Russian news channel RT to broadcast on Rumble after Big Tech curbs

https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/russian-news-channel-rt-broadcast-rumble-after-big-tech-curbs-2022-03-03/

by vitabenes • 4 years ago

57 163 4 years ago

reuters.com

jbverschoor3• 4 years ago

Good. It's insane that the west is calling out censorship from Russia, but is doing the exact same thing itself.

NicoJuicy4• 4 years ago

It's pure propaganda by now.

Even journalists of RT in the West decided to quit their job ( publicly announced through Twitter), because it went insane.

pyronik192• 4 years ago

It'd be nice if the "journalist" at CNN had the same kind of integrity.

keymone17• 4 years ago

Since when blocking enemy's propaganda considered "bad"?

shabier15• 4 years ago

So North Korea is doing good then

disambiguation4• 4 years ago

It's not really insane, it's a difficult dilemma.

To play devils advocate, why should we give our enemies the same rights as our neighbors? Both cohorts are not held accountable in the same ways, nor can we expect our enemies to reciprocate the same good faith.

I think in principle free speech is good, but RT news - and any and all messaging coming out of Russia - should be classified as such. If said propaganda is disguised as genuine sentiment on social media then that's bad for free speech.

jbverschoor3• 4 years ago

Let’s block all advertorials or posts that are biased. Ads used to be called “commercial propaganda”

anomie31• 4 years ago

No one in the US government is forcing their hand here, and freedom of speech includes freedom from compelled speech, or the compelled platforming of others.

coffeeblack4• 4 years ago

Good. It’s important to be able to see all sides. Everybody with a brain will know to be very skeptical of any news source directly controlled by a government. Same is true for CGTN and other channels still on YT.

lnsru• 4 years ago

It’s a wishful thinking, that everybody has some brain. There are enough flatearthers, antivaxers and wannabe putin’s buddies.

kyrra• 4 years ago

Silencing ideas that you do not agree with does not lead to an open society. Because guess what, the less popular ideas ends up being the right one sometimes.

(In this case I agree that RT is likely propaganda, but knowing an argument you disagree with makes it easier to argue against people that make it.)

Gareth3212• 4 years ago

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”

Easily my favourite George R. R. Martin quote. We discovered why free speech is important during the 17th century in the Enlightenment period. The scientific method itself owes its existence to free speech, and the ability for any person to disagree with any other person, regardless of their class, race, age, nationality, religion, or beliefs. The same goes for democracy. Take away the fundamental principle of free speech and you undermine science and democracy.

Are evil people going to attempt to convince the suggestible that they're not evil? Of course! Contrary to common sentiment, free speech has a cost. We pay this cost gladly so that we can live in relative prosperity.

phatfish• 4 years ago

Right now it is worthless, anything on RT about the "special military operation" is 100% propaganda. It's just fun watching their presenters try to act normal.

newsclues• 4 years ago

It’s not worthless if you contrast it to the propaganda from CNN.

herdcall• 4 years ago

Yes, but I'm not sure we can trust what's coming out of Ukraine/Zelensky either, like 10K Russians killed, victory is imminent, etc. This way at least we may get tidbits from the other side, including arguments/thoughts from Russia side.

E.g., I saw a post yesterday on Medium that Ukraine is discriminating against black refugees (https://medium.com/alternative-perspectives/why-are-black-pe...). If you're only listening to the Ukraine friendly media, you'll miss that (IMO important fact).

jdrc2• 4 years ago

it is, and that's important to know. most russians (and more importantly russians abroad) are presented with the same tired old propaganda they always did

friedturkey3• 4 years ago

It’s useful to know what some people are fed and what the source of “their” opinions may be.

It’s also useful to see what overdone propaganda is like to have a solid reference point for when our own countries try to do the same.

rightbyte• 4 years ago

RT's cover of the war is quite good if you want to read the party line view of it in english - which of course is interesting. TASS is better though.

RT cut down their tabloid tone a notch too.

RTs main problem is that it is called Russia Today. That is a worthless name to do foreign psyops ... learn from al-Jazeera.

Raed667• 4 years ago

I don't see how exposing a vulnerable audience to distilled pure propaganda is actually a good thing.

mariusor3• 4 years ago

But the paradox is that everyone is part of some kind of "vulnerable audience".

Maybe you like to consider yourself superior to the people who would lead credence to what RT writes, but in my opinion there's nobody immune to some kind of propaganda machine. Maybe something more insidious is required for you or me, but in the end it's hubris to consider yourself invulnerable.

darthrupert• 4 years ago

Not good. Reporting should be held to some standard. At minimum, knowingly lying about important topics while claiming to be a serious news organization needs to be a serious crime.

For instance, RT claims to be a news source, but knowingly lies about atrocities committed by the Russian government.

Most people don't have the resources (time, knowledge, smarts) to see what is not true by themselves.

Alternative viewpoints need to be shown for actually controversial topics, of course.

b3nji• 4 years ago

Everyone has a brain, its up to the individual to treat others with the knowledge that they have different information, perceptions, and experiences.

I'm not certain writing off whole swathes of people based on personal perspective is a good plan.

Reach out to those you disagree with, be it antivax, flat earth, whatever.

They are human, and want the best for themselves, and their family.

Try not to "other", if you can help it.

loudmax3• 4 years ago

It's also exhausting when there are centers manufacturing bullshit on an industrial scale. It's simply easier to manufacture lies than to track down the truth. I don't think the correct answer is the repression of lies, or certainly not in the long term. But fighting for truth without giving up freedom is not easy.

cabirum2• 4 years ago

Another source worth mentioning is waronfakes.com which counters ukrainian propaganda echoed by western msm.

jonathanstrange2• 4 years ago

A page that doesn't even reveal openly who runs it (real names, affiliations, background) is completely worthless crap. If you judge alleged "news" uncritically like that, just by consuming it, you're part of the problem.

keymone17• 4 years ago

RT reported about ukrainian army crucifying a child in Donbas in 2014 which literally caused some people in Russia to volunteer as fighters and cross the border with intention to kill ukrainians.

No, RT should be banned and every person working for it should be jailed for life.

Freedom of speech is not freedom of inciting violence and hatred.

Edit: here, educate yourself - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucified_boy

shabier15• 4 years ago

Freedom of speech is not freedom of inciting violence and hatred.

Zelensky lied about a Russian shell hitting a nuclear plant and called for retaliation, which is exactly inciting violence. There's a lot of misinformation spread by both sides (Russia and the West) but silencing any of them would be stupid and unfair.

pydry3• 4 years ago

Would you also apply this rule consistently with all of the Iraq war cheerleaders who also promoted fake news (like yellowcake)?

Im reminded of Chomsky's quote here (it's surprising how often it is relevant):

Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.

coffeeblack4• 4 years ago

Every conflict party in every conflict does that.

Remember the story about Iraqi soldiers pulling babies out of incubators in Kuwait? Told by a “nurse” in from of the UN, so that the US would get permission to invade Iraq?

People need to be able to see these stories to learn to recognize them as the bullshit they are. Hiding them will do more harm that good in the long to.

tonfreed• 4 years ago

And a number of mainstream western outlets are trying to convince us to join the war by reporting on Russia's use of thermobaric weapons as if it was a warcrime.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2310098-what-are-thermo... https://au.news.yahoo.com/what-is-a-thermobaric-bomb-and-why...

The worst offenders don't even mention the US' extensive use of them, such as the CBU-72 in Vietnam.

There's a huge amount of propaganda going on right now, I don't trust any outlets to be telling me the truth.

disambiguation4• 4 years ago

This is an instance of bad actors taking advantage of vulnerable / dumb people. Banning RT comes across as whack-a-mole because it will just sprout up elsewhere.

This is unfortunately something that can't be simply banned out of existence.

CedarMills• 4 years ago

Normally I'd agree but knowing the damage that propaganda does - RT and any other Russian-government owned channels should be shutdown/"canceled".

For the last eight years, they've been riling up the Russian population with portraying Ukrainians as Nazis, barbarians, etc. It's gotten to the point now where they would make up fake stories (e.g. crucified boy). Right now, during the war - you literally can't call it a "war" or you might face being sentenced. If you share anything opposing the official view - you could get 15 years behind bars. Russian government has also forced all "opposition" media to shutdown in the last couple of days. Soon, they will annex themselves from the internet and the population will only have one source for news - the propaganda channels.

jessaustin• 4 years ago

I'm afraid this may be out of date. Lee Camp said Saturday on Unauthorized Disclosure [0] that RT America was done. [EDIT:] I suppose that is a different entity from RT itself. So, it seems the synchronized censorship (DirectTV, Roku, Spotify, YT Europe) has achieved its real aim, of silencing American critics of capitalism, imperialism, and war. That the mouthpiece of a different imperialist regime remains available is a trivial matter.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=104ZygfOHZg

simion3146• 4 years ago

Quick question, most countries have laws on how media should work, like what can you put on public TV at what hours, how to mark certain content, rules that demand to always provide both sides perspective and punishments if you don't follow the rules, like removing your TV license. Did we allow this new media to just ignore our laws and publish one sided fabricated news? Maybe is finally the time to block stuff that is not media, or force them to label their content as "fiction/fabrication"

And someone will say "what about XYZ?", yes label Xyz fiction too if it does not follow the rules. With national media that exists physically here you can have the justice system give them big fines if they for example fabricate bullshit about a person/company but if this media is some freelancers far away the justice will never reach them so we should do something before we reach the scenario in Idicracy

asdfasgasdgasdg5• 4 years ago

rules that demand to always provide both sides perspective

Not sure what country you're referring to, but there's certainly no such rule in the US, Australia, or the UK. In the US it would be unconstitutional.

vmind• 4 years ago

The UK at least has legislation which applies during elections and referendums (https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-co...).

simion3146• 4 years ago

Not sure what country you're referring to, but there's certainly no such rule in the US, Australia, or the UK. In the US it would be unconstitutional.

So in US you can say on newspaper or TV things like "Bob did X" and Bob can do nothing about it? I thought the at least justice can demand Bob to be paid damages and the newspaper/TV to show a retraction. I mean are you free to denigrate people in US with no consequences? If yes, let's ignore US and focus on countries where we demand media to act like professionals, to have a code and rules and to pay if they broke it, pay damages if they damage people etc.

kube-system2• 4 years ago

The US actually does have regulations that requires that, although it’s fairly weak:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-time_rule

This rule has actually had a notable effect in the current election cycle: https://www.newsweek.com/fccs-equal-time-rules-prompt-statio...

loudmax3• 4 years ago

most countries have laws on how media should work

Much of how the internet works reflects its origin in the United States where freedom of speech is a paramount value. In America, the notion is that it's better to combat lies with the truth than with repression.

In the era of Fake News and The Big Lie, this value is being stretched thin. It may be that we'll need rules to restrict the spreading of untruths, perhaps a labeling system as you suggest. Even so, I think it will be very hard, if not impossible, to craft laws of that sort without building an edifice for repression.

simion3146• 4 years ago

At least some punishment or force them to comply with the basic rule "

If you put false/wrong information on first page like Bob did Y. then justice can force you to put on the same first page a retraction like "We are sorry, we were wrong, Bob did not did X" and pay Bob damages.

So if some TV channel or Internet media thing says shit like "Masks do not help with Covid" they will have to pay a fine and publish "Masks can help with Covid in this cases "

The issue remains with extrnal media like from China and Russia, they can refuse to follow the local laws and then we can label them, maybe tax them and use the money to support local news/media related universities.

numeromancer• 4 years ago

Should "we" force you to label your posts as "activism" rather than "information" or "discussion"?

simion3146• 4 years ago

HN can auto-label all our posts by default as personal opinions but if they can detect I am a MS/Apple/ employee they can auto-label me with that, if I am part of some group they can label me with "member of this group". Transparency if fine with me.

Like for food, label what is inside, if you want the "media" label you should be an actual journalist and follow the laws and the media code of conduct, otherwise we can give you a different label more appropriate.

yrgulation• 4 years ago

The fact that pro putin’s propaganda channel comments are getting upvoted, while those against are downvoted says a lot about the type of people that use this forum. Russia today and sputnik constantly promote anti western values, politicians and groups and are a major source of misinformation yet some call banning these weapons of war censorship. Appalling.

iso1210• 4 years ago

HN has some of the most pro-putin comments I see anywhere. These are established accounts with years of history talking about tech, so not Russian bots or whatever.

mopsi• 4 years ago

Not everyone is a paid shill. Lots of tech people are Russians and/or from Russia and support the war in Ukraine. Independent polling shows that the majority of people in Russia support the war, including the majority of the highly educated.

blub• 4 years ago

What you’re seeing here is a place which is not 100% anti-Russia and recognizes that there are gray areas to anything. This is invaluable and anyone who values liberal democracies should support such discussion forums.

The problem is, many people only support liberal democracy and free speech when it suits them. This was very much visible when censoring and demonizing those that were criticizing vaccines or the policies of Western governments, it’s visible now too.

ZGDUwpqEWpUZ2• 4 years ago

It's literally censorship. It doesn't stop being censorship just because you want it censored.

Trying to redefine words like that insults your readers. People might consider your position a bit more if it's not obscured by your ego.

keymone17• 4 years ago

It's censorship of enemy's propaganda vehicle. Since when is that considered "bad"?

Steltek• 4 years ago

No, it's literally moderation. Platforms can promote or demote content as they see fit to better appeal to the market. Newspapers are not obligated to print every letter to the editor. Youtube is not legally bound to air any random video that was uploaded.

Censorship is when the government steps in to define allowable speech.

logicchains3• 4 years ago

promote anti western values, politicians and groups and are a major source of misinformation yet some call banning these weapons of war censorship

It's pretty damn ironic that in the same breath you accuse Russia of promoting anti-western values, you attack the classic western value of free speech by calling for the banning of news sources you disagree with.

adolph• 4 years ago

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

Groucho Marx

myko2• 4 years ago

Not really, we are in the paradox of tolerance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance) here.

It is in fact a bad idea to let Putin's propaganda machine have unchecked ability to spread anywhere.

flas9sd• 4 years ago

absolute free speech is an american construct. For historical reasons, in Germany the crime of Volksverhetzung is a thing and I'm glad for there to be limits. There's no question of what RT is doing, they're trolling at the state level.

shabier15• 4 years ago

Just because some commenters disagree with an action doesn't mean they're "pro-Putin". Please refrain from that tribal, binary thinking- it doesn't help the cause.

prions• 4 years ago

HN in general has taken a hard lurch to the libertarian right as of late. In this highly upvoted value system, there is no higher principle than free speech and no greater sin than censorship. Except censoring the censors, which is viewed more harshly than censorship itself.

People will respond and say that HN isn't a monolith, and thats true. At the same time, these extreme takes are dominating the top posts of every thread thats even slightly tangential. One of the top posts on the thread about wifi ovens was about how the government was installing killswitches into smart devices.

The view from nowhere [1] is especially relevant nowadays.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalistic_objectivity#View_...

throw_m2393393• 4 years ago

Some people are indeed really hard at work at creating a false equivalency or apathy. But it is to be expected on a public forum now. The kremlin is going to use western's freedoms against us, while granting their own citizens none.

paulvnickerson• 4 years ago

I'm glad to see the alternative tech companies (Rumble, Truth Social) that promote truly free spread and competition of ideas, and that they are surviving (RIP Parlor). If Facebook, Youtube, etc. insist on restricting thought and discussion on their platforms, it will be to their detriment.

shabier15• 4 years ago

Agreed. It is much easier to be aware of what the other side is thinking and, if the situation or platform allows it, to challenge those ideas.

IE62• 4 years ago

Anecdotally, in my experience you are just as likely to be banned / shadowbanned on these kinds of "free speech" networks as well. The only thing that changes is who is pressing the keys and what message they want you to hear. I think referring to them as such is problematic.

chayesfss• 4 years ago

In before irate trumpkins compare rt with cnn/msnbc while ignoring the fact that fox news is 100% legal to operate. Oh wait, too late.

dang2• 4 years ago

Flamewar comments will get you banned on HN, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Fortunately you don't seem to have much (any?) history of posting like the above, so it should be easy to fix.

Russian news channel RT to broadcast on Rumble after Big Tech curbs

Related Stories