General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMaybe RT Has a Bigger Influence on American Politics Than We Think - Mother Jones
Yesterday I noted that the intelligence report on Russian hacking devoted an awful lot of space to RT America, the Kremlin-funded cable TV network. That struck me as odd since I don't think RT had much influence on the election. Shortly after I wrote that, I got this tweet: Pat Bagley @Patbagley @kdrum
Don't think you know how influential RT is among Christian Right, most of whom don't know what RT means
And this email: I think you underestimate the influence of RT on the Jill Stein and "Never Hillary" crowd among Bernie supporters. This is only one aspect of delegitimizing the center. A leftist progressive friend who works on Syrian refugee issues was really disturbed by how many on that part of the spectrum think Putin is just dandy.
And this from Vox's Zack Beauchamp: The ODNI report focuses, to an almost surprising degree, on RT the Kremlins international, English-language propaganda media outlet. The report contains several striking observations about RTs reach, message, and proximity to the Russian government.
....According to the report, RT as well as Sputnik, another Russian governmentfunded English-language propaganda outlet began aggressively producing pro-Trump and anti-Clinton content starting in March 2016. That just so happens to be the exact same time the Russian hacking campaign targeting Democrats began.
....During the 2016 campaign, RT aired a number of weird, conspiratorial segments some starring WikiLeaks Julian Assange that cast Clinton as corrupt and funded by ISIS and portrayed the US electoral system as rigged.
Put this all together and you have a portrait of a sometimes Alex Jones-esque "alternative channel" that appeals to fringe elements on both the left and right and successfully hides its identity from them... - Mother Jones
Now connect the dots. Go one step further. Google the ODNI's said headlines (pg 14) and see who the American news outlets were that carried the RT/Kremlin propaganda directly into living rooms across America before the election. Eureka!
I'll save you some of the work.
Where have you seen these RT headlines before?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028439946
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Especially regarding Ukraine, then Syria, and finally, the anti-Clinton screeds during the election.
They appeared to me so obviously propagandistic and fake from the beginning that it's hard to imagine any so-called progressive biting on any of it. And although there were quite a few of us calling it out as bunk, there were just as many (if not more) who bought it hook, line, and sinker.
If I were King (or Queen), I'd put any links to RT mendaciousness on the no-post list.
herding cats
(19,565 posts)If they were here on little old DU, you know they were everyplace.
ffr
(22,670 posts)It's something completely different when they're the headlines on major news outlets in America. It's as though there was coordination.
And I loved page 14 of the IC's report. It clearly states that these are the headlines that the Kremlin wanted broadcast in the United States and when we look at who was broadcasting the headlines, fake news, and videos, it was right-wing television and radio talking heads. The CIA, FBI and NSA all conclude that these Kremlin headlines were the ones. And it was Fox and conservative outlets who carried the Kremlin's water. Damning accusations when it's not DU'ers saying that, it's the CIA, FBI, and NSA.
Fox News and the like, are extensions of the Kremlin's messaging machine.
You and I have known this, but now the intelligence community is saying it.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)with the confusion with regard to what passes for "progressivism" that is sown here and on other sites on the Internet. It's still going on here (like the return of the repressed, as soon as the election ended), and there are certain repeated buzzwords that are very attractive to otherwise rational people, who begin to believe the propagandistic ideology as a substitute for real issues. I'm just saying: caveat emptor.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Until recently.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)ffr
(22,670 posts)However, as I stated above, I'd like our M$M to make the connection between what's in the IC's report (pg 14) and which national television and radio agencies who were rebroadcasting those Kremlin headlines. Was there a mechanism and coordination?
Some RT stories probably have merit without hidden innuendo. I like to believe I'm skeptical enough to know which are journalism, opinion, or propaganda.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And ought to have been treated as such.
ffr
(22,670 posts)mopinko
(70,127 posts)then they got big eddie to blow smoke and sow fud.
yup. yup. vile.
we used to block that site here, but since they picked up hartmann, nobody seems to mind it.