Since the whole nerve agent incident, and now the latest Syria crisis, I've watched a fair bit of this (mainly to see what 'the other side are saying'). I have to say that it seems like a fairly bizarre mix of half truth, complete lack of truth, and conspiracy theories.
​​​​​

I'm torn between thinking that this junk 'news' should been taken off the airwaves, and my firm belief in freedom of speech.

Does anyone else watch this?

 

Take it away how ?!

 

Well, it's the other side's propaganda, but it's a million times better than the propaganda and damn **** poor crap we get passed as 'news' from out state news channel

Have you looked at the shows - Alex Sammond, Going Underground etc?

 

I'm sure they have some good features.

It's their news coverage that concerns me.

Fortunately we don't have a state news channel in this country.

 

You are of course assuming that what RT is saying isn't true... You never know, they may actually be right. It's a strange world out there.

 

I am indeed assuming that.

History would suggest that it's a good assumption though.

 

It is Main Stream News-either subtle or obvious agenda for political/financial/manipulative motives.

Not worth wasting time on

 

Jus stick to infowars , like kwik

Much safer lol

 

Really?
Ours is the BBC

 

I think it's a good assumption what our government says is fake - WMD anyone?

 

I assume you're being deliberately obtuse, and do actually know the difference between a state and a public broadcaster?

 

Propaganda, lies or half truths? It doesn't matter much as neither side in this conflict is supportable; they're both vile. The only possibility would be to bombed the place flat and wipe out both sides entirely, and hope a few civilians survive. That might not happen then.

 

It's still an assumption at the end of the day, so it could still be wrong.

 

Not much difference at all I would guess

I'll change it to Deep State

 

Ok well carry on enjoying your news from the Russian state then. I'm sure you'll learn much

 

RT is one news source I use. I do look at the BBC, but see dreary items such as drinking 5 units a week will shorten your life by 6 months

However, I've just watched Sophie & Co interview with Pres Erdogon's chief adviser. Where else can see that. Certainly none of the MSM's channels

 

Too right You wouldnt get any that nonsense nanny state in Russia where its positive encouraged drown your sorrows in so much potato moonshine

 

Indeed where else would you find George Galloway giving credibility to Russian claims that the UK staged the latest chemical attack in Syria?

 

Russia are the biggest bunch of liars on the planet and feed their people false news the same way the North Koreans do. How any of you are sucked in by Putin and Lavrov saying Russia is innocent in everything is absolutely laughable. It's what Russia has always done, it's their tactics and how they get away with what they do. They do something illegal and deny all knowledge of it and say it didn't happen and keep saying it in the hope idiots go and believe them

 

I think you might be overestimating the West's honesty and under estimating Russia's

While I'm not a Russia apologist, I do look for balance, or look for for who's going to benefit, and Syria regime change for one thing has long been on the agenda

So for now, I'll keep my mind and eyes wide open

 

I don't care much for RT.

Nor do I care much for other mainstream news outlets, where it seems the story and the sensationalism is the prime motivator in getting that headline scoop. The accuracy of the report, its sources or even the quality of English is just not up to scratch. Sure, time is always of the essence in getting that big scoop out first, but at what expense?

Well, of course I'd be expected to say this. It's apprantly my hobby horse. I hope I didn't disappoint.

"So" (the average TV jouno's grammatically poor start to a TV interview), I'll end my contribution with a report from RT https://www.rt.com/op-ed/401994-omran-aleppo-boy-syria/ and question why the BBC did not name the terrorist attack victim, Ebba Akerlund. RT's stance is always at odds with Western media and some would call the BBC's omission a conspiracy (where a quick search will find plenty of comments from people who noticed this), however I'd prefer to put the former down to institutional bias (of which various media outlets suffer) and the latter down to the typically sloppy journalism that also appears to be endemic in media corperations.

 

News 24 cover some oretty diverse stuff.
Sky.
Channel 4 News. Pretty unbiased and honest.

 

Arguably when challenged, their public statement dismissed any 'Bias' as merely being 'Independant thought'.

Certainly when it gets political, their independant thinking is on par with the BBC. No worse though just a slightly different viewpoint. Possibly better quality journalism, although it is provided by ITN of whom also supply content to ITV and channel 5.

 

The way political parties control media (unless their barons own them) is via advertising.
When you want them to shut up, throw them a full page advertisement and pay them a substantial amount of money.
One needs to read many sources and use his brain to judge what the truth is.

 

Lol! Under estimating Russia's honesty?

I watched the BBC interview with Sergei Lavrov last night and that bloke is the World's biggest liar and conspiracist I just wish it had been Paxman interviewing him.

If you want to believe anything he says you really do need to be less gullible and wake up to reality.

The interview is here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-m...erview-in-full

You don't need to be an expert in telling a liar when you heart this **** speak

 

https://www.rt.com/uk/424392-may-hus...capital-group/

Certainly won't see stories like that on our good old state funded pedophile ring we call the BBC.

But i guess the Bond villain Russians just make all these nasty rumours up.

 

Flat Earth & Chemtrails are conspiracy theorys.

Educate yourselves on the Gulf of Tonkin incident,

Certainly a factual event that did happen and proves how little these folk care who make the decisions to send generations to their deaths in the name of profit....

 

It's just more propaganda - you're being played


It's almost comical how you attack the BBC as 'state funded', which it obviously isn't, then use a completely bollox, made up, hoax story from RT (which IS state funded) as some kind of evidence of how we're all gullible.


Quite funny really

 

I was watching intently until Pearl Harbour was used as an example of a false flag (or 'flase flag' as they kept calling it)
, then I switched off
Just a bunch of conspiritards

 

RT is apparently under investigation by Ofcom over its coverage on the Salisbury poisonings.

Can't imagine why