606418/L/

            http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/08/9225/

            I also see the thousands of hated statues to Lenin still standing in Russian cities, towns and villages…

            http://www.saint-petersburg.com/monuments/ploshchad-lenina/

            The red pill also allows one to comprehend the meaning of the following…

            ‘The West never verified the collapse of the USSR because no collapse occurred, since if a real collapse had occurred the West would have verified it, since the survival of the West depends on verification. Conversely, this proves that the political parties of the West were co-opted by Marxists long before the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, since the survival of the West depends on verification.’

            Would you like me to ask Morpheus to contact you, so that you too may take the red pill and disconnect yourself from the Matrix?

          • William_Brown

            I knew I shouldn’t have engaged with you! Ah well, let it be a lesson to others.

          • https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/home Dean Jackson

            “I knew I shouldn’t have engaged with you!”

            Engage? You mean spew pitiful ad hominem, the only lame recourse left you, since any attempt at damage control would be useless, in fact counterproductive, in that it would allow for repeating of my easy to understand proofs.

            “Ah well, let it be a lesson to others.”

            You really should have known better, Comrade. But then Marxists aren’t too bright, as proven by the fact they’re Marxists, who gullibly act on the brilliant, though errant, writings of Karl Marx!

      • Lapsed self-loather

        Well you bloody well should. He may repeat is posts, but that is only because Marxist subversion tactics are complex topic understood by few (like a game of chess, they are always playing a few moves ahead) and he is one of the few who gets it.

        • Gerschwin

          And you be sure to wrap the tin foil tight around your head now…shhh…. the aliens are listening…

          • Lapsed self-loather

            The Cold War wasn’t mere conspiracy theory, rather conspiracy fact based on openly known psychological / ideological warfare techniques, of which few are even aware of today . We have been subverted so successfuly that now no external input us required as the useful idiot “liberal” majority constantly bend over backwards to be as “PC” as possible and destroy ourselves.

          • Gerschwin

            Are you from Area 51?

  • Gerschwin

    All of the above is true, but RT is also immensely entertaining if you’ve no dog in the media fight and are happy to plant tongue firmly in cheek, kick back and enjoy the fruity Svetlanas or Tatjanas with their cardboard English reporting on the decadence and impending demise of the West – it makes for a lot more entertainment than the mono-speak liberal snooze fest of something like Question Time.

    • Hegelman

      Even their English as a rule is better.

    • Richard Sanderson

      “kick back and enjoy the fruity Svetlanas or Tatjanas with their
      cardboard English reporting on the decadence and impending demise of the
      West”

      Yeah, that is going well. You can see the presenters gritting their teeth as the falling oil prices crush Russia’s economy, while the West carries on as per usual.

    • Unenlightened_Commentary

      There’s some truth in that. Supposedly during WW2 Lord Haw Haw’s broadcasts were widely listened to, not because people believed them but because they were at least entertaining.

  • Hegelman

    I knew a lot about the obscenely lying obscenely rich swindlers who are our masters in the Western world, but I was not aware their media was Unbiased.

    Now I have been told that by such a reliable source I can sleep peacefully.

  • Hegelman

    The Western media is no more able to report the world truthfully than the wolf can be truthful about his plans to the lamb.

    • Sam

      Western media actually investigates it’s politicians and breaks stories about them that makes them look bad. Russian media cannot do this, as 95% of it is now state owned and the real journalists have been assassinated by Putin or thrown into jail by him. He even regulates bloggers on the internet now; if you have a blog in Russia that gets over 3k hits a month (a pathetically small number for the internet, even though obviously this should never be the case;) you have to register with the government and if you “slander” the Russian government or politicians, you can be subject to censorship, fines and imprisonment.

  • William_Brown

    You report this as if it’s news: RT, Fox, CNN, Sky, BBC….they all spin to the tune played by their paymasters. As do the Speccie, Telegraph, Guardian & New Statesman. One can only hope that ingesting something from all outlets might, just might, give one a brief glimpse of the truth – whatever ‘truth’ actually means.

    It’s why so many have been so disengaged – they’ve just given up and are happy to leave politics, and its related media coverage, to the ‘bubble’. On a day to day basis, it’s of no relevance to them at all. Besides, they haven’t got the time to sort the wheat from the chaff since there is so much smoke, mirrors and blatant lies.

    • Gabriel Flaubert

      Not strictly as you say.

      On CNN, for example, I can see all sides of the story; CNN in Spanish invited to speak to spokespersons of various communist regimes that have emerged in Latin America (Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua, followers of Cuba), (incidentally, that I’m not willing to discuss it, I live in Venezuela, I know what I mean, at least in the case of Venezuela, the hardest hit of all, Ecuador and others are not so bad (neither good), but remain disguised dictatorships).

      However in RT only praise these dictatorships, not invited to speak to spokesmen democratic alternative, do not even cover what they said at some point.

  • Alex Granovsky

    So happy I have unsubscribed from the Spectator few months ago.

    The only positive thing is to read comments and know that the majority of people do actually disagree with this over-appalling anti-Russia agenda and still are able to get the facts right.

    • Hegelman

      Yes, Tovarish, we know a thing or two about the capitalist wolf !

    • Richard Sanderson

      You unsubscribed? Aww, cute. Bye! Reporting on the rampant corruption and conspiracy theory lies coming out of Russia is not an “anti-Russia agenda”. RT and Putin are getting exposed. It will carry on. Get used to it.

      • Baron

        Carry on as usual is about right, Richard, accumulating debt everywhere what with the insanely low cost of money. When the bond market wakes up, pushes the rate at which it is willing to lend to the massively debt ridden governments and individuals, the fun will begin.

        It may be a step to far, but Baron reckons either the EU or the Republic will implode before Russia does. Unless, of course, a war steps in, an even greater fun for people like you, one presumes.

  • Hegelman

    As for the woman who was able to resign live on “Russia Today”, which operative of the Murdoch media like The Times or The Sun or of Fox News or of the other toxic gushers of poison propaganda in the US and the UK is able to do so?

    In “The Guardian” anyone who seriously questions their scribblers, or even points out the well known fact that most of them are private school characters who went to Oxbridge, gets banned from the site. I know this from personal experience.

  • Bumble Bee

    Almost NOBODY in the British media should be sitting on a high horse and lamenting about the lack of ‘real journalism’ in the Russian media.

    The british MSM is embarrassingly propagandistic and to a certain extend dangerous and self destructive. Actually scrap that, it IS VERY DANGEROUS.

    Have you seen what our politicians and MSM have reduced this country to, in less than 15 years? I only need to say 1 word: Islam.

  • Hegelman

    The whole world is ruled these days by scamsters.

    Demanding,as O’Sullivan does, those under Western scamsters to bark at the scamsters of Russia is stupid.

  • Hegelman

    The whole world today is ruled by scamsters.

    Demanding, as O’Sullivan does, that those under Western scamsters should bark at the scamsters of Russia and refuse to lend a ear when the Moscow scamsters tell on the Western ones, is highly stupid.

    We all have to survive in this hard world and we cannot refuse to look at information because it comes from tainted sources. Western sources are thoroughly corrupt too and we may be able to find out something useful by checking one liar against another and reading between the lines.

    As for the calculating looking young lady who resigned live on RT, I bet she was snapped up by those managing fountains of truth like Fox News.

    • jamesmace

      It’s fascinating that the Russian trolls offer a graduate level lesson in logical fallacies. Ad hominems, straw men , straw dogs, they are all there.

  • GenJackRipper

    “That campaign in turn now looks like a dry run for RT’s reporting and
    commentary on the Ukrainian crisis, which depicted the Kiev government
    as bloodthirsty neo-fascists intent on ethnic cleansing etc. — while
    depicting actual bloodthirsty neo-fascists (and Russian soldiers) in
    eastern Ukraine as peace-minded democrats.”

    Yes, because bombing civilians in Donetsk Dresden-style is not blood-thirsty, but fighting against government forces is blood thirsty.

    War is peace. Peace is war. Newspeak.

  • GenJackRipper

    Funny, when I printed this before lunch it said:

    “John O’Sullivan is executive editor of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.”

    but now it says:

    “John O’Sullivan is Director of the Danube Institute in Brussels and a Fellow of the National Review Institute.”

    I suppose it was a little to obvious before why this article was written; RFE is the opposite of RT in terms of ideology.
    The irony of that is… well ironic.

    • davebr

      Should have used bat guano.

  • Guest

    This thread has become the Hegelman Blog.

    • Hegelman

      That can only improve and entertain readers. I am well informed and witty.

      • Chris Morriss

        Methinks that you might post under other avatars on this site? Your idiosyncratic use of English seems rather familiar.

        • Hegelman

          Your judgement is defective in this instance.

  • Hegelman

    This is what I got from the Wiki site about John O’Sullivan:

    “John O’Sullivan, CBE (born April 25, 1942) is a British conservative political commentator and journalist and currently vice president and executive editor of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. During the 1980s, he was a senior policywriter and speechwriter in 10 Downing Street for Margaret Thatcher when she was British prime minister and remained close to her up to her death.”

    Now we know why he is so IMPARTIAL.

  • Christopher Gage

    Astounding to think that our own media is completely impartial. Come on, The BBC?

    RT does have some interesting characters, Keiser is entertaining, taken with a pinch of salt, of course.

    We all know what to expect when watching any media channel; make the allowances and make up your own mind.

    • Richard Sanderson

      “RT does have some interesting characters, Keiser is entertaining, taken with a pinch of salt, of course.”

      I heard him talking about MH17. Now he is totally discredited. Get in the f***ing sack, Max.

      • Christopher Gage

        I haven’t followed him closely. He’s entertaining, though, I wouldn’t want him in a position of power!

        • http://www.siddalgrove.co.uk/enemy_of_the_state/ dpb

          In a Farage government with Stacey Herbert as Home Secretary? Bring it on

    • Lapsed self-loather

      There is no such thing as impartiality anyway. It is a nonsense concept as all individuals and organisations have to have a bias of some sort. If an organisation such as the BBC were to have a bias it should be in favour of the British people who fund it, not against the British people as it constantly seems to be.

  • Bumble Bee

    Can somebody please take the coffee away from Hegelman?

  • gerronwithit

    I guess a reality of our daily life is that we understand how to avoid or peer through the miasma of multicoloured horse manure delivered by our own media i.e. we know, i believe, the predilections of the BBC, C4, The Guardian, The Telegraph and even the dear old Spectator. In general, I never look at CNN or Fox or Euronews (if that is what it’s called) because, well, I can’t bear them, but that’s personal.

    As for RT and its troll commentators even here, I think we all now have a good understanding of whose agenda that it spews out, so it’s categorised with other country’s propaganda and to be avoided unless there is a specific reason.

  • http://andreygolub.biz Andrey Golub

    it much worst about CNN and the most Western media- they all publish propaganda, all that’s “approved by State Department”. so here it’s still “light propaganda”, in respect of the US side ;))

  • realarthurdent

    Russia TodayThe BBC: anatomy of a propaganda machine
    It looks like a news channel. It talks like a news channel. It says whatever Putin the European Union wants

    • Simon_in_London

      He he.

  • Diggery Whiggery

    You don’t think that maybe some Russians might think that the BBC could possibly be a little bit biased and that it churns out Western propaganda. Putin actually massively increased funding of RT following the western media’s universal declaration that Russia invaded South Ossetia first. Turned out, as the US secretary of state admitted at the time that this was not true.

    Personally, I watch RT occasionally, but I’m aware that it will concentrate on certain stories and portray them according to a political agenda. I therefore take what I watch with a shovel of salt, but I do the same when I watch Channel 4 or the BBC.

    All media is biased. Whether it comes directly from the journo himself, politicians, government or from a general institutional or societal bias doesn’t matter. Treat all media with suspicion and think for yourself.

    The thing that is really killing the west at the moment is not that people trust Putin or believe him more than our own politicians, but simply that we have no reason to believe that he his lying any more than our politicians.

    All globalized politicians are now seen globally as being in a different class skating over the top of the rest of us, looking out for themselves and their kind. Whether they’re Russian, British, American or whatever, is totally irrelevant. They all have more in common with each other than they do with us.

    We are living in a dangerous world where feeling affinity with your countrymen can no longer be relied upon, whether it concerns your neighbour or someone in authority. This will end badly.

    • http://www.volgatrader.com Philip Owen, Volga Trader

      The BBC News did not declare Russia invaded Georgia first. It did host commentators who said so.

  • Mountainman

    Why don’t you do a piece on the all pervasive propaganda machine that is todays Western Media. This article is from a pot that calls the kettle black. RT is a defence against the outrageous propaganda of the Western media. It comes to something when Al Jazeera and RT are more credible than any of the Western outlets.

    • EricHobsbawmtwit

      You stretch credibility of your argument by asserting that the Western media is anywhere near as bad as Al Jazeera or RT.

      • Mountainman

        I agree with you. I find it incredible, but nevertheless an unavoidable conclusion, that Al Jazeera and RT have more credibility than the Western mainstream media. The sad thing is that the Western MSM does not realise how transparent their falsehoods are. However it is the nature of propaganda to peddle lies so they are probably unimpressed when confronted with competition in the propaganda stakes from more credible and accurate opposition sources.

      • Unenlightened_Commentary

        I don’t think Al Jazeera should be lumped in with RT or Iran’s Press TV. It’s a serious news organisation, except about Qatar, even if it is biased towards Arab opinion.

        • EricHobsbawmtwit

          It’s certainly trying to be, yes.

    • Gabriel Flaubert

      On CNN, for example, I can see all sides of the story, they interview everyone and say what happened to everyone.

      In RT only praise anti-American dictatorships (as currently dictates in my beloved Venezuela), 1000% coverage, not invited to speak to spokesmen democratic alternative, do not even cover what they said at some point.

  • fuck nato

    Hahaha I know my comment will eventually be deleted by the lying snakes in UK. But the fact of the matter rt has more articles about the truth happening around the world compared to CNN ,yahoo , BBC , fox , NBC, guardian etc… And some of those corporate medias aren’t funded by governments? The propaganda spewing from those media outlets is pathetic injustice to the world and brainwashing. The entire reason you write an article like this (one of many) is because rt keeps bringing the truth (maybe not everything happening inside Russia) and you want to ruin their credibility. But when it comes to news happening around the world they are #1. You should be writing more articles about the genocide and funding in Ukraine from USA and Europe. About how joke of a president o*ama truly is and all the corruption happening around the west, fukoshima leaking radiation. Nato attempts to get closer and closer to russia, because of bullshit ‘cold war rhetoric’. @obamadictator

    • EricHobsbawmtwit

      You need to switch off Prison Planet mate.

      Also get a job.

    • Bumble Bee

      i like your moniker

  • John H Newcomb

    Thanks to O’Sullivan for an excellent critique of RT (English) and its Kremlinist character. What he could expand on even more is the huge Russian government funding of RT – not only in English, but in several languages (RT Deutsch, RT En Español, etc) – and most importantly of the other emerging new propaganda machine Sputnik – another Kremlin tool in several languages – as well as a huge octopus of Kremlin “soft-power” international NGOs in the West (many in London, NY, Washington, Paris, etc).

    Links to other critical articles analyzing RT:
    – Oliver Bullough (2013) “Inside Russia Today: counterweight to the mainstream media, or Putin’s mouthpiece?”:
    http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/world-affairs/2013/05/inside-russia-today-counterweight-mainstream-media-or-putins-mou
    – Catherine Fitzpatrick (2010) “More Moral Equivalency from Vadim Nikitin”:
    http://3dblogger.typepad.com/minding_russia/2010/04/more-moral-equivalency-from-vadim-nikitin.html
    – Rosie Gray (2014) “How The Truth Is Made At Russia Today”: http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/how-the-truth-is-made-at-russia-today
    – Oliver Hotham (2012) Don’t be fooled – Russia Today is trash”:
    http://notsoreviews.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/dont-be-fooled-russia-today-is-trash/
    – James Miller (2014) “Throwing a Wrench In Russia’s Propaganda Machine”:
    http://www.interpretermag.com/throwing-a-wrench-in-russias-propaganda-machine/
    – Nikolaus von Twickel, (2010) “Russia Today uses controversy to seek viewers”: http://www.sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=30993
    – Sonia Scherr, (2010) “Russian TV Channel Pushes ‘Patriot’ Conspiracy Theories”: http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/fall/from-russia-with-love
    – Shaun Walker (2010) “Russia today, tomorrow the world”: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-today-tomorrow–the-world-2083869.html
    – Jesse Zwick (2012) “Pravda Lite”: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/world/magazine/101703/russia-tv-rtv-cohen-alyona

    • Hegelman

      I often find RT clumsy.

      But the opposition – the obviously crooked Anglo-US media – is such a liar that it is easy to undermine by a word of truth here and there.

    • Hegelman

      The whole world today is ruled by scamsters.

      Demanding that those under Western scamsters should bark at the
      scamsters of Russia and refuse to lend a ear when the Moscow scamsters
      tell on the Western ones, is highly stupid.

      We all have to survive in this hard world and we cannot refuse to look at information because it comes from tainted sources. Western sources are thoroughly corrupt too and we may be able to find out something useful by checking one liar against another and reading between the lines.

  • Ambientereal

    This is the beginning of the true new Russia. If you need to lie it is because you are doing something wrong. It is not correct that Putin puts the wholehearted russians against the west. Russians “are” actually westerners, sometimes more than many others that live much nearer the west

  • JSC

    The fact is, RT has been the driving force and proclaimer of the narrative of the protesting left in the UK for quite a while now, even more so than the BBC. Morons like Russell Brand and ecomentalist Greens swallow it’s tripe whole and unquestioningly. Need proof? Look at the blogs of such people you’ll see they post link, after link, after link to dodgy RT propaganda. The only thing RT is good for is its worldwide reporting in (the ever increasing) areas of the world where white, western reporters would simply be killed / beheaded.

  • Roger James Michael Sutherland

    It is an awful channel, constantly giving interviews to random bloggers cited as “experts”. I don’t know how anyone who isn’t a communist or a crazed Islamist could support a channel which pays £70,000+ a year to George Galloway so that he can broadcast a litany of anti-Western, anti-Israeli, pro-Islamist, pro-communist babble to RT’s natural constituency of conspiracy theorists and anti-Americans. (If you want a citation for the £70,000+ figure, look at Galloway’s entries in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.)

    To condemn RT is not to pretend that Western media are wonderful, but to my knowledge, none of the mainstream newspapers in Britain receive their funding from a burgeoning police state which “disappears” journalists when necessary and violates the territory of its neighbours with impunity (and whose only ally in Europe is its client state of Belarus). Britain is not a bastion of liberty, since people can be hassled by the state for the “crime” of expressing an opinion on Twitter, but I think most serious people would rather live in British civil society and would rather, given the choice, face the British authorities than the Russian ones. Those who disagree might want to consider emigration to Brave Mother Russia.

    That said, as someone who dislikes the misanthropic belief echoed by the smuggest people from both sides of the spectrum, I don’t believe people are “brainwashed” by news broadcasts which they agree with, no matter how much I deplore their opinions. Most people will see through RT, just like people are increasingly seeing through the BBC’s nonsense.

    • Hegelman

      I often find RT clumsy.

      But the opposition – the obviously
      crooked Anglo-US media – is such a liar that it is easy to undermine by a
      word of truth here and there.

  • John H Newcomb

    On Facebook, “Boycott Russia Today” provides links to articles about RT, Sputnik and related organs of the Kremlin’s international propaganda machine: https://www.facebook.com/boycottrussiatoday

  • BillyCobbett

    Is RT the only news available in Russia. Are Russians not able to access independent sources on the internet? The key to all news(propaganda) is to be able to sort the facts from the bull. The ‘West is most definitely no different.

  • Hegelman

    This is rich comedy.

    One scoundrel warns us against the wiles of his rival scoundrel.

    In terms of Evelyn Waugh’s “Scoop” this is “The Daily Beast” owned by Lord Copper warning us of the dishonesty of “The Daily Brute” owned by Lord Zinc.

  • Hegelman

    The very fact that a Western propaganda chieftain is forced to warn against RT is a tribute to its effectiveness and the weakness of Western propaganda at present.

    As far as I can recall no-one bothered much with the effect of Soviet news outlets in the West by the 1950s at least. The major Western propaganda attack against these outlets was targeted at their efforts in the Third World.

    Since the end of the Cold War clearly the situation has changed. The Western media has lost credibility even in its heartlands as people have seen only too clearly that they are speaking for a rich class with no global competition. So many turn to a news outlet like RT which they know is also speaking for a deeply corrupt rich class but is at least different and hostile to the gangster news media they have in their own countries.

    Sure Putin is a crook; but it is possible he may tell the truth now and then about the West. When Westerners had more faith in their system they did not pay attention to Russian propaganda. Now they do.

    • Simon_in_London

      “The very fact that a Western propaganda chieftain is forced to warn
      against RT is a tribute to its effectiveness and the weakness of Western
      propaganda at present.As far as I can recall no-one bothered much about the effect of Soviet news outlets in the West by the 1950s at least.”

      Good point. The fear of RT seems to be a symptom of the breakdown of the Western elites’ control of the public through propaganda. More and more people are learning to distrust the Western media. Not that RT is any more trustworthy, but it does throw a light on our own corrupt media class – of nominal ‘left’ and ‘right’. The modern Western Left is in thrall to CIA-backed Frankfurt School cultural Marxism and is very much part of the system, along with the ‘Neo-Liberal’ Right. (Ironically RT also uses a lot of Western cultural Marxist dialectic to attack the West – it’s a handy weapon.)

      • jamesmace

        Nonsense- millions protested Russia’s influence in the western media after WWI. Gareth Jones rebuked the NY Times obfuscation of the russian genocide in Ukraine . Sadly he was murdered while Duranty was festooned with Pulitzers for the coverup of the Holodomor

  • Hegelman

    As they say in Africa, in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

  • https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/home Dean Jackson

    “It says whatever Putin wants”

    That’s not true, since Putin and Medvedev are figureheads, as was Yeltsin. RT news stories are approved by the KGB disinformation department, which isn’t too great of a logistical endeavor since RT is an organ of the KGB.

    See my comments below for the real story behind RT, which every Soviet watcher must watch in order to know the latest in Communist strategy vis-à-vis the non-co-opted West…

    • gerad

      You clearly have a lack of knowledge about everything. RT is a hugely intelligient,wonderful informed and expertly crafted news station

      Only a severly dumb person would call it “propaganda”

      • https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/home Dean Jackson

        “RT is a hugely intelligient,wonderful informed and expertly crafted news station”

        That may be, but it is an organ of the KGB. Since the institutions of the West, including political parties, were co-opted by Marxists over one-hundred years ago, RT plays the ‘good cop/bad cop’ routine with the West, the ultimate purpose being to weaken the West’s prominence in the world, which the co-opted West plays its part in.

  • Richard

    If you want to test whether the BBC is biased, you just have to look at their coverage of the Left’s poster-boy country: South Africa. You very, very seldom see anything in-depth about it, and anything negative is always attributed to the former government. And if you look at the way a programme like, say, Crimewatch, is broadcast, you will note that woeful under-representation of black criminals and over-representation of white criminals (look at the seriousness of their crimes to see the manipulation). The media of the Left is just as biased as Pravda ever was, just it is not as overt.

  • http://twitter.com/#!/DavidWLincoln David W. Lincoln

    Interesting, because isn’t the author an old comrade-in-arms of Conrad Black?

    A very good effort to explain why things are taking place, and why they are going the direction they are headed in.

  • Evolution stopped at the neck

    The pot calling the kettle black

  • JohnCrichton89

    All lot of the comments convey my initial reaction, pot/kettle/black.
    Being said, this is the only online UK orientated news outlet that lets commentators, and writers, say whatever they want. The only one !
    One more than Russia granted, but still. Not exactly something we should be proud of.
    These are dark days for your profession, effectively being whored out to any and all left wing policies.
    When not cowering in fear of right wing extremist’s and their threats of violence. British journalism? What’s that ?

  • rightrightright

    There was an RT report on the housing shortage in London and the SE. No mention of immigration as the exacerbating factor and no mention that the people living in sheds around Slough and so forth had SE Asian rather than wicked English landlords.

    Similarly, a report showing South Americans creeping illegally into the USA was literally accompanied by sad violins.

    One can pick up the occasional interesting nugget but on the whole, one has to take RT with a large pinch of salt.

  • http://weourselves.com/ Christian Wright

    This is rich, given the Spectator turned itself into the Unionist campaign’s flunky, butchering the truth to help NO prevail in the referendum campaign. They didn’t even try to address the issue of the MSM’s complicity (1,2). Got to admire the author’s chutzpah and brass neck, though.

    More pertinent the state broadcaster, the BBC, outright lied, and lied, and lied, in that campaign (3,4). They are doing it again right now in Scotland to support Labour who are facing an extinction-level event in Scotland on May 7 2015. They’re not even trying to hide it. It’s wall to wall Murphy and Labour

    RT was the one broadcaster who DID tell the truth about indyref. Their reports were well researched and their presentation, even handed.

    It would better serve this journal had the focus of this critique been the BBC, an instrument of state propaganda in the fine tradition of the 1950s Pravda.

    1. http://www.weourselves.com/the-eye-sees-not-itself-but-by-reflection-and-not-a-one-of-them-has-the-balls-to-look-in-the-mirror/

    2. http://www.weourselves.com/spectators-uncle-tams-vacuity-evinced-in-post-debate-review/

    3. http://www.weourselves.com/the-bbc-is-corrupt/

    4. http://www.weourselves.com/the-bbc-is-corrupt-ii/

  • Bill_der_Berg

    George Orwell knew a thing or two about the biased reporting and the rejection of unwelcome opinions by the press and publishers. His essay on ‘Freedom on the Press’ is still worth reading.

    One of his conclusions was that –

    “To exchange one orthodoxy for another is not necessarily an advance. The enemy is the gramophone mind, whether or not one agrees with the record that is being played at the moment”.

    What is John O’Sullivan doing in the following passage but putting forward a choice of orthodox opinions? The ‘gramophone mind’ in action.

    “That campaign in turn now looks like a dry run for RT’s reporting and commentary on the Ukrainian crisis, which depicted the Kiev government as bloodthirsty neo-fascists intent on ethnic cleansing etc. — while depicting actual bloodthirsty neo-fascists (and Russian soldiers) in eastern Ukraine as peace-minded democrats”.

  • Simon_in_London

    “John O’Sullivan is Director of the Danube Institute and a Fellow of the National Review Institute.”

    National Review is the mouthpiece of American Neoconservatism, which has killed a lot more people since 9/11 than the Russian government has.

    • Bill_der_Berg

      They probably think that it was a price worth paying. After all, those killed were mostly foreigners.

    • jamesmace

      Are you including the 61 Russian journalists killed under Putins watch?

      • Simon_in_London

        If he killed 61 Russian journalists, that would still be a lot fewer than jounalist deaths due to US action, yes.

        • jamesmace

          Oops – there appears to be an updated list of over 300 journalists killed in Russia who appear to have had the misfortune of being perceived as being critical of the Kremlin.

          http://journalists-in-russia.org/

          Also, I missed the execution of 300 + journalists in the US.
          Was that on RT? Link?

  • Bill_der_Berg

    Not long ago Iran was ‘the greatest threat to the US’, now it is an ally in the fight against IS.

    So are we now required to stop hating Iran and start hating Russia? It is hard to keep up with these changing fashions.

  • rtj1211

    Sp let me get this straight:

    1. You’re telling me that Roger Boyes and Con Coughlin are not MI6 cold-war troughers seeing a new lease of life for their money-making in columns in the Times and the DT respectively??
    2. You’re telling me that the UK Press reports objectively on the EU, both its positives and its negatives??
    3. You’re telling me that war reporting, political reporting and the interests of the British People are objectively served by the BBC?
    4. You’re telling me that the Murdoch Press in objective and unbiased, as opposed to expressing the Murdoch world view upon pain of the Editors being fired?
    5. You’re telling me that climate science is reported objectively in the UK/US/EU MSM?
    6. You’re telling me that Russia and Russians are reported on fairly in the West??

    The aim for all UK watchers of RT is to pick up facts they don’t get from the UK media, to understand positions taken by the Russians and to understand that the world doesn’t revolve around us and nor should it.

    It is about understanding that as the West has broken the terms of the Gorbachev-Bush doctrine in terms of NATO expanding to Russia’s borders, Russia should have no qualms about reorienting its alliances toward South America, China, the Middle East etc. They have a right to exist, to trade and to fulfil their own lives within their own spheres, and if the British, Americans and EU apparatchiks deem otherwise, then the sooner they are all murdered the better. Just as if Putin et al decided they could invade Eastern Europe again, they should be bumped off with impunity also.

    Unsurprisingly for the daughter of a former Russian politburo member, Sophie Shevardnadze is rather well informed about international politics, albeit from a Russian persepctive. Cross Talk is clearly a programme made by someone who has lived in Russia rather than in the grip of the Western Media and it shows a healthy disregard for official political lines. Clearly, Moscow was recruiting CIA officers long ago as they are happy to contribute from their side of the story. Ditto MI6 officers in London. George Galloway was after the money, what else could you expect?!

    I really hate the Spectator implying that UK people aren’t capable of reading between the lines when watching RT. I don’t for a moment believe all that it says, but it does make me have a healthy disdain for the UK media (which I’ve had for many years any way).

    The issue at hand is not Putin seducing the British, but the British having declared in fairly robust terms that their leaders and their media are stark naked and their titles as Emperors are no longer attached with the respect that would have been present in centuries past.

    I suggest that you reinvent Britain rather than slag off Putin.

    Britain is a laughing stock, has been for years and always will be. it’s a place of charlatans, financial shysters and those with an irredeemable sense of entitlement utterly unrelated to their worthiness for such privilege.

    But you can’t say that in a ‘loyal’ UK media title, can you??

    Why not????

    • Sam

      This isn’t about English media but about RT and it’s utter betrayal of all the precepts of good journalism. RT is the least balanced media source in the universe. It is *the* closest thing to pure propaganda that has ever existed on such a large scale.

      Regardless of what Rupert Murdoch chooses to do with the media he owns, it is first and foremost, not state owned/ran/financed publications. They also do not go to Russia and market viciously anti-Russia/ridiculously pro-West propaganda to Russians. His media doesn’t target Russians at all in fact.

      There is literally nothing fair or balanced about RT, *ESPECIALLY* when it comes to Russia and the West. You couldn’t even find a single, solitary article even slightly critical of Putin at RT or any Russian media (as it’s nearly all state owned now, or the good journalists of Putin have been assassinated by him and/or put into prison) or anything good about the West. This is not true for Western media, where you will find much criticism about our leadership and our media actually investigates and outs the flaws in our government and society. And maybe most importantly, our governments aren’t trying to silence the media and assassinating journalists and trying to have literally all of our media owned/ran/financed by the state.

      It’s not to say that any of your criticisms of the West are unjust. But I don’t think RT or RT “supporters” like you (and Russia also pays internet trolls, you can never be certain of who you are talking to when it comes to RT supporters) should be worrying about the splinters in the eye of Western media, when there is a sequoia tree in the eye of Russian “media.”

  • Roger Hudson

    You have to look at both RT and CNN and work out for yourself where the balance is. Anyone who thinks they watch a non-biased medium is deluding him/herself.

  • http://politicalfilm.wordpress.com/ polfilmblog

    The first sentence is a lie and blatant propaganda. There are several prominent American journalists on RT clearly not saying what Putin wants. O’Sullivan is a liar.

  • Terry Field

    Russia Today is funny.
    It is obviously propaganda; dog-in-the-manger self-pity mingled with bitter arrogance and whining about the ‘West’ and its excesses and difficulties.
    Kaiser is a joke – funny, off the wall, but in no way serious. His odd female sidekick is sexy in her desire to match his wacky observations; it is just good fun.
    Only a wally would take it seriously.
    Then again, there are a heck of a lot of wallies about.

  • Ian

    I watch it for about ten minute every night it does make be laugh Russia is obviously the greatest country in the world and Europe is a broken collapsed state .
    North Korea couldn’t do a better job.

    • pp22pp

      The Cotswolds are not broken. Much of urban Britain IS a broken society.

  • jamesmace

    Mr Sullivan,

    Well done and one should note that RT is a continuation of a century old Kremlin propaganda machine that has kept the west blind to “huge events” as warned by Orwell.

    Google Gareth Vaughn Jones to understand this phenomenon – and it’s frightening that even today, few realize that Russia started WWII with their ally the Nazis by invading 6 European countries in 1939.

    • Simon_in_London

      “few realize that Russia started WWII with their ally the Nazis”

      I don’t think this is due to Russian control of the Western media. The pro-Soviet bias in the West was initially instrumental, the USSR being a weapon against Nazi Germany, and propagated by Socialist sympathisers with Communism. Russia has if anything received more hostile coverage since the fall of Communism.

      • jamesmace

        You lost us after the first three words. Western Pro Russian bias was strong before and after WWII.

        The pro Soviet bias in the western press reached its first peak with the cover up of the Holodomor in Ukraine in 1932. It continued with the very successful banishment to the Memory Hole of the fact that Russia also started WWII with its own invasion of Poland along with the Nazis.

        As Orwell said, “Huge events like the Ukraine famine of 1933, involving the deaths of millions of people, have actually escaped the attention of the majority of English russophiles…”

        • Simon_in_London

          Fair enough. You are right, but as I said, this was a pro-Communist and pro-Soviet/Bolshevik bias, not a bias in favour of ethnic Russians. Imperial Russia had not received particularly favourable coverage even when our ally.

  • nick

    Is BBC biased? Remember the BBC reporting of the IRA “terrorists” in the 80’s? Talk to anyone who lived in Ireland to get any idea of the truth rather than the BBC bullshit…

  • The PrangWizard of England

    Russia Today (RT-tv) is indeed subversive viewed from a Western free and democratic perspective, such as still remains of western free values. But as has been mentioned it is not the only source of attempts to demoralise the people of the West.
    Much criticism has been directed at the BBC which has tended for years to take a negative view of every activity which does not fit its own left-wing political philosophy.
    It has in this respect started to copy RT and has developed a format, a series of programmes called I think ‘BBC Pop Up’, in which they say they will be covering stories and issues which are currently omitted from the ‘mainstream’. This of course is the mantra of RT which makes a point of finding obscure movements and dissident views which they promote out of scale to further their subversive agenda.
    In the BBC’s ‘Pop Up’ which I saw the other day we saw two young men, exuding a kind of ‘alternative radical’ air reporting from a US city, which has had bad press in that it appears in one of those ‘unhappy’ places to live lists. They featured something about the many bridges there, many run down of course, and a derelict steel mill which had been decorated by some ‘alternative’ sculpture artist with a wire stag to represent nature taking over from human destruction of the environment. Then there was something intended to be cheery but not convincingly so – for balance I imagine – a banjo band, then a piece about bad US accents, followed by a Thanksgiving meal which one of the reporters claimed he didn’t know anything about it, but he ‘wanted to learn’ about quirky cultural beliefs. Finally we had ‘Conflict Kitchen’ where food from countries which the US is in conflict with is sold, Iran, North Korea etc., clearly politically motivated and on the Left and thus very attractive to the BBC.
    I would venture to suggest that this sets the tone for future programmes, Negativity and criticism. Western values are to be subverted or ridiculed, Left-wing causes to be supported.

  • pat kelly

    The BBC is a joke that pretends to be unbiased. It is now receiving money from the EU.

  • Bill_der_Berg

    ” Gallup International’s poll of 68 countries for 2014 found the US as the greatest threat to peace in the world, voted three times more dangerous to world peace than the next country”.

    That may help to explain why so many people tune in to RT.

  • Bill_der_Berg

    John O’Sullivan of all people should understand Russia’s desire to take over neighbouring territory. Back in the days of Saddam Hussein, he suggested that it would be a great wheeze for Turkey to invade Iraq and seize part of that country’s oil rich region.

  • foxoles

    ‘ … interleaved with weird giggly speculation about what drugs George Osborne was on …’

    Or perhaps not so weird, now we’ve all seen his spaced-out performance at PMQs.

  • MRMcCaffery

    RT is the most biased news outlet out there today. While the U.S. does not and never has censored the news media, this outfit should clearly be treated as an arm of the Russian Administration and not an actual news purveyor.

    • a girl

      Indeed. I can’t believe the credulous limp and frankly stupid responses of others I’ve read on this thread.

      • MRMcCaffery

        I love it when RT (and CCTV for that matter) brings on these half-drunk nobody American professors as ‘experts’ as if that makes their case. “Breaking the Set” may be the most ludicrous show on TV.

        • a girl

          I’ll take your word for it, having seen none of the above, myself.

  • mf

    the author, and all of western media, and indeed western political establishment, would do well to use this opportunity and reflect on actual social costs of the following:
    1. corporatization of western media outlets which often prevents this media from discussing subjects deemed too controversial or offensive to advertisers, who on the whole, represent what could be described as a “right wing point of view” in western society, namely maximization of monetary profit trumps all other considerations as greatest profit automatically leads to greatest public good, no need for stinking public policy.
    2. Further consequences of corporatization which puts profits in media outlets over integrity and public service, and views regulations as imposition by a terrible state, which in turn leads to these media outlets always putting entertainment (also known as infotainment) over news dissemination, leads them to behavior like trading “access” for integrity, etc.
    3. And everyone should reflect on (1) and (2) having contributed to a terrible tragedy called Iraq war, consequences of which are felt in many places, including media space. Moral equivalence was an old hat trick of soviet propaganda. RT repeats this old hat tricks with few extra digital tricks that the article refers to. Trouble is, the story line itself appears far more believable today, and Putin is banking on it. Just read comments to this article.

    Question to author: what have western media establishment and political establishment done to prevent another Iraq war? Perhaps the author should start there, before worrying about RT.

  • Brimstone52

    RT covers the events that the western media exclude and vice versa. But still we don’t get the whole unexpurgated truth.

    • a girl

      You trust anything from the clutches of the aspiring Tsar of new Russia? Don’t be a berk!

      • Brimstone52

        I said nothing about trust.

        Do you trust what you get from this or any other rag?

  • Bill_der_Berg

    Some sobering statistics.

    “More than two-thirds of the general public distrust the UK media in the wake of the Leveson Report, according to a survey.

    According to the Edelman Trust Barometer, 30 per cent of 1,000 members of the general public surveyed and 33 per cent of 200 the “informed public” trust the media. The informed public are defined as university educated, top 25 per cent earnings bracket individuals who are engaged in business news and public policy”.

  • Terence Hale

    Hi,
    “The difference between real journalism and Russia Today”. I am a simple nut case, I read an article and make spontaneous a comment. The Dutch and the Americans censors me on most, the Russians have never censored me.

  • Lou Coatney

    Meanwhile, the U.S. House, led by the childless warpig Kinsinger from Illinois, overwhelmingly passed Resolution 758, to put America on war footing specifically targeting Russia … which Spectator blithely overlooks.

    We deliberately started this crisis with our $5 billion Kiev coup timed to the Winter Olympics, with which we broke our 1994 Budapest Memorandum/treaty with the Russians and basically declared (political with the option to military) war on them. The Russians now feel terminally threatened – for the following reasons – and may themselves launch a “pre-emptive” first-strike nuclear attack on the West, before we do it to them.

    1. Obama resumed the development of our missile first-strike capability (which GW Bush had stopped, to his credit) with his “Conventional” (as though that is fooling anyone) Prompt Global Strike program.

    2. Our missile defenses deployed in Britain and Poland (and Israel and selected places in the U.S.) now make a “pre-emptive” (again) first-strike war seem “winnable” in the minds of our “neoconservative” (Dr. Strangelove) militarists … who are responsible for our illegal Kosovo bombing war (for which Yeltsin turned Russia back over to its national security community/Putin), our disastrous and war crime Iraq war, the Libyan tragedy, all but destroying Syria, Georgia’s aggression against South Ossetia – the Georgian defense minister was *Israeli* – and now Ukraine. They seem to think they can redeem disasters with even/infinitely worse disasters.

    3. The corporate media in the West are hyping World War 3, trying to condition our people into accepting us entering one or starting one “pre-emptively.”

    4. Moderate Sec/Defense Chuck Hagel was forced to resign. It was under him that our Defense Intelligence Agency blew the whistle about the August 2013 sarin gas attacks in Ghouta Syria being by our al Qaeda/Islamic State allies, not by Assad. (The DIA director was forced to resign some months ago.) I think Chuck Hagel would have exposed and tried to stop Obama/NATO launching a first-strike against Russia. Instead, Obama’s new Sec/Defense Ashton Carter is a neocon who publicly urged a first-strike attack on North Korea in 2006 and is presumably delusional enough to think that a first-strike war on Russia is “winnable.”

    5. While our neocon crazies in the Senate – led by warpig McCain – have been trying to push a Russian Aggression Prevention Act, the House just came out with House Resolution 758, to put America on a war footing specifically against Russia.

    NDAA 2012-15 military dictatorship followup to that resolution could also make dissent and other efforts to stop the war, like mine, punishable as “treason in time of war.”

  • Chris

    Biggest load of crap I have ever read in my entire life. I suggest you read John Pilger’s, War by media and the triumph of propaganda.

  • Natasha Johnson

    How Dr Brave Help Me to Bring Back My Husband and Restore My Family

    I am Natasha Ivan from United Kingdom, Scotland, I did not believe in Love spell magic for i thought and believed it was not real until the day that my boyfriend left me for one Girl, I tried all my possible means to get him back to me but it all seems to be in vain, So one day i saw a testimony on the INTERNET about Dr Brave how he helped one Man to get his wife back, although i didn’t believe in love spell, i contacted him because i loved my Boyfriend and i want him back, So Dr Brave performed the love spell and told me to wait for just 12 hours which i did, So surprisingly, My Boyfriend sent me an apologizing Text and he started begging me, from that day, we became together and up till now, We are in love with each other like never before.. If you need any help, You can as well contact Dr Brave on this Valid Emails ( bravespellcaster@gmail.com) You can also call him on +2348070370762 or contact him directly Via His Website http://enchantedscents.tripod.com/lovespell/

  • eric_c_anderson

    What could be more chock-full of propaganda than British and American MSM? I’m happy to watch RT. Ian Channing’s comment in this section is spot on. This article is just another example of the anti-Russian propaganda the western aggressors are jamming down our throats.

  • boonteetan

    For decades, western media tend to be perversive, manipulative, insensitive, and sometimes outright deceptive. Arrogance and recalcitrance seem to be their norm simply because their nations are powerful. Time has changed, would their journalism keep pace with time? One wonders.
    (btt1943, vzc1943)

  • OurParty

    RT may well be biased. But who better than ones own rival/enemy to hold up a mirror to ones faults?

    I would dearly love the BBC to report both sides of a story. Indeed, to report anything other than Royal burps, and farts. I am also frustrated at why the BBC haven’t even begun reporting on how appallingly incompetent this Government are.

    You complain that RT are only reporting the Roubles difficulties far down their schedule but have you witnessed even one question from the BBC to our own polticians about the pound losing a third of its value since this Government’s took office?

    Furthermore, have you heard any BBC reporter dare to ask how The Windsors could happily hang-out with Sir Jimmy Saville and Sir Rolf Harris for so many years despite decades of their sex crimes being reported to Police?

    Give me RT anytime over the pointless BBC. The best they can do these days is invite one of the Windsors onto Countryfile and then fawn and drool over everything they say.

    • a girl

      Oh puke. You’ll be polishing Putin’s hairless chest next. Why don’t you do us all a favour and emigrate, faithless one?

      • OurParty

        Why don’t you develop some ideas of your own instead of wasting your time throwing insults at complete strangers ?

        • Swanky

          Heh heh heh. I’ve got a lot more ideas than Putin has hairs. What an irony!

  • M P Jones

    “But there are, of course, stories that Russia Today is not keen on covering — such as the reality of Russia today”

    RT is one of the stations which, with other agitprop broadcasting organisations like Al Jazeera, help to enable observer to form a more balanced picture of what is going on in the world. Only very naive people believe either of the news organisation are unbiased or reasonably complete with regard to coverage. I can certainly do without Max Kaiser’s rants but some of his interviews are very good and not available anywhere else.

    • a girl

      Oh puleeze! If they’re propaganda stations for illiberal regimes, they are BAD for human freedom, anywhere! I don’t give a d-amn about their interviews being ‘very good’ in that case! Why don’t you grow a conscience?

      • M P Jones

        Why don’t you grow a brain then?

  • re.diez77

    The whole “freedom of speech” stuff is only allowed to people if there’s no REAL competitor to MSM BS. Now they stop pretending to be “fair” and start blackmail campaign against RT. The joke is that RT actually warn you about such things. So now Western media reveal their true face – one more reason to switch channel and look “a second opinion”.
    P.S- Yes,I’m Russian. No, I’m not payed for this bc my english is too bad 🙂

  • tolpuddle1

    RT is dreary and very biased – like the rest of the media.

  • a girl

    I’m afraid that Chesty O’Putin is never going to make inroads in THIS household. I don’t like ex-KGB agents that are wannabe Ivan The Terribles in our times. I think we should put the boot in and show him and his nasty little backwater their place. For big as the Russian territory and stolen lands and disputed whatevers are, it is always a barely civilized wretched and savage little place.

    From America With Love. : )

  • Guest

    The RT is itself a perfect example what happens when here is no second opinion.

  • Martti Kangas

    The RT itself is a perfect example when there is no second opinion…….

  • AlanFromMoon

    briefly and clearly, if someone can watch the Russian media (nonsense) must visit a psychiatrist. It’s something sick and must be forbiden for the good of our childrens !

  • obiwan

    Let’s ask the BBC if it’s prepared to run a story that goes against one of it’s most aggressive political narratives… oh, I dunno, let’s say something calling into question the Holy Consensus on so-called ‘man-made climate change’.

    No..?

    We all have our ‘truths’, Speccie. Are yours the same as mine?

  • Julio Cameron

    John O’Sullivan, is a British conservative political commentator and journalist and currently vice president and executive editor of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    Radio Free Europe, founded as an anti-communist news source in 1949, as part of a large-scale Psychological Operation during the Cold War. RFE/RL received funds from the Central Intelligence Agency until 1972. During the earliest years of Radio Free Europe’s existence, the CIA and the U.S. Department of State issued broad policy directives, and a system evolved where broadcast policy was determined through negotiation among the CIA, the U.S. State Department, and RFE staff.

    So Mr. John O’Sullivan is US/CIA propaganda?

    SOURCE: Wikipedia

    • Tommy

      Say no more.
      I knew this article was a farce when I saw the headline.

  • Hill

    More bashing of RT news and of anyone who does not copy paste the garbage that the corporate media is obliged to push on us

  • Wardy0

    RT might be “propaganda” but the BBC is just plan garbage. I’d watch RT all day rather than listen to the lies from SKY or BBC.

  • http://www.modern-britain.com ModernBritain

    The Western propaganda machine knows no shame.
    fb.me/6jhxsjJHw

  • PUTINISCOWARD

    I find it funny when people deny that Russia has any involvement in Ukraine. Yet, Russia just took a part of Ukraine with masked gunmen. Hence, the typical Russian rebuttal: 90% of the people in Crimean wanted it. Heck, I would want it too, if over 10,000 armed gunmen overtook my city too, lol.

    • PUTINISCOWARD

      Then Russia has the nerve to rig the elections, lol. Now Russia is stationing nukes in Crimean. I’m sure the people there are open arms for that too. Or maybe Russia has bought their souls with potatoes and vodka, like they have with the Russian people.

  • PUTINISCOWARD

    Routine deletion from Russia Today when you’re posting comments. It has the be pro Russian. That should tell you something. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out, but pro Putin lovers still take up for him and adore him. I wonder how much they’re going to adore him when the potatoes and vodka dries out in Russia? And when the bread line reform? I have it good here in the USA. I’m not going to lie. Most Russian Women have to sell their bodies or wed with a man from the West to make it. Otherwise, Russia just sucks them up and spits them out. I’m married to a woman who’s from Russia, Moscow to be exact!! And I’ve also lived in Russia while we were waiting on her visa. This was 3 years ago. Yet, she hasn’t even wanted to go back to Russia to visit her family and friends. She hates it there and she’s even college educated with a Masters degree. She made $1,000 a month in Russia, and here in the USA she makes $5,500 a month for the same job she did in Russia.

    • PUTINISCOWARD

      We both live in sunny California in a nice home with 3 cars. She loves yoga and working out too. She’s very beautiful and she would even jump in front of a bus for me. However, she hates Russia and everything about Putin. Yet, she use to be brainwashed by Putin, and she even admitted she would blog horrible stuff about the USA and the UK online. Here’s the irony: She now blogs horrible stuff about Russia and Putin online. I reckon, the grass is greener on the other side. Too bad you pro-Russian lovers can’t see it. Hence, you only see this distorted reality about the USA that you Generalize and blog online. In lay mans terms, pro Russian media is made for idiots. True story.

  • portnoy23@yahoo.com

    I actually like RT as an after dinner dessert. I find it superbly entertaining. Well done RT!
    Now you are officially the laughing stock of people with a bit of brains.

  • sherry

    yes yes Putin is bad and cnn bbc fox sky gave unset truth news NO ?? LOL LOL ? Thanks god TR EXIST to correct the news we hear every day in western TVs.
    TR TV gave outer side of history . and so far Russian didn’t made chaos in all over the word since 2001 /2015 IRAK ,AFGHANISTAN LIBYA. EGYPT ,TUNISIA .VENEZUELA . NICARAGUA , AFRICA .and meany moor is not PUTIN WAR OR INVASION

  • Gabriel

    The pro-russian propaganda too comes at Wikipedia. where hordes of Volunteers pro-Russia writes in military articles that russian weapons ever has better parameters than Western counterparts. According they, the best scientists and engineers are russians. In addition, they too have the most honest and humble businessmen, that do not intend fleecing Mother Russia.

  • PORTES PORTES

    The problem is that the western Corporate propaganda media BBC, CNN, ABC, CBC, Fox has already lost 45% of their audience. Russia today has ony 2 billion viewers, including me. Go figure that out.

  • PORTES PORTES

    If Russia Today is saying only what Putin wants, they they are doing an amazing work. Their reporters are extremelly young, becautify and clever. The speakers that they bring in to the show such as: high profile economists, writers, ex-FBI agents, ex-CIA agents, professors, lawyers that speaks the truth, are not longer invited by the western corporate media, I wonder why. Wake up people. Putin is not the one that distabilized 65 countries, killing their own people. Please give me a break

  • Barbarossa77

    The Nazis had a propaganda office as well remember Goebbels , at least in the west we know that if a thing is to be reported it will be by the free press , look at the torture perpetrated by some US forces in the Iraq prison reported ,can you imagine this happening on RT .
    Putin is a dictator who along with Iran and China the world is not a very safe place right now and it would not take much for a WW3 to break out .

  • Alex Gee

    It’s tragically ironic that RT would proclaim about the danger of the lack of a second opinion, considering how dissent is treated by Czar/Premier Vladimir Putin.

  • davidgary1

    What a complete load of anti Russian TRIPE. I would advise anyone reading this to open their mind and start to watch alternative media channels like RT News. We are bombarded with western Propaganda and lies. If you want to get a full picture of world affairs I beg you to watch RT news for one week and I guarantee your mind will be opened.

  • Peter Bird

    the bbc are the lord haw haw of the propaganda movement

  • slorter

    There is old proverb the pot calling the kettle black! This is case in point!

  • Doc Tyler

    its funny how as soon as RT started to make headway in the Western world all the attention is now focused on the reporting of Rt as biased. Of course when we talk about the bias of the mainstream media here in the United States we are told we’re being paranoid and have no idea what we’re talking about, so who is actually putting on a front here?

    I also love how John Kerry complain that we were being out propaganda by RT and that we needed more money to overcome their fake propaganda. Of course if you add up all of the outlets for American point of view, Voice of America, NPR, PBS ETC. ( who are all just cheerleaders for the president) I would imagine that the budget of the two countries are rather lopsided. and the way I look at it are RT covers the stories that Western governments do not want people to know about! you say it’s propaganda to highlight problems in other countries but personally I think it’s revealing the truth that’s normally hidden.
    If RT was just lying that would be easy to refute but the Truth? ….when they try to shoot the messenger you know somethings up!

  • wombleranger

    So the BBC doesn’t work under direct order of the British Government? This article is nothing but pure pro-western propaganda of the worst kind.If R.T. is so bad then why do they seem to be the only news service in the world that features real news and truth, not American and British fear mongering and entertainment disguised as reality! And in case you’re wondering i am an Englishman.

  • Jim

    That is why you need to have more than one source obviously.

  • davidgary1

    What a rubbish article full of complete hypocrisy. I thank God for RT so we can see the other perspective on world issues. The Western media is completely bias and is funded by their governments and their Zionist Oligarchs. No one disputes RT is from a Russian perspective but the astonishing thing for me was that they hold the moral high ground on issue after issue in particular foreign policy ‘Syria comes to mind’. The West tries to portray Assad as an evil dictator when he is in fact a President with the support of his people trying to fight terrorism ‘which ironically is funded by the U.S’! The same goes for Putin who is continuously held in contempt by the Western media when in fact he is supported by a massive 82% of the people.

  • kikdyzma

    west did not invaded Iraq under false pretenses and killed half a million people. west did not sponsor armed oppositions (when armed opposition attack west they called terrorists) in Libya, Syria and elsewhere. hahaha. it is just propaganda. For me is colonialism 2.0

  • John Lockhart

    It’s a pleasure to be lied to by someone believable instead of the BS we get from AP, MSNBC, Fox and CNN. Thank you RT.

  • HocusPocus

    “The time will come when RT has to confine its clever inventions to a captive market: Russians.” You wish, but since RT is broadcast in English, the entire Commonwealth is listening.

  • Jim

    If you want the bad stuff about Russia, read the US and UK news, and vice verse. Pretty simple.

    • Tony Conrad

      There was a time when nice people agreed with communism. That was before the revolution. What an absolute evil that turned out to be.

      • Jim

        Like I said, read something besides the Sun Times, watch something besides Fox News. Our revolution involved stealing the property and the lynching of royalists too. All depends on what side you’re on. As far as Russia is concerned, the European countries that were still headed by royal families, as well as the US, attacked the Russian Communist revolution as soon as the russians pulled out of WW1. We even sent cavalry to Russia to help the royalist White Russians. “One mans terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.

  • JPSamulcek

    I visit RT quite often even though I’ve been banned from posting. I’m not sure exactly why, I’m not that contrary but I found it odd and because I believed they were tolerant of opposition so to learn about their their thin skin it was somewhat disappointing.
    I’m encouraged with Putin’s opposition to encroachment by NATO and his stand against the NWO but most of all his actions in Syria although I realize it is a survival issue.
    Like our Media I suppose they have certain areas where truth is best kept a non issue.

  • A.Alexander

    Too many words for RT.

  • pat bredl

    I watch RT and find my news on the internet. For too long, we do not get the whole picture of the news Our news consists of propaganda, rhetoric, suppressed news and garbage that CTV (Canada’s Fox news) broadcasts. CBC is under a lot of political pressure (hopefully this will stop with our new government) which chooses the reports of MSM and Reuters. I also watch BBC and Aljazeer and at times Deutsche Welle. I find BBC quite narrow minded and full of western propaganda, and quite hateful if one does not agree with them. BBC reports what is acceptable to the Americans or BBC picture of the world.

  • Miles Hodgkiss

    We’re not as fooled as anyone thinks. We know employees are subject to the will of their employers. It cuts all ways. We like the fact that someone reports on the West’s gaping broadcasting silences i.e on subjects that don’t favor America’s geo-political agenda. We like people to question the statements released by The US State Department and particularly enjoy seeing the smug faces of the employees of that department crumble into incoherent babble when their statements are found wanting. Why can’t The Washington Post ask such questions? or The BBC? Clearly they are prevented! So much for The Freedom of Press in The West! Not once has The BBC ever mentioned Israel’s prerequisite demand to a peace settlement with Palestine requiring the surrender of their water aquifers to her so that she may always control the flow of water to Palestinians….clearly an impossible notion and a provocation designed to prevent a settlement…The New Scientist magazine gave it an airing why not The BBC? The BBC gives us near enough daily bulletins on stories from The Jewish Holocaust but are not so keen to highlight the hypocritical stance adopted by the children of the survivors in Palestine…… I’m looking forward to hearing much more critical reportage on Israel’s hypocritical nasty and deliberately provocative and nigh on fascistic approach to the problems they have created in The Middle East with the help of American Foreign Policy from anyone……. but, especially from The Jerusalem Post.

    • Tony Conrad

      It appears that you are the recipient of bisased reporting as well.

  • Scotoz

    The whole notion that the West’s propaganda is somehow better than Russia’s is bizarre as it is clearly known that the CIA has embedded journalists in over 600 media outlets in the USA alone and was discovered in 1975 at the Church Committee Congressional hearings.Then if we add to this the farce of CNN journalists using green screen technology to pretend they were in Baghdad during the first attacks in the first Iraqi war in 1991 and the very many obvious charades passed as journalism then it is very clear why RT is seen as the closest thing to the truth than any Western media outlet.

  • Alex C. Johnson

    You start with ‘The difference between real journalism and Russia Today’, but then you argue that it isn’t neutral. Every news channel on this planet isn’t neutral, but influenced by the interest of lobbyists, journalists and the company owner. RT is propaganda from Russia and the other newspaper are propaganda from USA. I think it is quiet good to have both – it is only good to have a lot of sources to build an own opinion on.

  • Tony Liu

    Of course, anything coming from outside of the “free world” is puppetry. What else is new?

  • J Danson

    Acquiring knowledge from a variety of different sources. Something my University Professors used to call deep reading around the subject as a basis for solid research. Maybe we should junk that idea and just read from one rulebook of dogma instead, innit?

  • xzuma

    Of course the author himself fails to mention critical facts and distorts the others. For example, Abby Martin expressed her disagreement with the Russian position in Ukraine on air, not with the RT’s editorial policy. On the contrary, she praised RT for giving her 100 % editorial freedom. The fact that she expressed her opinion on Ukraine is the hard proof of 100 % editorial freedom. That’s the difference between real journalism and your mumbling, John O’Sullivan. Gosh.

  • Greekstudent

    What a pathetic article that mentions no PROOF of distorted facts reported by RT.
    I did not see a faked chemical attacks, staged war zones, staged disaster zones here.
    Meanwhile BBC,CNN etc have all been caught red handed even by MIT studies faking Syrian chemical attacks that they blamed on Assad in order to promote a certain political point. Sorry, you are not convincing anyone here. RT is growing because it offers TRUE yet uncomfortable facts.

    • Tony Conrad

      Why did the broadcaster resign then?

  • Cale

    Nonsence. The Biggest Liar Broadcaster is the BBC. I know this out of first hand. And the BBC budget is mucht larger then RT’s. But to admit losing is not easy. Doesn’t matter, just open your eyes and ears, look around you and see who’s correct.

  • Ronaulde LeDieu

    I used to be a loyal subscriber to RT I am ashamed to say. They allow scripting from CIA trolls, while blocking and banning others who counter that.

    They are in bed with CIA/NSA. RT Sucks!!

    • Cyril Sneer

      Whatever you say 1 comment profile.

  • whack-a-mole

    Haha Johnny boy. I take it you get your truth from the BBC right? The problem you have is trying to make one seem propaganda but not the others. The BBC is the mother of all propaganda my mate and just like RT they are all run for the same purpose. Brainwashing. Seems to have done the trick on you.

  • http://www.niallbradley.net Niall

    Better Putin than the devil.

  • Tony Conrad

    The BBC has grown more and more biased over the years. There was a time when they reported world truth but now they manipulate truth according to their own views. Pity but true. I hear they are paid by the EU to present them in a good light. Just another cover up and perversion of the real aims of the undemocratic EU. As for Russia today at least one would be aware of their falsehoods. After all Putin was head of the KGB who toretured subjects they did not agree with.

  • Fred Eidlin

    The appropriate comparison to RT would be Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). Anyone interested in the issues raised in this article might be interested in comparing them: RT https://www.rt.com/ RFE/RL http://www.rferl.org/

  • simon

    RT is a great news outlet and often quick with new stories from all over the globe and especially Europe. Although there is some pro-Russian propaganda mixed in there, it’s usually easy to spot. Most of the RT content is fairly non-bias. It’s eye-opening to get the Russian perspective on Ukraine and balances our version of events. I’m an Australian, btw- not a Rusky! I don’t know what people are so worried about. RT stories are easily verifiable, just like most online news stories, simply by doing a google search. I also read and watch the American media but is so overtly partisan and ideologically driven that it is extremely hard to get a two-sided story – RT and sites like it help to provide a balance. The Keiser Report on RT is the most informative alternative report on all things financial and I have learned so much from tuning in. I am neither left or right but take what I like and dump the rest – it’s called being an adult.

    • Cyril Sneer

      Well said. I’ve always said that RT covers the bits the western MSM don’t want you to see.

  • Father Todd Unctious

    Russia Toadie.

Close