Ukraine Thread

[Gilrandir]

On how Russian propaganda in the internet is managed:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-10138893.html

[Sarmatian]

That is the new low.

For western media, that is...

[Beskar]

That is the new low.

For western media, that is...

So they shouldn't show the practices of other countries?

[Sarmatian]

So they shouldn't show the practices of other countries?

Nooooo....

That article is lazy excuse for journalism at best, and propaganda piece at worst.

First off, it's a story that wasn't verified. You've got a guy who tells a story. Serious journalism used to reject those. That would be the same if I walked in the Independent office and told them there's a building in Guangzhou where cows play chess. Where in St. Petersburg is that building, if it is in St. Petersburg? You have a guy who worked in there, doesn't he know where he worked? It can't be for protection, his name is mentioned. Why there aren't any pictures of the building, instead of a few large and ominous pictures of Putin? Why didn't a journalist check the location out?

Secondly, what's the point? Do you know how many million articles are on the internet and how many millions comment on them daily? A few hundred people, even if each writes a 135 comments daily, are nothing compared to those. A drop in the ocean is a fair comparison.

Imagine that, instead of Russia and internet, the article was about 800 people who are bent on polluting the world by lining up on a beach and peeing in the ocean every day. Someone would get fired.

It would make much more sense, and would be much more believable if it revealed that governments influence and/or pay journalist and popular online sources of information quite often, but that's pretty much known already.

That article is the perfect example of propaganda piece - lots of malarkey, very little substance, lack of anything concrete in it, and a couple of pictures of Putin to set the readers in the right mood while they're reading it.

[Montmorency]

The quality of the piece is ultimately not relevant given the veracity of the information.

[Husar]

That's a great topic, in fact I agree that no government should use shills or intimidation tactics such as *ahem* saving all internet communication *ahem* in order to make the public thought government-compliant. Here are some more cases of government-sponsored opinion manipulation:

USA, Canada: http://www.naturalnews.com/042093_in...vernment.html#
surprise, China: http://qz.com/311832/hacked-emails-r...ganda-machine/
Bahrain: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bahrain-pr-...ger-m-c-377063
Egypt: http://www.worldpress.org/mideast/3638.cfm

It goes against all demands of government transparency since these shills are not visibly acting in the name of the government, yet propagate only the government's agenda, unacceptable.
There was also this government that we keep selling weapons to that uses armed thugs in the streets to intimidate the people to follow its backwards agenda, what was it again, oh yeah:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...di-Arabia.html

Also a way to keep public opinion in check.
Maybe we should invade them now before we have sold them our most modern weapon systems and it becomes even more painful.

So which countries can we trust not to be undermined or evil who can invade all the nasty manipulative ones and turn them into good democracies?
Norway, Denmark and Finland?

And this is a little extra, free of charge: http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/8...fting-lizards/

[Viking]

What about...what about...

What about the website Husar used for his first claim? Some more promising headlines:

Pro-terrorist Cornell University takes money from globalist Bill Gates to push GMOs destroying America (Murica!!)

If toxins in cigarettes are unsafe to INHALE, then why are toxins in vaccines supposed to be safe to INJECT?

'Vaccines are safe' says the same profession that once swore cigarettes were safe, too (burn!!)

Black box memory card stolen from crash site of Germanwings jetliner? Plausible cover-up theories now taking shape

I was sceptical at first, but when I saw the first all-caps words, I decided I could trust their journalistic standards.

Now, since we would not want to have too much talk about Russia and Putin in this thread, let's turn the talk to kittens.

[Husar]

What about...what about...

What about the website Husar used for his first claim? Some more promising headlines:

Pro-terrorist Cornell University takes money from globalist Bill Gates to push GMOs destroying America (Murica!!)

If toxins in cigarettes are unsafe to INHALE, then why are toxins in vaccines supposed to be safe to INJECT?

'Vaccines are safe' says the same profession that once swore cigarettes were safe, too (burn!!)

Black box memory card stolen from crash site of Germanwings jetliner? Plausible cover-up theories now taking shape

I was sceptical at first, but when I saw the first all-caps words, I decided I could trust their journalistic standards.

Now, since we would not want to have too much talk about Russia and Putin in this thread, let's turn the talk to kittens.

I'm not going to search for it, but I'm pretty sure that I was told somewhere on this topic that the reputation of the websites is irrelevant as long as they show the right facts. Therefore your attempt at discrediting a non-reputable site that I found ina 10 second google-search is irrelevant.
Here is a video that you will surely agree with:

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I'm not going to search for it, but I'm pretty sure that I was told somewhere on this topic that the reputation of the websites is irrelevant as long as they show the right facts. Therefore your attempt at discrediting a non-reputable site that I found ina 10 second google-search is irrelevant...]

Ideally, yes, but in practice no. As Aristotle noted quite a while back, Ethos, Logos, and Pathos are all routes of appeal that function persuasively for the audience. Hyperbolic blogs etc. arouse the passions (pathos) but generally fall short in credibility (ethos). So even when they are relating facts accurately and making reasonable conclusions therefrom (logos), their credibility still gets called into question and may well undercut the reader/viewer's trust in message.

[Viking]

The world is fully of all kinds of people making all kinds of claims. Unless you have infinite time at your hands, it's most convenient to focus on the sources that seem the most credible.

And no, Putin is not a reptilian; he's a normal extraterrestrial. He has been observed near many crop circles.

[Husar]

Ideally, yes, but in practice no. As Aristotle noted quite a while back, Ethos, Logos, and Pathos are all routes of appeal that function persuasively for the audience. Hyperbolic blogs etc. arouse the passions (pathos) but generally fall short in credibility (ethos). So even when they are relating facts accurately and making reasonable conclusions therefrom (logos), their credibility still gets called into question and may well undercut the reader/viewer's trust in message.

And therefore all of Gilrandir's ukrainian news sources do at least get a silent approval here? And why should I trust US or British sources on the conflict when both countries have traditionally seen Russia as their arch-nemesis even after the fall of the iron curtain? A source that is reliable on a current plane-crash or on internal policy of the country it comes from is not automatically reliable when it reports on a country that is seen as a traditional or current enemy of the country the source is based in.

As for the rest, there are still three links that conclusively prove that the west has absolutely no problem in dealing with or supporting countries which manipulate public opinion on the internet. Why should Russia not do that if it works for others? There was also a report a while ago where Putin bought the services of some US PR agency to improve his own image. If he was always so bad, why did a US PR company help him improve his image for 9 years? It's a bit like Gadhaffi with whom we did business until we decided we don't need him anymore.

Here are some unreliable links:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...98C00S20130913
http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/12/medi...in-pr-ketchum/

And from the related links it seems as though Ukraine ain't afraid to use the same tactics itself:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/25/tech...ex.html?iid=EL

But I guess it's only evil when the other side does it.