Russias RT: The Network Implicated in U.S. Election Meddling
Source: New York Times
JAN. 7, 2017
RT, a state-run Russian television network that broadcasts around the world in English, was implicated in a recently declassified United States intelligence report that accused the Russia government of meddling in the American presidential election to tip the vote in favor of Donald J. Trump.
The Russians are accused of hacking the email systems of the Democratic National Committee and conducting a widespread disinformation campaign that included the propagation of fake news stories on the internet and the airwaves.
RT’s coverage of Hillary Clinton “throughout the U.S. presidential campaign was consistently negative and focused on her leaked emails and accused her of corruption, poor physical and mental health and ties to Islamic extremism,” the declassified intelligence report said.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/07/world/europe/russias-rt-the-network-implicated-in-us-election-meddling.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bucolic_frolic
(42,998 posts)Stacey Herbert and Max Keiser turned hard against HRC about a year ago.
It was like 'what happened?'
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)
olddad56
(5,732 posts)elmac
(4,642 posts)Hell, their putties weaponize fascism.
regnaD kciN
(26,044 posts)
elmac
(4,642 posts)Hartman and the others are in the denial stage. May be tied to contracts that they can't afford to get out of.
stopbush
(24,388 posts)But, hey, they're OK, right?
TomCADem
(17,380 posts)If Russia is their main source of income, then we should be careful.
Ed now had a private plane at his disposal.
dawn frenzy adams
(429 posts)However, more than being alarmed by the Russians , we'd better concentrate on the criminality of the Republicans. They have been hacking elections and suppressing votes for over 17 years. If we are waiting for the Democrats to stand up for voting rights, that will not happen. After all, the evidence is overwhelming, and they've ignored it. That included several respectable documentaries on the subject.
Though I'm troubled by RT, I think Thom and Pap are right here about the Democrats letting the Republicans quash democracy, yet again.
TomCADem
(17,380 posts)...this is how it can be pro-Trump on the one hand while also putting left leaning folks on the payroll as well. The common thread is that you have to be pro-Russia. It is okay to slam on each other, just not Putin.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Fuck 'em. They are are just getting their 30 pieces of silver.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Many on the far left are hard wired by personality to blame the mainstream left in their own country for everything. Name any problem anywhere in the world, and their minds always swing however many degrees required to take shot at their own liberals.
Unfortunately, of course, a fair number gravitate to the press and academia, so we get a lot of incoming from people who are often sloppily identified as part of the liberal left but tend to be very different in some very basic ways.
Sigh. Conservatives have a big advantage over us that way. The far right hates everyone else but joins the mainstream right and the far left in attacking the mainstream left. RT gives both sides opportunity for that, so no big surprise we see them working together there.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)
roamer65
(36,744 posts)They are basically Russian stooges.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)are Rooskie stooges. sure.
After booting out the progressives,
you wonder why you lost?
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)And you'd better not call the paid employees of the Russian government New Deal Dems. That would be an insult to New Deal and the Dems.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)Thom & Ed are all twice the Dem you will ever be.
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)Which does nothing to address the facts of the matter: Thom and Ed were paid by the Russian government. Which by definition means that the Russian government found them to be useful in advancing their agenda to install (I don't feel using the word "elect" is quite appropriate in this case) Trump. Thom and Ed would be complete fools if they weren't aware of this.
And Bernie never worked for RT. So don't bring him into the mix.
oasis
(49,309 posts)They all played a role in installing Benedict Donald into the top executive slot.
mwooldri
(10,299 posts)... in the days of the USSR. Listen, understand and remember that it has biases in the points of view that are broadcast.
Heck, we need to do this with all news sources.
mcar
(42,270 posts)Anywhere.
elmac
(4,642 posts)should not be considered a legit source of news. They have their propaganda, we have ours. I will not watch or listen to either.
2naSalit
(86,289 posts)They were absolutely nasty toward HRC which is why I lost track of them.
They were on Air America, and then Current TV. Hartman was also on Air America when that was a thing, so maybe that's what you're thinking of.
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)Just google "RT" and "Cenk Uygur" and you will see a bunch of results pop up.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)I watch a fair amount of RT, including some today,
and have found them to be reasonably fair.
In fact, they were and are MUCH MORE FAIR to HRC than FOX, or the
US Reich Wing media in general.
And I've never caught RT spreading the kinds of vicious lies that
Breitbart does all the time - such as the church burning in
Dortmund.
I'd like to see specific examples, and evidence, that RT . .
“throughout the U.S. presidential campaign was consistently negative
and focused on her leaked emails and accused her of corruption, poor
physical and mental health and ties to Islamic extremism,” the declassified
intelligence report said.
Hekate
(90,496 posts)If you missed the examples, do a search. Otherwise, enjoy the rest of your stay. I am in no mood for this.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)I don't have the links handy, but there's a holocaust denying extremist in the U.S. they would use as a phony independent American journalist on stories, when convenient.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)RT is the Breitbart from the Kremlin. Fake news, conspiracy theory, lies, twisting of facts all to show Putin Good, USA Bad, Trump Good. They even had an actual German neo-Nazi as a fake-expert host until they got caught. They still keep the neo-Nazi's articles on their website: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=385698
It's insane that any pro-democratic website allows them at all, even in the home page vid section. More:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=320863
why socialist should have nothing to do with RT
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016141944
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RT#Conspiracy_theories
RT hearts Alex Jones
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017195493
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017193359
nuff sed?
yardwork
(61,531 posts)Links to RT made DU a cesspool of lies for over a year. You can put your fingers in your ears and sing la la la all you want, but don't bring that crap here.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)NOTHING !!
Just name calling, not a single EXAMPLE of actual RT propaganda . .
If you want to persuade people who can read, that is not the way to do it !!
None of you provide a shred of actual evidence . .
Which of course is a hallmark of propaganda !!
uhnope
(6,419 posts)which is full of examples. Here, I'll even link to it for you http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141658998#post25
I'll wait for your correction. Unless you're just being deliberately distracting and obfuscating about anything that criticizes RT / Putin / the Kremlin, but you wouldn't do that, now would you?
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)It was totally bogus.
Why should I check any more?
But for sure, RT is shaky at times - as are all the media.
But where else can I get to see Prof. Richard Wolff?
http://www.rdwolff.com/
Not that his word is gospel either, but the MSM has a news
blackout against him, just like they did to Bernie and so many
others.
And Dude, my post on Ukraine that you cite is accurate.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)Last edited Mon Jan 9, 2017, 07:47 AM - Edit history (1)
Gimme an R... In a post filled with links, you picked one--NOT the most prominent one--and invented reasons it was insufficient. On the basis of that, you reject the truth that is well known about RT. And since you're proudly a defender of Kremlin lies, as shown here and here, it's obvious the little game you are playing. Good luck since Putinphiles don't get much respect anymore for good reason
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)What were you doing back then?
Likely cheering on the phony Intel.
Just don't post bogus information and you'll be fine.
(BTW, I'm a huge Orwell fan, and have read just about everything he wrote.
He was no fan of propaganda.)
Response to FairWinds (Reply #41)
Post removed
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)"shiraz socialist" is phony intel, not to mention fake news.
Shame on you for citing it.
And what were you doing in 2003 again?
uhnope
(6,419 posts)
politicat
(9,808 posts)There are multiple types of cleaner propaganda that do just as much damage as the more obvious dirty stuff, but go unnoticed.
Clean prop is necessary to the dirty stuff, because the clean acts as flack or radar chaff -- by putting out what appears to be clean, fair, balanced and neutral, it lends legitimacy to all propaganda originating at the same source or with similar voices. If $AgencyNews reported $NStory, $XStory, $YStory and $ZStory well, it makes them seem more reliable when they report dirtier propaganda, and it allows the $DirtyAgencyNews to do the dirty work, while letting $AgencyNews seem clean. Doesn't mean $Agency and $DirtyAgency aren't collaborating behind the scenes, or that $Agency isn't giving $DirtyAgency items to drop.
I know that sounds like conspiracy thinking, but that's how Voice of America and Radio Free Europe operated for decades. They were the clean prop agencies, and they often did very good work, but that doesn't mean they weren't engaging in the same propaganda game.
Jimbo101
(776 posts)(British Government claimed they didn't have anything to do with it -
Response to inanna (Original post)
Post removed
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)in meddling in the US election.
I recall multiple posts on DU from these paid operatives, and possibly others, proudly displaying the RT logo and peddling misinformation to DU readers.
I was outraged with DU being used as a propaganda arm of the Russian government then, and the intelligence report merely validates my outrage.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)of RT "disinformation"?
I didn't think so.
That being said, I disagreed with the RT coverage of Central Europe and
the Caucasus in a number of respects; but found it no more propagandistic
that the US MSM - and certainly FAR LESS propagandistic than FAUX, Lim --, etc.
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)So I am a bit puzzled by your request.
But it should be clear to anyone that RT and its employees are knowingly and willingly carrying water for the Russian government, just as it should be clear to everyone that the Russian government had an agenda in influencing the outcome of the US election.
It's not the 1960's anymore. There are more sophisticated means available to Putin than the crude peddling in disinformation.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)it's got that same evil 'birther' fake news propaganda ring to it.
hexola
(4,835 posts)Cable-less Americans can access RT more easily than domestic news...
Rex
(65,616 posts)About as trustworthy as corporate run news. Probably worse.
otohara
(24,135 posts)demeaning President Obama, the US government, Democrats and Hillary was paramount during the primaries then on to the GE.
The more the extremists on the left infiltrate the party -the more it makes me want to bolt. I have been a registered Democrat since 72, voted in all elections but one because Reagan won before the west was able to cast their votes. I recently changed to Unaffiliated and if these people continue to demean the party and our leaders - I am done voting for anyone.
I have volunteered, been a delegate 4 times locally and donated what I can.
I will not be following those who demonized Hillary for almost two years. I will not follow the likes of David Sirota, Glenn Greenwald, Julian Assange, Michael Moore, Mr & Mrs Sanders, Nina Turner, Killer Mike...they bitch a lot but have little to offer and don't have a clue how to deal with the realities that are Wall Street, fracking, Trump, the GOP, foreign policy. All of which are here to stay.
My millennial son says his peers are all over this medium - they are Sanders supporters who did nothing to stop this. Some voted but the peer pressure was intense.
They helped bring this nightmare to our door because of hatred and payback for not choosing Sanders....unforgivable.
mitty14u2
(1,015 posts)Hartman should walk away, Ed should retire and stay fishing, the rest should just fold up and find a job that appreciates they work for Russia. This News show is aimed at young Americans that are trying to find a political footing, Communism is starting on the wrong foot!
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)the TPP.
The Drumph got it about the TPP, but the corporate Dems did not.
I watch a fair amount of RT because they cover many issues that the MSM do not.
The corporate Dems should have been watching RT.
Give me RT any day of the week.
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)If this is the only criteria you use to gauge information sources, you will keep electing Trump.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)about the TPP and fair trade in general?
The DLC and the Koch Bros?
Who on the MSM carries Lori Wallach?
And FYI, I hosted two Hillary field workers in my home
for nearly three months.
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)They have an agenda, and they cannot be relied upon for bias-free coverage.
And if you are into media personalities, you go to the ones who have enough integrity to not be paid by the government of a repressive regime.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)I sure don't.
Do you watch it much, or at all?
What media do not have an agenda? For example, check out
National Public Radio's economic coverage - it's all austerity,
all the time. Keeps Dean Baker mighty busy debunking it.
And they won't use the word "torture" applied to the USG.
Of course, that is an agenda.
And check out the entire MSM on corporate (they call it "free"
trade - that's why Ed Schultz got bouned from MSNBC.
To repeat, Trump understood the trade issue while many Dem
leaders did not. Why not? Because criticism of the TPP (or NAFTA)
was blacked out of the MSM.
I'm also now able to watch Deutsche Welle because I have a spiffy
new smart TV. It's pretty good, as is France 24.
I even watch CCTV sometimes, now that is REAL state tv!!
Thanks for being civil . .
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)Last edited Tue Jan 10, 2017, 05:02 PM - Edit history (1)
I don't watch either one.
And please don't ask me whether I prefer excrement or vomit for breakfast. Since I haven't tried either (nor do I intend to), I would be a fool to express preference for one or the other.
As far as media and agendas, I can tell you this: state sponsored media have very different agenda from commercial media.The former is completely in tune with on the state that funds it, and the latter is completely in tune with their commercial interests. The former is primarily concerned with the state's political, geo-political and economic interests, and that will determine the programming you see on state media. Naturally, it will vary from state to state and regime to regime. The latter is primarily concerned with conducting and promoting commerce, either on their own behalf or on the behalf of their corporate owners, which in most cases means identifying their target audiences, producing programming that will attract those audiences and selling the consequently acquired numbers of "eyeballs" to various commercial interests desiring to reach those audiences. As you can see, the interests and goals of one is very (sometimes radically) different from the other. Using the same set of judgments to compare the two is ludicrous. I can compare RT to France 24, or I can compare Fox to MSNBC, but I cannot compare Al Jazeera to Bloomberg (I watch both, BTW).
So I suggest you drop your useless attempts at comparative analysis (or, more accurately, judgments) and concentrate on critical analysis of each. And since this thread is about RT, address my criticism of RT or, if you can't, just quit.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)know anything about RT because you don't watch it,
you are impervious to facts or reason.
Here is an RT program that is MORE accurate and
honest in defending Ms. Clinton from the Benghazi scam
than the rest of the MSM.
http://www.thomhartmann.com/bigpicture/grayson-unveils-benghazi-complaint
beastie boy
(9,224 posts)but I am not biting.
And once again, you have absolutely no grounds to conclude that I know nothing about RT. I know plenty about RT. This is the reason I don't watch it. Cause and effect, my dear. Get them straight.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)where are they now?
