[HN Gopher] Russia to punish 'fake news' about Ukraine war with ...
___________________________________________________________________
Russia to punish 'fake news' about Ukraine war with 15 years' jail
Author : simontheowl
Score : 257 points
Date : 2022-03-03 15:55 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.thetimes.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.thetimes.co.uk)
| pavlov wrote:
| It's good to remember that the previous American president also
| waged a war against every media outlet he didn't like by claiming
| they were "fake news." It's the same authoritarianism in
| different stages.
|
| And if you think nobody in America wants to jail journalists and
| media CEOs, go look at any forum with a substantial amount of
| Republicans talking freely.
| [deleted]
| echelon wrote:
| > And if you think nobody in America wants to jail journalists
| and media CEOs, go look at any forum with a substantial amount
| of Republicans talking freely.
|
| I'm a liberal and would like to point out that fellow liberals
| say the same about conservatives. We're wasting energy and
| making enemies fighting a narrative warfare, and it's frankly
| very stupid.
|
| Jail the their protestors, but not our own. Deplatform their
| voices and curtail their free speech, but not our own. It's the
| exact same behavior in both sides, yet both parties rush in to
| say how they're different and morally correct.
|
| We need to mend ties, not strain them further. We're becoming
| too polarized, and that's exactly what authoritarians that eye
| the end of Democracy and its influence want. We're focused on
| fighting our petty squabbles instead of positioning ourselves
| in the global sphere.
|
| If you think any of our manufactured crises are even in the
| same order of magnitude as what Ukraine is facing right now,
| then they're already winning.
|
| My worry isn't in owning or being owned by the other party.
| It's that Democracy is shown to be less effective, that free
| speech is put in a box, and that we end the century in
| shackles. No future under those pretenses is worth looking
| forward to.
| president wrote:
| Agreed. If there's anything I've learned over the years, it's
| that Democrats and Republicans are equally nasty. The only
| difference is one side is much more powerful because they are
| supported by virtually every cultural institution that
| exists.
| cabalamat wrote:
| I agree. The US culture war helps dictators like Putin and
| Xi.
| LegitShady wrote:
| tnat doesnt solve the problems it just makes the stakes
| higher.
| natechols wrote:
| Nearly all of recorded human history has been rule by
| gangsters - the liberal democracies of the rich world are an
| aberration, not the norm. I think about this almost daily and
| it terrifies me.
| phs318u wrote:
| Yes! I often wonder whether, in the far future, there will
| even be historians that know that for a brief moment in
| time - a couple of centuries - a historical blip - there
| was a significant chunk of the world where the masses could
| educate themselves and rise above their origins, without
| fear of reprisal from the state.
|
| What I fear most is a return to the historical mean - where
| the vast majority are mere peasants. Ignorant, and
| systematically oppressed, restrained, and exploited.
| dehrmann wrote:
| > Deplatform their voices and curtail their free speech, but
| not our own
|
| If there's one thing Democrats and Republicans agree on, it's
| that tech isn't censoring the things _they_ want censored.
| moate wrote:
| I'm currently debating how many burner accounts I should
| make to upvote this, because this so succinctly describes
| the situation. Everyone wants the thing _they_ hate gone,
| and hates the the other side feels the same way about
| something they love.
|
| (note to mods: after debate, the answer was 0, plz no rate
| limtz)
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| The global fascist movement has had success hijacking the
| Republican party and some parts of the left (eg Gabbard).
| Largely the success on the right was greater because of
| affinity toward aggrievement in the electoral base that was
| more susceptible exploitation, but it also reflects the more
| mature financial channels (eg NRA).
|
| But this is not a left/right political issue. That is
| incidental. The social exploit of this foreign operational is
| orthogonal to political ideology and both side stand to
| suffer substantially. Trump's lack of conservative ideology
| bona fides are well documented.
| akomtu wrote:
| To be honest, the blue camp is different only in rhetoric: if
| the red wants control in the name of national security, the
| blue wants the same control in the name of grotesque moral
| rightnessess. Fake news is a good summary of our media today,
| it just applies to both camps.
| electrondood wrote:
| Bullshit false equivalence.
|
| I notice that Democrats aren't forming white supremacist
| militias, plotting to kidnap state governors, attacking
| Congress specifically to overturn the results of a national
| election, etc.
| marcusverus wrote:
| If you only apply 'guilt by association' to your opponents,
| but not to yourself and your tribe, then your worldview
| will be built on a foundation of cheap rhetorical tricks.
|
| Remember when Hillary's mentor (Mr. Byrd) was a former KKK
| Grand Dragon (and Democrat Senator)? Or when that democrat
| attempted to assassinate a dozen Republican lawmakers on a
| baseball field? How about the one who killed five cops in
| Dallas? Or the ones who engaged in (or cheered on) the 2020
| riots that did billions of dollars in damage (including a
| months-long attack on a Federal courthouse in Portland,
| complete with firebombing!)?
|
| All of this finger pointing bullshit is a distraction,
| intended to scare stupid people to the polls.
| adventured wrote:
| maxlamb wrote:
| Any evidence that democrats "operate the antifa terrorist
| network"? There were riots in Portland after Biden was
| elected, it seems antifa are mostly anarchists and not a
| fan of the current Democratic Party either.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| The expectation for conservatives / republican
| politicians is that a failure to disavow any problematic
| group is perceived as endorsement. So I can just as
| easily beg the question, why haven't more Democrats come
| out and disavowed antifa?
| dehrmann wrote:
| > The FBI drove that plot to kidnap a state governor in
| fact...
|
| For the curious,
| https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/24/us/whitmer-kidnapping-
| tri...
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| This is one of many incidents of government agencies that
| run amok and often unchecked. If the US public were to be
| informed of the true scale of the American intelligence
| apparatus it would destroy the US's public image for
| decades.
| akomtu wrote:
| Again, the blue camp isnt any better here. Did you hear
| about the very recent Kentucky event? Did you hear about
| the sketchy "rise of the moors" organisation and that
| highway event? The "fake news" isnt just biased reporting,
| but also not reporting events that would challenge the
| narrative. A small disclosure: I was among those who
| donated to the Bernie's campaign, yet I reject most of the
| blue rhetoric.
| mrexroad wrote:
| s/fake news/entertainment exploiting a set of curated
| insecurities to maximize ad-sales/g
|
| The problem is that most are convinced that it's all
| "fake news" and their preferred source is the "least
| fake", all while getting pulled deeper down the rabbit
| hole.
|
| I see the same dynamic with my teenage kids and the
| YouTubers /etc they watch on topics they're interested
| in. They hear something, get overly excited about it, and
| then fixate/share/etc. I almost feel it's a part time job
| to show enough interest to where they'll talk about it so
| I can try and help build the reflex of distill out
| fact/assumption/inference, and reframe narrative to a set
| of possibilities that for facts. It's actually been a
| challenge b/c often things sound stupid if I'm too
| reductionist and they shut down. But TBH usually sounds
| stupid b/c it is stupid manufactured drama that sells
| YouTube ads. Same dynamic whether some Roblox gamer
| drama, MLB lockout drama, or politics -- all "news"
| eventually optimizes to maximize ad revenue, competing
| with creative entertainment for attention.
| magicalist wrote:
| > _Again, the blue camp isnt any better here.... Did you
| hear about the sketchy "rise of the moors" organisation
| and that highway event?_
|
| lol, Rise of the Moors super invested in universal
| healthcare and social safety nets now?
|
| I'm going to go out on a limb and say supposed sovereign
| citizens aren't very active in local party politics.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| Plenty of equivalence actually.
|
| Democrats encourage anarchist militias who openly advocate
| for violence and arson, try to de-legitimize election
| results through "Russia-Gate" conspiracies, openly cheered
| on the fire bombing and attacking of police officers and
| government buildings(court houses), spread misinformation
| about the Kyle Rittenhouse despite all expert legal
| analysis saying they were misinformed.
| jgwil2 wrote:
| > try to de-legitimize election results through "Russia-
| Gate" conspiracies
|
| US intelligence confirmed that Russia tried to swing an
| election, so this isn't a "conspiracy." As for the rest
| of your points, those positions were never embraced by
| mainstream Democrats.
| LegitShady wrote:
| Contrast with the next presidential election, which also
| had Russian interference, but questioning the results of
| make you a conspiracy theorist.
|
| The Democrats have the election as either a sham or the
| most secure election ever based on if their side won.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| The Mueller report showed some involvement but did not
| say the election results were illegitimate and there were
| a large amount of democrats who continue to claim this
| election result is not legitimate.
|
| (FWIW I don't like trump but I still believe he would
| have won 2016 with or without Russia, its a cop out to
| blame Russia for that)
|
| We literally had Democrat senators saying "rioting is the
| voice of the streets"(AOC), and calling Kyle Rittenhouse
| a domestic terrorist, whole portions of cities in
| democrat run cities were given to anarchist militias like
| in CHAZ and were flippantly calling these groups
| "peaceful" while they engaged in looting, arson, and
| attacking police officers.
| puffoflogic wrote:
| > plotting to kidnap state governors,
|
| Given that the only plots to kidnap state governors were
| planned and executed by the FBI
| (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/24/us/whitmer-kidnapping-
| tri...), and the FBI was acting to frame right-wingers, it
| stands to reason that in fact 100% of recent plots to
| kidnap state governors were planned and executed by the
| left.
|
| The left has also been responsible for the only actual
| violent attacks on the US Capitol in the past century:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_Senate_bom
| b...
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground#United_St
| a... (warning: mostly erased from Wikipedia; this single
| sentence is the only coverage remaining that I can find)
| dehrmann wrote:
| Remember the aftermath of the Portland protests? The damage
| and loss of business were estimated to be $23M. It's not
| the same as what you're describing from the far right, but
| it's also pretty bad, just in a different way.
| eric_cc wrote:
| dude just stop. Idiots on the left. Idiots on the right.
| Stop being a tool.. because honestly, only a brainwashed
| tool would truly believe the problem only exists with The
| OTHER group.
| avion23 wrote:
| dev_by_day wrote:
| Democrats have plenty of blood on their hands in demanding
| censorship.
|
| Remember the accusations of racism that were used to shut
| down the lab leak theory? Or the demands to censor
| scientists with any dissenting viewpoints over Covid? The
| cover up of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal that resulted
| in journalists from the Post being banned?
|
| The "war on disinformation" their obsessed with is not any
| different from a "war on fake news". Censorship is a tool
| of cowards and there are plenty of cowards in both parties
| that will use it to shut down any dissenting view points.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| Division is the goal of the adversary. We should stop
| arguing for no good reason if we don't have to.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| We shouldn't allow people to spread lies and demonize one
| side unchecked. If were going to talk about problems, its
| best we don't scape goat on one side and admit there are
| flaws in both parties.
|
| Letting them scape-goat and demonize unchecked doesn't
| help anything either.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| I stand by what I said. Focus on what you have in common
| and deal with disagreements by leveraging conflict de-
| escalation techniques such as NVC
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication.
| Think about what you stand to gain arguing with someone
| on the internet. Consider what it does to your mindset. I
| agree with you on civil disagreement and standing up for
| what you believe.
|
| For instance - I disagree with you on the lab leak theory
| and laptop comments. I understand you feel about them
| strongly, but I think you are smart and should reconsider
| the source material for those claims. Further, I feel the
| way you expressed it was regrettable: "blood on their
| hands" is unnecessary and inaccurate. You could have
| phrased that in ways that were more accurate, more
| effective, and less inflammatory.
|
| Everyone is literally less intelligent, less capable of
| rational decision making, and more susceptible to
| manipulation when they are angry. I have certainly been
| guilty of this before, and I am just trying to share some
| of what I have learned.
|
| One final comment: one thing that all social media
| including HN could do is remove user-visible up and
| downvotes. It engages the brain in a similar way to
| gambling (https://www.brainfacts.org/diseases-and-
| disorders/addiction/...) and creates self-reinforcing
| conflict that can be exploited.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| By the way the "source" I am invoking are MIT scientists
| for the lab leak theory being plausible
| https://www.amazon.com/Viral-Search-Covid-19-Alina-Chan-
| eboo... and when it comes to dissenting views on COVID I
| am referencing Dr. Robert Malone(holds a patent for mRNA
| vaccines) and the great barrington declaration
| https://gbdeclaration.org/ which was created and signed
| by many Ivy League medical researchers and practitioners
| about how flawed our strict lockdown measure are.
|
| Hunter Biden has gone on record saying that laptop might
| have been his.
|
| Don't presume a persons sources without asking first. You
| strike me as a smart person as well and should check
| these sources out with an open mind before dismissing
| them.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| > For instance - I disagree with you on the lab leak
| theory and laptop comments. I understand you feel about
| them strongly, but I think you are smart and should
| reconsider the source material for those claims. Further,
| I feel the way you expressed it was regrettable: "blood
| on their hands" is unnecessary and inaccurate. You could
| have phrased that in ways that were more accurate, more
| effective, and less inflammatory.
|
| Notice what you're doing though. The information content
| of this is effectively the polite version of "stop being
| mad and wrong, go read a book."
|
| It contains no actual rebuttal of anything. You present
| no new facts or reasoning, only an assertion that you
| disagree which was already implied.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| Sorry, I don't have much time to reply but you have a
| good point.
|
| That is correct and intentional. My core point is that
| everyone can benefit changing how we disagree and when we
| choose to disagree. In what you quoted, I was just trying
| to make the point less abstract with a concrete example.
| I wasn't trying to be persuasive or reach some sort of
| resolution. I could have been more effective, thank you.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| So your saying Democrats are not in favor of censorship?
| Are we just going to pretend this is a one sided issue
| and they were not guilty in trying to cover up the lab
| leak theory or going after journalists who try to write
| stories about hunter bidens laptop?
|
| I don't see how pointing how both parties are guilty of
| engaging in censorship is wrong. I am advocating for the
| position that censorship is a tool used unfairly by both
| parties when they are given the chance, I don't like
| conservatives or republicans either for how they treated
| Edward Snowden and Juliane Assange.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| Your second paragraph stands alone on its own well
| without the first. I think human flaws spread around
| pretty evenly. It's actually a pretty good starting point
| for thinking humanizing the person you are disagreeing
| with and establishing common ground. If it's okay, I
| don't want to talk about the lab leak or laptop here - I
| don't want to distract from the separate topic of this
| law imposing 15 year prison sentences threat to Russian
| journalists.. "fake news" has only been brought into the
| discussion because of headline editorializing. I have to
| go back to work and likely cannot reply further but
| didn't want you to think I ignored you.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| FWIW I despise censorship, irregardless of which party it
| comes from, and can tell we both see a lot of flaws in
| human nature in general so don't think we are far off in
| disagreement here. Journalists should be left the fuck
| alone, certainly.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| It's the censorship making the division worse.
|
| Social media already has a big problem with filter
| bubbles. If you go to a place where 99% of people there
| are one party's partisans and try to rebut their
| misinformation, you get dogpiled. People insult you and
| sling baseless accusations of racism, which deters people
| from attempting to debate when they're highly
| outnumbered. So any place which has any partisan bias
| gets an even bigger one until everything is totally
| polarized.
|
| Platform censorship makes it even worse because the
| platform's censors will be in one bubble or the other,
| their censorship decisions will be biased in that
| direction and push anyone on the other team onto other
| platforms and we end up with entirely partisan platforms
| that never talk to each other, and are thereby both
| highly misinformed about different sets of things.
| [deleted]
| _ph_ wrote:
| As a non-american, I can see how some actions of the left
| seem to be a bit over the top and as things escalated might
| really got a bit extreme too. But is a push against racism,
| for gender equality, LGBT rights really wrong? Do you notice,
| how much people, who stand for those issues, get attacked in
| the public discussion?
| Already__Taken wrote:
| As an outsider "name of grotesque moral rightnessess"
| thrown from the Christian right made me spit my coffee out.
| akomtu wrote:
| If most "christian rights" knew my beliefs about the
| religion, they'd burn me at stake. I do think that the
| Bible has a lot of wisdom in it, but a lot of bs too.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| " But is a push against racism, for gender equality, LGBT
| rights really wrong?"
|
| Isn't it an issue of framing? E.g. it appears that some
| think that the solution to racism appears to be
| implementing institutional racism indefinitely until racism
| is cured.
|
| This is distracting from the real issue of class warfare
| which is what psyops relies on to divide prior arguing past
| each other.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| > racism, for gender equality, LGBT rights
|
| The thing is, those are all non-issues now, and have been
| for a while. The reason the MSM is known as fake news in
| the US, is that they keep trying to push these as current
| issues, even though they've been settled.
| metamet wrote:
| They certainly aren't non-issues.
|
| https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/florida-s-
| don-t-...
|
| https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-
| policy/judg...
| jtgeibel wrote:
| This is complete nonsense. I can easily think of an
| example from the past week where a Republican controlled
| state is attacking transgender children and their parents
| to score political points with the Republican base. It is
| absurd to claim that equal rights in America is a settled
| topic or a non-issue.
|
| https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-transgender-care-
| lawsuit-...
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| _The thing is, those are all non-issues now, and have
| been for a while_
|
| That's just not true.
| ajford wrote:
| That's a truck-load of bullshit. Texas Gov. Abbot is
| pushing an anti-LGBTQ+ agenda in the open. He and his
| pals are flat-out pushing anti-trans agendas that accuse
| parents of children seeking gender-affirming treatment of
| child abuse.
|
| The Texas right-leaning lege just got through passing a
| bill that was designed to be hard to assail in the courts
| that hands out money for turning in anyone who assist
| someone in seeking an abortion, robbing people of their
| rights over their own bodily autonomy.
|
| Florida gov't is trying to pass bills that prohibit
| talking about gender orientation and identity, racism,
| and equality in the workplace and classroom.
|
| This isn't a "non-issue". This isn't "settled". We're
| still fighting for our rights and freedoms, and those of
| our children. I'll be damned if I'm gonna let some greedy
| nutjob politician deny my children (or anyone's children)
| the right to be who they are or want to be.
|
| If they don't like gender transitioning, then they
| shouldn't transition, but don't tell me or mine that they
| can't!
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| In the Context of politics being preference:
|
| " He and his pals are flat-out pushing anti-trans agendas
| that accuse parents of children seeking gender-affirming
| treatment of child abuse."
|
| Isn't this, by definition, a very debatable topic with
| pros and cons that have to be weighed. Where one comes
| down, I.e. their preference for policy on this, will be
| informed by their background and biases.
|
| E.g. it isn't entirely obvious that we should give
| minors, who legally can not consent to many activities,
| access to ethically untestable non-reversible treatments.
|
| These issues are actually the purpose of politics. E.g.
| it is a feature of the system that there is debate on
| implementing the preferences of a democracy.
| spoils19 wrote:
| I agree whole heartedly. Until we figure it out, treating
| it as legal abuse and punishing the parents is the way to
| go.
| ajford wrote:
| The treatment administered to minors is reversible.
|
| Studies show that gender-affirming treatments and care
| can reduce thoughts of suicide and self-harm.
|
| No one is pushing these treatments on unwilling minors.
| To take away peoples' rights to these treatments is
| unconscionable. And to direct people to be charged or
| investigated for child abuse is even more so. It's just
| another point that puts people in fear of the
| authorities.
| klyrs wrote:
| > Isn't this, by definition, a very debatable topic with
| pros and cons that have to be weighed.
|
| Honestly, you're voicing for support of the person you're
| responding to, here. These aren't "non-issues" as GGP
| claimed.
|
| But, puberty blockers, the medical treatment under fire,
| aren't non-reversible.
| cheeseomlit wrote:
| Chemically castrating a child is child abuse.
| ajford wrote:
| Puberty blocking is not chemical castration.
|
| By your argument chemotherapy is assassination by poison
| and setting a broken bone is assault.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| Delaying puberty is not chemical castration.
| emptysongglass wrote:
| > But is a push against racism, for gender equality, LGBT
| rights really wrong?
|
| No, of course it isn't. But many people I know, myself
| included, are afraid to speak out against what we see as
| new forms of hate levied in their name. The CHAZ or the
| hijacking of this brutal war against Ukraine into a
| commentary on care only being bound to race or the
| evacuation of cisgendered women and men from their own
| bodies by way of language so that everyone is "just" a
| vagina-haver or penis-possessor are just a few examples of
| where I see these pushes become the very weapons of the
| forces its proponents profess to fight.
|
| > Do you notice, how much people, who stand for those
| issues, get attacked in the public discussion?
|
| As a liberal (or what was liberal 10 years ago), I mostly
| notice how much people who stand for these issues attack
| others who have a different opinion and try to silence
| them.
|
| This is the first time I'm giving voice to some of these
| deeply unpopular opinions in the new liberal left spaces
| like HN, for which I fully expect to be downvoted and
| potentially flagged into oblivion.
|
| I don't think the oft-violent rhetoric and deplatforming
| crusades of the new left is the right way of effecting
| positive change on the world.
| waffleiron wrote:
| Not just America, in the EU right now:
|
| In Czechia up to 1 year for publicly supporting Russia (two
| people already detained):
| https://www.praguemorning.cz/expressing-support-for-russia-o...
|
| In Slovakia, supporting [Russian] war propaganda 10 to 25
| years: https://spravy.rtvs.sk/2022/02/za-podporu-vojnovej-
| propagand...
|
| EU banned RT and Sputnik:
|
| "It shall be prohibited for operators to broadcast or to
| enable, facilitate or otherwise contribute to broadcast, any
| content by the legal persons, entities or bodies listed in
| Annex XV, including through transmission or distribution by any
| means such as cable, satellite, IP-TV, internet service
| providers, internet video-sharing platforms or applications,
| whether new or pre-installed"
| frabbit wrote:
| Wow! That should be the real headline story. "Western"
| (w.t.f. does that mean?) state destroys freedom of speech in
| order to save it from Russia.
| eric_cc wrote:
| This is bullshit. Most American news (left and right) is
| Entertainment and in that sense it IS actually quite fake. And
| that's to say nothing of the times MSM is outright lying. Trump
| calling out the fake news as fake was probably one of the best
| things he did with his time as president. At least some people
| woke up as a result. Before Trump, people would view
| publications like NYT and WaPo as fundamentally different than
| Fox News. Now, thankfully, many more people realize they are
| exactly the same. If anything, Fox News presents itself more
| honestly as news entertainment and NYT is more deceptive.
| swayvil wrote:
| kmeisthax wrote:
| It's one thing for Zuckerberg to ban you, and another thing
| for Putin to do the same. If Facebook bans you, you can go
| somewhere else. But they aren't the only game in town and
| their power is limited to refusing to serve you. If a
| government bans you, that means almost certain death.
| yifanl wrote:
| I mean, let's not pretend that in Facebook's ideal world
| where they own the market, there _wouldn't_ be somewhere
| else to go to. Obviously that's not the case today, but I'm
| concerned that it'll get there eventually just based on how
| network effects seem to be trending.
| kmeisthax wrote:
| I will not deny for a second that Zuckerberg dreams of
| having the kind of big monopolistic platform that would
| let him single-handedly suppress speech he doesn't like.
| However, that's still not as bad of a harm as being
| thrown in jail for the same thing. There's a huge gulf
| between "large multinational corporation" and "sovereign
| nation" - the former can still have it's power challenged
| through antitrust law and regulations, while the latter
| is immune to such things because they have their own
| military.
| prox wrote:
| I found this article very enlightening :
| https://www.csis.org/features/kremlin-playbook-3
|
| From the center of strategic and international studies. It
| describes how the same ideology (white male christian)
| worldview is connected to Putin and Trump, and how the West is
| viewed as decadent through the moral lens of the fundamentalist
| churches in both the US and the Russian orthodox church.
| t0suj4 wrote:
| Conservatism is relative term. It basically means "keep what
| we have and carefully evaluate new things".
|
| Conservatism in the US is not what conservatism in France is.
| Conservatism in Mexico is not what conservatism in Brazil is.
|
| Putin's version of conservatism, as mentioned in the article,
| is only applicable to Russia and countries with similar
| culture.
|
| Comparing Trump to Putin is like comparing Nixon to Brezhnev.
| prox wrote:
| So when Trump is praising Putin, where does that come from?
| What does he admire?
| t0suj4 wrote:
| I think Trump's praises may increase his chances for
| Putin to accept Trump's proposals. IIRC Trump wrote a
| book about making deals that's why I believe it.
|
| Besides that I think that Putin made genuinely smart
| strategical steps to ensure that nobody will get between
| him and Ukraine... How it will turn out we yet have to
| see.
|
| Cornering a leader with nuclear capabilities benefits
| nobody and can get dangerous, leaving him with nothing to
| lose. I think Trump wanted to use Russia to counter
| China.
| LegitShady wrote:
| white male christian is not an ideology. The first is a skin
| color, the second is a gender, the third is a religion.
| Pretending that you throw those three things together creates
| some coherent and common ideology is not logical thought
| prox wrote:
| No, and maybe I could have worded that better. But that's
| part of their identity and what they rally around. If you
| read the article you would see what I mean.
|
| From the article "Here traditionalism and identity are
| fused together such that disrupting one threatens the
| other. Any demographic change (particularly immigration
| from Muslim-majority and non-White countries, exacerbated
| in the public perception by low birth rates) is viewed as a
| direct challenge to identity and tradition."
|
| So maybe the better word is "strategic conversatism" as per
| the article.
| signatoremo wrote:
| It's also good to remember that Donald Trump is no longer the
| president, all of the fake news that he didn't like still made
| it to the public, and none of the journalists he didn't like
| are in jail, or killed.
|
| Now that is out of the way, should we switch our focus back to
| how Russia suppress any domestic news about the ongoing Ukriane
| war? Or "special operation" as it's only allowed to be called?
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| "Fake News" comes in many forms. Hyperbole and playing fast and
| loose with words like "waged a war" plays into this. The media
| has NEVER been particularly friendly to the President. Even
| George Washington himself lamented how the press was slandering
| his administration with falsehoods.
|
| What did this war look like? What actions did the government
| actually take to fight journalists covering POTUS unfavorably?
| Because I just remember an incredible amount of pearl clutching
| by journalists about how dangerous it is to say bad things
| about the press and how democracy would die in darkness if
| their credibility was questioned. It never actually stopped
| them from continuing act the same way.
| peeters wrote:
| I think it's useful to distinguish between what a President
| _says_ , and what he uses his executive powers to _do_. As
| far as what he _did_ , I think the most impactful was
| probably drastically reducing press briefings in which the
| free press can directly challenge the administration.
|
| https://pressgazette.co.uk/trump-vs-media-freedom-of-
| press-d...
| gotoeleven wrote:
| Do you remember all the reporting about russia and trump during
| this time? Would you call that news fake or not fake?
| lkxijlewlf wrote:
| But, there _is_ a connection between the two. Even his own
| children have admitted they get most all of their money from
| Russia (for example).
| hunterb123 wrote:
| Prime example of the effects of biased reporting ^
|
| There's a difference between having LEGITIMATE business
| long BEFORE your dad has power vs. getting put on a board
| of a corrupt energy company WHILE your dad is overseeing
| the country relations as VP. One is capitalism, one is
| nepotism.
|
| But all that being said, the statement "they get most all
| of their money from Russia" is wrong at face value. Their
| businesses do not get the majority of revenue from Russia.
| Back that statement up with a source so it can be torn
| apart.
| coolso wrote:
| zackees wrote:
| sydthrowaway wrote:
| jansen555 wrote:
| criley2 wrote:
| commandlinefan wrote:
| > with a substantial amount of Republicans
|
| Well, since you opened that door... it's democrats/leftists who
| are actually _succeeding_ at shutting down news media that they
| disagree with.
| moate wrote:
| Avowed leftist here: Let's just agree that both the Dems and
| Repubs ban/seek to stifle opinions they don't agree with.
| Someone wants to ban Maus, someone else wants to ban Joe
| Rogan. Both parties want power at the expense of "freedom".
|
| Censorship is part of existing as part of a society though.
| There are people who seek to actively hurt others using words
| and media, and the whole idea of a state is to (pretend?) to
| act in the common good. At this point the internet gives
| everyone a platform (look at us right now, there's a near 0%
| chance we would have ever spoken in physical real life) and
| makes a TON more noise that makes finding the signal harder,
| which means both sides can find plenty of examples of the
| other behaving badly to "whatabout" whenever someone points
| out their own bad behavior.
|
| TL;dr- Everyone wants censorship, even if they pretend they
| don't, so let's not pretend it's actually either side. If
| anything, your point just proves that Dems/leftists might
| have more power in the US to influence these things, but that
| doesn't prove they have more desire to influence them than
| the right.
| commandlinefan wrote:
| > Censorship is part of existing as part of a society
| though
|
| I suspect that's exactly what Putin would say if he were
| challenged.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| It's probably also what the parents of dead children in
| Newtown, who were harassed out of town by Alex Jones
| listeners, would say.
|
| You need to elaborate more if you want to use hyperbole
| to make a point, otherwise it's just hyperbole. It exists
| on both sides of an argument.
| noja wrote:
| > Avowed leftist here: Let's just agree that both the Dems
| and Repubs ban/seek to stifle opinions they don't agree
| with. Someone wants to ban Maus, someone else wants to ban
| Joe Rogan.
|
| What kind of an argument is this? The only common thread
| between the two is the word "banning".
|
| Banning Joe Rogan is because he spreads misinformation
| about vaccines. He is causing lots of people to die, and
| the pandemic is longer because of it.
|
| Banning a book about the holocaust prevents people learning
| about the atrocities of the past.
| ejb999 wrote:
| >>How can you equate banning Maus with banning Joe Rogan?
| The only common thread between the two is the word
| "banning".
|
| Because free speech is free speech, whether you agree
| with what was said or not.
| noja wrote:
| Free speech is not free speech. Shouting fire in a
| theater is not free speech because it causes panic then
| harm.
| zthrowaway wrote:
| https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-
| tim...
| dev_by_day wrote:
| Shouting fire in a theater when there is no fire and
| expressing concern over the potentially dangerous side
| effects of a vaccine are different. The previous is an
| outright lie about a non-event while the later has some
| truth.
|
| Its factually true that people have had severe adverse
| reactions and died from the vaccine. He interviewed
| genuine credentialed experts like Dr. Robert Malone on
| the potential dangers of the Covid vaccine.
|
| I am in favor of the Covid vaccine and disagree with Joe
| but he's allowed to express his dissenting opinions.
|
| Podcasts are not medical advise and should not be treated
| as such.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| > shutting down news media that they disagree with
|
| I suspect what you mean by this is "outlets claiming to
| report 'news' but actually spreading misinformation".
|
| That's quite different from "disagreement".
| dev_by_day wrote:
| What would you call news outlets like MSNBC spreading lies
| about the Kyle Rittenhouse case? An honest mistake? Or
| calling the lab leak theory racist?
|
| Notice how this works?
|
| When a news source that is aligned with your political
| party gets it wrong "its ok" but when its a new source that
| is not aligned with your party its "spreading
| misinformation".
|
| There is no objective standard for misinformation so trying
| to say disagreement and misinformation are not the same
| depends entirely on what is the issue being discussed. Any
| issue with ambiguity can be dismissed far too easily by
| just claiming it "misinformation".
| deanCommie wrote:
| When the Lab leak theory had absolutely no evidence for
| it, and was being purported days after the start of the
| pandemic, it was racist.
|
| Later, the longer a root cause was not discovered, the
| more likely the theory became, and the less racist it
| became to speak about.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| I guess your assumption is that everyone left-aligned
| watches (and agrees with) MSNBC. That isn't true. I
| certainly don't watch it.
|
| There _are_ reliable news outlets. Don 't assume that
| just because an outlet has a political skew in the
| direction opposite from your preferred one that everyone
| you disagree with must watch and endorse it. That's a
| strawman.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| > That's a strawman.
|
| Its a strawman that you are introducing by saying:
|
| > I suspect what you mean by this is "outlets claiming to
| report 'news' but actually spreading misinformation".
|
| > That's quite different from "disagreement".
|
| I am pointing out that there is not a large difference
| between what you say is misinformation and disagreement.
| Many news outlets get things wrong and are guilty of
| allowing political bias to steer them towards saying
| things that are not true. You can't just call something
| misinformation because you disagree with it.
|
| Nearly every news outlet in this country has gotten
| things wrong at some point and a tenuous definition of
| misinformation could be used to make them all look bad.
|
| Citing something as "misinformation" is often a strawman
| argument and a word used to dismiss viewpoints people do
| not agree with on any issue that has some ambiguity,
| including the lab leak theory.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| I'll stop laughing when Fox News is no longer the most
| watched cable news outlet in the country. A self described
| _entertainment_ channel, who said under oath "no rational
| person would believe the things we say"
|
| I think CNN would try to hide under "entertainment" in front
| of a court of law, but have they actually been dragged in
| front of a court for lying?
| dev_by_day wrote:
| MSNBC has used the same "entertainment" defense when it was
| sued for defamation. All news media organizations use this
| defense, its not unique to Fox.
|
| https://greenwald.substack.com/p/a-court-ruled-rachel-
| maddow...
| nmz wrote:
| There's a clear distinction between any "Person's show"
| vs "channel news". I don't expect bill maher or the
| Oreilly factor to be news either.
| ajross wrote:
| Curious what you're citing here? The american right obviously
| has an _extremely_ robust selection of sources to choose from
| in every medium there is. You can read Breitbart or watch
| Fox, you can find multiple radio stations with talking heads
| in every market. You can find fellow travellers on Facebook
| or 4chan (or right here). The biggest podcast in the nation
| pushes a mostly conservative line.
|
| I mean, I'm sure that somewhere there's been a terrible abuse
| and someone got fired or whatever. It's a big country. But,
| I'm equally sure that whatever happened, you know about it
| because the news was delivered to you by conservative media.
|
| The US is fine. We had an authoritarian scare for a while,
| but the system held.
| user-the-name wrote:
| honkdaddy wrote:
| Are you talking about Joe Rogan? He's not a conservative.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| Please provide a single example of a media agency that is
| barred from publishing content because a "leftist" disagreed
| with it.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| The Hunter Biden Laptop story was openly censored, even
| when put forward by a journalist with the Post and Biden
| has admitted that laptop may have been his.
|
| https://nypost.com/2021/09/21/the-hunter-biden-laptop-is-
| con...
|
| https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2021/09/21/do
| u...
|
| Leftist bias at the intercept prevented Greenwald from
| publishing a story about it as well
| https://nypost.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-quits-the-
| inte...
| ryandrake wrote:
| News publications have to decide what is and isn't
| newsworthy, and it could be that this one just doesn't
| meet the bar. I know the right _really_ really wants it
| to finally take off and gather steam, since they invested
| so much into it. It 's a hard pill for them to swallow
| that HunterBidenLaptop just not that interesting or
| important. Kind of like Hillary's E-mails. At the end of
| the day nobody really cares about them.
|
| I mean, if I worked in a news room and wanted to publish
| a story about the president's cousin's roommate's great
| soup recipe, and the editor says "NO" does that mean I'm
| being censored?
| dev_by_day wrote:
| You asked for examples of censorship and it was given to
| you.
|
| Irregardless of Greenwald, you can't deny twitter and
| social media outlets banning a New York Post
| journalist(and the White House Press Secretary) for
| sharing that story was not egregious censorship.
|
| Banning articles from journalists is censorship. Period.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Sorry, but I didn't ask for anything upthread. You might
| have meant to reply to someone else. Trying not to get
| involved with a flamewar, but it should be noted that
| there are many possible explanations of a paper's
| editorial decisions that do not invoke censorship.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| To clarify I gave an example of censorship first and it
| was ignored by you to create a a long winded argument
| about Greenwald. You never refuted the point that the
| original story was banned (even before Greenwald was
| brought up) or that leftist bias may have factored into
| there choice to not publish that article that turned out
| to be credible. Intercept is a left bias rated outlet
| https://www.allsides.com/news-source/intercept a story
| about potential corruption from a candidates son is not
| the same thing as a "cousins recipe". That was a
| distasteful strawman.
| nouveaux wrote:
| I don't know enough about the Hunter Biden Laptop story
| to know what's true and what's not, but your WSJ link is
| the opinion section. Can you link to a WSJ article not
| from the opinion section?
| dev_by_day wrote:
| It was revealed to likely be real during the publishing
| of a book by a fairly neutral Politico journalist on
| Hunter Biden
|
| https://nypost.com/2021/09/21/the-hunter-biden-laptop-is-
| con...
|
| https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2021/09/21/
| dou...
| leereeves wrote:
| Its authenticity has even been acknowledged by The
| Guardian.
|
| _" Now, however, almost no one disputes [the laptop's]
| authenticity."_
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/feb/27/hunter-
| biden...
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| When a media agency internally decides not to publish
| something it might be biased, but that's generally not
| considered censorship. Censoring can be biased, but not
| all bias is censorship.
|
| Russia participates in censorship on a state level with
| its own state-run media agencies. These things are not
| equivalent. The Hunter Biden story is widely reported by
| numerous American media outlets.
| dev_by_day wrote:
| > The Hunter Biden story is widely reported by numerous
| American media outlets.
|
| And that story was banned on social media unfairly(this
| banning was cheered on by Dems and left leaning folks),
| even though it turned it to be credible later.
|
| It was egregious censorship is the main point I am making
| here.
|
| As bad as Putin? No. Was it bad? Yes.
| hunterb123 wrote:
| The censorship was Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube
| blocking it all at once before the election. The media
| helped by downplaying it and going with the Russian
| disinformation/hack lie.
|
| Playing semantics over whether omission of truth is bias
| vs. censorship doesn't make a strong argument.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| That's not really a good comparison. Being an asshole to
| journalists if really different than putting them in jail for
| their reporting. The difference here is that some Republicans
| who have no power to actually do that talk shit about doing it,
| but Putin actually jails a lot of journalists.
| cromd wrote:
| I don't think they're saying that Republicans are currently
| doing what Putin is currently doing. They said some people
| want to jail journalists, and you seem to be agreeing by
| saying those people "talk shit" about jailing journalists.
| Maybe one could say that talk is harmless, but I think most
| would challenge that.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| My claims is that the phrase "the previous American
| president also waged a war against every media outlet" is
| overblown nonsense. There are a mere handful of marginal
| Republican nobodies who support this stuff and we saw for 4
| years that the courts are happy to slap down any US
| politician makes big constitutional missteps.
| klyrs wrote:
| No, that phrase isn't 100% true. Trump didn't wage war on
| Brietbart, OAN, and the like. Only "mainstream media"
| like CNN and even Fox when they reported what he called
| "fake news," actually facts he didn't like.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| It's also not true at all. There was no war on any
| journalists. I'm not aware of a single journalist jailed
| by the Trump DOJ, the FCC didn't yank any licenses,
| nothing. It was all talk.
| cromd wrote:
| This seems to be largely about your definition of war. No
| elections were overturned, but could you say he waged war
| on elections? He had his team out there saying that Hugo
| Chavez created the rigged voting machines and that it was
| statistically impossible for Biden to have won. It was an
| ideological war, not a physical war. You don't have to
| jail anyone to nonetheless do broad damage to an
| institution. I agree that people can over-analyze sloppy
| comments from fringe weirdo politicians, but here is
| something the president tweeted:
|
| >"They can't stand the fact that this Administration has
| done more than virtually any other Administration in its
| first 2yrs," he continued. "They are truly the ENEMY OF
| THE PEOPLE!"
|
| (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/437610-trump
| -cal...)
|
| And surely media can be bad, can harm people, can lie,
| but "ENEMY" is interesting.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Being a shit-bag and. a bully just isn't a "war".
| Arguably the controversy saved most of the legacy media
| landscape from financial ruin and gave them 4 more years
| to adjust to some new revenue models, the NYT in
| particular seems to have figured out how to pivot to a
| profitable online subscriber model that works. It wasn't
| clear in mid 2016 that they would be able to do that.
|
| You can make a good case that the guy damaged the
| discourse and eroded trust in institutions, but news and
| journalism have flourished in recent years.
| klyrs wrote:
| During the BLM protests, there were hundreds of assaults
| and detentions of members of the press, along with an
| enhanced surveillance apparatus. That these actions
| didn't go through the strictest official channels doesn't
| mean that they didn't happen.
|
| Trump's commentary on the violence against the press:
| https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/19/media/trump-velshi-msnbc-
| shot...
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > During the BLM protests, there were hundreds of
| assaults and detentions of members of the press, along
| with an enhanced surveillance apparatus. That these
| actions didn't go through the strictest official channels
| doesn't mean that they didn't happen. Trump's commentary
| on the violence against the press:
| https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/19/media/trump-velshi-msnbc-
| shot...
|
| I agree that local police assaulting journalists is
| awful, they should be fired and prosecuted. And I'm aware
| that Trump made some dumb ass comments praising that
| shit, but it doesn't constitute a war on the press.
| You're talking about some isolated disparate instances
| perpetrated by unrelated local police departments during
| a summer of protests and riots. That isn't an act of the
| executive branch of the federal government. The US
| doesn't have a strong presidential system like say for
| example France. The us president has virtually 0 control
| over any individual police departments other than
| threatening to yank some drug war funding.
|
| There do exist levers the executive branch could pull to
| attack the press, e.g. via the FCC or by having the DOJ
| prosecute sources. The Trump admin didn't do those things
| despite all of his bluster. He basically ended the policy
| of aggressively prosecuting leakers and spent all day
| engaging with the media. Sure he's a shit bag who did
| crimes, but the war on the press stuff is overblown.
| klyrs wrote:
| > The Trump admin didn't do those things despite all of
| his bluster.
|
| Yes, it's an administrative motte & bailey. Police
| support, individual and organizational, for Trump is
| incredibly high and their loyalty to him transcends
| official channels. He's explicitly endorsed violence
| against journalists, brutality towards suspects, and
| celebrated the execution of Michael Reinoehl. While he
| didn't have direct control over the state police, he
| spoke directly to them frequently, and encouraged all of
| this.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Again, encouraging bad actors is 100% different from
| using the full power of the executive branch to persecute
| journalists which he did not do, and Russia does.
| klyrs wrote:
| Yeah, Russia is definitely worse, but I wouldn't say 100%
| different. Trump _loves_ Putin and the power he wields.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > Trump loves Putin and the power he wields.
|
| That doesn't really mean anything on the ground. The
| situation in the US is 100% different. Some dumb-ass
| president can love authoritarian shit all they want, but
| don't have a ton of actual power to lock up journalists.
| Russia just today shut down its last non-government owned
| TV station. That just can't happen in the US legally, and
| the courts are quite protective of speech and property
| here. The Trump years saw numerous cases of supposedly
| friendly judges telling him to fuck off. And the few
| avenues he did have to legally attack journalists, like
| prosecuting their sources, he didn't use unlike the
| previous administration.
|
| Frankly he's just a stupid demagogue, and a symptom of
| the erosion of trust in institutions. But he didn't wage
| war on the press. THere's no evidence to support that
| outside of his bluster. He belongs in jail, but not for
| this.
| jmull wrote:
| It's pretty weird this comment is downvoted to being greyed
| out at the moment.
|
| As if it's wrong to point out that tweeting and a 15 year
| jail sentence are not equivalent.
|
| I can't understand what this means... are there really
| Russian vote-bots here or something?
| pmcollins wrote:
| clearly, yes
| ch4s3 wrote:
| I get it to some extent. People really hate Trump, and I
| understand that and largely agree. I think it can be
| threatening to people when their identity is wrapped up in
| really heated partisanship to have an attack on their
| enemies questioned. It's only human to want to rally around
| something and have a hated outsider. And Trump truly is a
| bag of shit, he just wasn't as bad on this one narrow thing
| as newspapers and cable news might want you to think.
| klyrs wrote:
| Meanwhile, on page 2:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30541671
| [deleted]
| ch4s3 wrote:
| What do you want me to say? They shouldn't be doing that
| and anyone involved should be booted out of government.
| I've long argued that most of the really awful shit done by
| the US domestically is perpetrated by local governments.
| They're still not going to be able to successfully
| prosecute any journalists.
| frabbit wrote:
| That's okay. We can always play with semantic definitions of
| what it means to be a journalist -- and lock Julian Assange
| up without trial.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Assange should be let go, what's happened to him has been
| awful. But that's the result of the Obama administration's
| policy and is literally 1 person vs. the eradication of all
| independent press in an entire nation. We should free
| Assange and condemn Russia jailing at least 293 journalists
| right now.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| The backchannels were Manafort/Kilimnik, Michael Flynn/Kislyak,
| and more.
| https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-...
| is a digestible background. That is just the US - most European
| countries have analogues, as do key Asian, African, and South
| American countries.
|
| The are not separate phenomenon at different stages, they are a
| global, coordinated group. They were coordinated by the massive
| cash flows coordinated by a small group in Russia. The use
| coordinated tactics, in concert with each other.
| pohl wrote:
| Yes, it's the same trans-national crime syndicate. It's the
| same war, even - it's just recently became kinetic. Amazing
| the ROI that Vlad got from TFG.
| areyousure wrote:
| In case anyone is curious, it appears that ROI = "return on
| investment", Vlad = Vladimir Putin, and TFG = "the former
| guy" = Donald Trump. It appears to be the ~4th time the
| latter abbreviation has been used on this site.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27920739
| squarefoot wrote:
| Does it sound surprising that they all are Putin strong
| supporters?
| lkxijlewlf wrote:
| Nope. Putin has played the long game by buying sympathy from
| the American Right.
| meragrin_ wrote:
| "We're protecting Germany, we're protecting France, we're
| protecting all of these countries. And then numerous of the
| countries go out and make a pipeline deal with Russia where
| they're paying billions of dollars into the coffers of
| Russia.
|
| "So we're supposed to protect you against Russia and you pay
| billions of dollars to Russia and I think that's very
| inappropriate"
|
| Trump 2018
|
| https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-summit-
| pipeline/trum...
| squarefoot wrote:
| "I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and
| I said, "This is genius." Putin declares a big portion of
| the Ukraine -- of Ukraine. Putin declares it as
| independent. Oh, that's wonderful. (sarcastic)
|
| So, Putin is now saying, "It's independent," a large
| section of Ukraine. I said, "How smart is that?" _And he's
| gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. That's strongest peace
| force... We could use that on our southern border. That's
| the strongest peace force I've ever seen. There were more
| army tanks than I've ever seen. They're gonna keep peace
| all right._ No, but think of it. Here's a guy who's very
| savvy... I know him very well. Very, very well. "
|
| Trump 02/22/2022.
|
| (emphasis mine)
|
| Full audio interview here:
|
| https://www.clayandbuck.com/president-trump-with-cb-from-
| mar...
| calculatte wrote:
| EtherTyper wrote:
| Or for a more concrete example, look at how both Republicans
| and Democrats are treating Julian Assange. Investigative
| journalism and whistleblowing are under attack by all political
| factions and by the justice system, today. We cannot treat
| anti-free-press authoritarianism in the West as an "early
| stage" or tomorrow's problem.
| user-the-name wrote:
| csee wrote:
| There's no equivalence here. Russia has assassinated about 50
| journalists under Putin and imprisoned/beaten many more. They
| have a very tight stranglehold on press freedom.
|
| But yes, we need to take it extremely seriously in the West
| and fight against any and all encroachments so that we don't
| slide further towards authoritarianism. Recent trends have
| been concerning.
| malfist wrote:
| Julian Assange isn't a journalist though. He was a contractor
| trusted with protected information which he then publicized.
| There's a big difference between a journalist finding and
| publishing information, and a mole in our government sharing
| our secrets with people.
|
| And that's ignoring the whole rape thing with Assange.
| scatters wrote:
| You're confusing Snowden with Assange. (And probably
| forgetting the role of Manning.)
| shagmin wrote:
| Chelsea Manning may be a better comparison since the US
| actually sentenced her, but even then that was about a leak
| with classified information rather than just punishing the
| press for being critical of the government. And she was
| arrested and served time (7 years?) and then got out, while
| coming out as transgendered (imagine going through that in
| Russian prison). It's not ideal, but it could be taken as an
| example of how much better it is in the US also.
| bastardoperator wrote:
| How are they treating him considering he's still in the UK?
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-
| sup...
|
| > In 2010, Assange gained unauthorized access to a government
| computer system of a NATO country. In 2012, Assange
| communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group
| LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and
| provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack.
|
| > Assange conspired with Army Intelligence Analyst Chelsea
| Manning to crack a password hash to a classified U.S.
| Department of Defense computer.
|
| If this is true then he is not a journalist.
| rovolo wrote:
| A difference is that Assange/Manning had to be spreading
| something true to be charged, whereas this targets anything
| "false".
| notshuttingdown wrote:
| If you have access to all other country's news sources, and
| they're all contradicting your govt... what are the chances your
| govt is right and the rest of the world is wrong?
| conradfr wrote:
| "We have always been at war with Westernworld."
| thejackgoode wrote:
| Metastasis of the Cold War, this is what it is. Like the world
| wars are connected, this war is also connected to CW. USSR did
| not disintegrate enough, ideologically.
| pessimizer wrote:
| What are the odds the same law will spring up in the US, but be
| good when we do it?
| ajross wrote:
| Almost certain that I read somewhere that Congress shall make
| no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
| kemitchell wrote:
| The constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees freedom
| of speech and prohibits censorship. I seem to recall the
| Soviet Union had a pretty spiffy constitution, too. The
| United States certainly did, during the Palmer Raids, during
| McCarthyism.
|
| Constitutions alone do nothing. If we're not on guard,
| collectively, we could easily end up without freedom of
| speech and press in practice.
| crocodiletears wrote:
| Probably in the EU, but that stuff gets squirreled in through
| private institutions here. Information clearing-houses like
| Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. will take it upon themselves
| after encouragement from the media and the government.
| crocodiletears wrote:
| Punctuates my point:
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/3/22960223/reddit-ukraine-
| ru...
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/3/22959636/spotify-
| removes-r...
| whoomp12342 wrote:
| this is the problem with the fake news narrative
| mediumsmart wrote:
| giuliomagnifico wrote:
| Fortunately the law has not been approved, but if it will be
| approved, this would make Russia even worse place.
| kitd wrote:
| Russia complaining about fake news is jaw-dropping in its irony.
| They're the ones who turned fake news into an art form. And as an
| authoritarian government, theyshould have no problem dealing with
| it.
| anthk wrote:
| I guess why:
|
| https://nitter.snopyta.org/MarkAmesExiled/status/14991264245...
|
| No one is innocent here. On Spanish media they dared to use
| videogame images (Arma 3) as real footage, ditto with a Chinese
| civil explosion (causality/accident) as a Russia bombing strike.
| mediumsmart wrote:
| magicalist wrote:
| > _No one is innocent_
|
| I'm going to go with jailing citizens for 15 years as much
| worse than mildly critical journalists in Russia.
|
| Ignoring your combo whataboutism and gish gallop. Don't think
| Russia has much jurisdiction over some Spanish news channel.
| anthk wrote:
| Lithuania will be doing the exact same.
| anthk wrote:
| https://wikiless.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_Ukraine?lang=en
|
| Look what happened in Ukraine. Among neonazis, they supported
| this:
|
| Ukraine's 2017 education law will make Ukrainian the required
| language of study in state schools from the fifth grade on,
| although it allows instruction in other languages as a
| separate subject,[65][66][67] to be phased in in 2023.[68]
| Since 2017, the Hungary-Ukraine relations rapidly
| deteriorated over the issue of the Hungarian minority in
| Ukraine.[69] According to the New Europe:
|
| The latest row between Kiev and Budapest comes on the heels
| of a bitter dispute over a decision by Ukraine's parliament -
| the Verkhovna Rada - to pass a legislative package on
| education that bars primary education to all students in any
| language but Ukrainian. The move has been widely condemned by
| the international community as needlessly provocative as it
| forces the historically bilingual population of 45 million
| people who use Russian and Ukrainian interchangeably as
| mother tongues to become monolingual. Furthermore, the large
| minorities of Hungarians, Jews, Poles, Tatars, Gypsies,
| Romanians, Caucasians, and Gagauz generally speak and receive
| some formal or informal education in their own national
| languages, all of which will be adversely affected by the new
| draconian language statute.
|
| Also:
|
| Lviv Oblast Unian reported that "A ban on the use of cultural
| products, namely movies, books, songs, etc., in the Russian
| language in the public has been introduced" in the Lviv
| Oblast in September 2018.[71] Critics[who?] called the law
| ill-defined, illegal, and unconstitutional, and a successful
| January 2019 court challenge by the Chuhuiv Human Rights
| Group was dismissed on technical grounds in May, and could
| lead to a complaint before the European Court of Human
| Rights.[72]
|
| They tried to ban the public usage of Russian in Ukraine.
|
| That's a little step towards fascism.
| kmeisthax wrote:
| One little step towards fascism does not justify the
| _massive leap towards fascism_ that is entailed by an
| autocratic regime like Putin 's invading their neighbors.
| artem247 wrote:
| I've finished state with Ukrainian as a primary language of
| instruction, being a Russian speaker. That was long time
| ago, more than 15 years. To be honest, it is not a big
| deal, you use both languages daily, you watch movies in
| both languages and so on.
|
| I also don't get "among neo-nazis" line.
|
| In any case language question is more a Russian propaganda
| talking point, I don't see it being major topic in the
| Ukrainian political life.
| magicalist wrote:
| Posting more and longer non sequiturs just doubles down on
| the whole "combo whataboutism and gish gallop" thing.
| anthk wrote:
| OFC, I agree. But here no one is trully innocent and
| there were really borderline nazi laws on non Ukranian
| languages that even the Francoist Spain didn't have until
| we put the fascist regime back to the post war era and
| not the one post US relations.
|
| Hope the war ends soon, the "rebel" provinces gets a
| referendum and if they opt to be part of Russia, they
| should have a clause to be Russian AND part of the
| European Union. Everyone wins. Russia too, even if it
| "hates" the West they need us the Europeans economically
| far more than a war mongering USA.
| foxyv wrote:
| I get the impression that Putin was on the edge of losing Russia
| before Ukraine. Ukraine may be a final ploy for him to stay in
| power. Wartime crack downs, crippling political rivals with loss
| of large foreign assets, insulating Russia from external media,
| cutting domestic media, mobilizing troops and reserves. All of
| this cements a shaky position which was being undermined by
| foreign and domestic political groups.
|
| We'll see how the gamble goes. We may see Russia become North
| Korea 2.0 with the Putin family as the new Tzars of Russia. Or
| maybe a second governmental collapse is imminent.
| guilhas wrote:
| Boris Johnson to make protests that cause 'annoyance' illegal,
| with prison sentences of up to 10 years
| https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-outlaw-protest...
|
| UK law people making social media posts could face two years in
| prison over Fake News https://www.rt.com/uk/539103-trolls-prison-
| psychological-har...
| asdswe wrote:
| Putin is no better than Hitler and nothing the Russian government
| says can be trusted. They only respect force, nothing else.
| tgv wrote:
| I'm sorry, but that's a bizarre remark. Hitler can be held
| accountable for millions of deaths, in all kinds of inhuman
| ways. Putin is nowhere near that and I cannot see that happen
| either.
| ukraineally wrote:
| I was very surprised to see virtually all hacking groups declare
| war on russia over this war. So many APT groups are Russian but
| they do oppose the war. The expected cyber war is all Russia's to
| deal with.
|
| The actual war isn't going well at all. Their reg troops are
| driving by wrecked russian equipment destroying their morale.
|
| So they can't deal with reality, send everyone who dissents to
| prison.
| squidwardeffigy wrote:
| sjmm1989 wrote:
| Hmmm... seems oddly reminiscent of something once done in a
| certain countries history. Almost as if it is being repeated.
| buscoquadnary wrote:
| I'm just waiting for them to press the button to flip their UN
| sign.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5u1u5IuLec
| krapp wrote:
| better to post it at the relevant timestamp:
| https://youtu.be/L5u1u5IuLec?t=69
| mediumsmart wrote:
| you could not start a war with a fake vial of wmd. no one would
| do that.
| pixl97 wrote:
| Like a set of steel blinds.
| asats wrote:
| Two out of the last three remaining somewhat independent media
| that were still operating in the country (already under major
| restrictions) were also shut down, TV rain just did their last
| transmission and walked out of the studio crying:
|
| https://youtu.be/e4an0MlF27k?t=11397
|
| Twitter and facebook are being blocked. Youtube and group chats
| in telegram/signal/etc are the only things left right now.
|
| 7670 people have been detained so far.
| madaxe_again wrote:
| They ended with swan lake, which is rather apt.
| okareaman wrote:
| > Twitter and facebook are being blocked
|
| This is the silver lining as people on Reddit are reporting a
| marked decrease in right wing trolling in all their social
| media
| quasse wrote:
| This is something I'm very interested in. Is the average
| Western consumer of COVID misinformation, racial hate-
| baiting, etc. seeing a sudden decrease in new "content" to
| share?
|
| Does anyone know of any organizations studying the ongoing
| levels of creation and engagement with that type of content?
| okareaman wrote:
| This was shared on Reddit by someone to back up the claims
|
| https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/hamilton-dashboard/
| csee wrote:
| Are the blocks that Russia is implementing avoidable with a
| VPN?
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| Which country do we have to sanction to cut down on all the
| left-wing trolling and astroturfing on reddit?
| snek_case wrote:
| Very similar to what China has done. Seems that it's
| unfortunately pretty effective. Control the information the
| people are fed and they control public opinion.
| [deleted]
| redisman wrote:
| My hunch is that works fine with 10% GDP growth every year.
| Without it? To be seen.
| squidwardeffigy wrote:
| t_mann wrote:
| Russia turning into North Korea v2 at lightning speed...
| coolso wrote:
| Didn't Abe Lincoln pull this same stunt too?
| sAbakumoff wrote:
| That's not even the worst part.
|
| Another proposition is to send anti-war protesters to war "so
| that they can see what's actually going on".
| rillazawayyy wrote:
| So the idea is to arm the anti-war protestors, then put them
| near the officers who are running the war on the ground?
|
| Maybe I'm being cynical, but I think there may be some
| potential problems with that approach.
| jmeister wrote:
| Ironically this article itself is fake news:
|
| 1. It is just a proposal: "The proposed legislation, which is
| supported by Vyacheslav Volodin, the parliamentary speaker, a
| close ally of President Putin, could be discussed by parliament
| as early as this week, state television reported."
|
| 2. Another wild proposal, to forcibly conscript protestors, was
| shot down by Kremlin:
|
| https://twitter.com/GazetaRu/status/1499402119836622858
|
| It's disappointing to see not one comment here suggesting that
| someone read beyond the headline. Et tu, Hacker News?
| zuminator wrote:
| How is the article fake news when it agrees with (is literally
| the source for) your main point?
| jmeister wrote:
| It managed to mislead the purportedly wise readership of this
| forum.
|
| Fake news doesn't mean literally everything in the article is
| fake. It's a metaphor
| lolinder wrote:
| "Have I ever lied to you?"
|
| Silverfish's brow furrowed. "Well," he said, "yesterday you
| said--"
|
| "I mean _metaphorically_ ," said Dibbler quickly.
|
| "Oh. Well. Metaphorically? I suppose not--"
|
| "There you are, then."
|
| -- Terry Pratchett
| TAKEMYMONEY wrote:
| "Fake news" isn't a metaphor, it's a thought-terminating
| cliche. It literally _literally_ means the news is a sham,
| not genuine.
|
| To your credit "to" in the headline here could be
| considered misleading. It implies "[If the proposal by
| Volodin, a close ally of Putin, is successful] Russia to
| punish 'fake news'".
| ilamont wrote:
| Ripping a page from Hong Kong's "national security" law under the
| PRC, which resulted in Apple Daily publisher Jimmy Lai being
| sentenced to prison (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-
| asia-56770567). The law even goes after people not living in Hong
| Kong:
|
| _The wording of the Hong Kong national security law asserts
| jurisdiction over people who are not residents of Hong Kong and
| have never even set foot there. This means anyone on Earth,
| regardless of nationality or location, can technically be deemed
| to have violated this law and face arrest and prosecution if they
| are in a Chinese jurisdiction, even for transit._
|
| https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/07/hong-kong-nat...
| hprotagonist wrote:
| A new arrival to Gulag is asked: "What were you given 10 years
| for?" - "For nothing!" - "Don't lie to us here, now! Everybody
| knows 'for nothing' is 3 years."
| aivisol wrote:
| "I am American, I live in a free country: I can go to a main
| square and call president (Reagan/Nixon/whatever) an idiot and
| nothing will happen to me!" - "Well, I am Soviet citizen, I
| also live in a free country: I can go to a main square and call
| president (Reagan/Nixon/whatever) an idiot and nothing will
| happen to me!"
| hunterb123 wrote:
| I loved when Reagan told Soviet jokes, that was one of them.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN3z3eSVG7A
|
| The YT comment section actually has a few gems too.
| mhh__ wrote:
| I always get that video recommended underneath footage of
| atomic bombs going off or movies like threads.
|
| Fitting, because the Reagan administration didn't realize
| at the time that they were accidently convincing the
| increasingly old men leading the USSR that the US was
| preparing a first strike on the evil empire.
| mc32 wrote:
| Heh. The one where he has two Russians arguing and one
| asked whether the SU was at the pinnacle of communism and
| his buddy's answer was hell no, things are gonna get a lot
| worse!
| k0k0r0 wrote:
| Putin sitting alone in some room. On the door: (Knock knock)
| Putin: "Who's there?" From outside: "Kyiv" Putin: "I don't get
| it." From outside: "That's right. You won't."
| ch4s3 wrote:
| I literally laughed out loud when I hit that line in Gulag
| Archipelago. Solzhenitsyn was brilliant.
| gre wrote:
| Solzhenitsyn was an anti-semite and a total liar.
| http://www.vestnik.com/issues/2003/0611/win/reznik.htm
|
| edit: his anti-semitism is debatable
| powerslacker wrote:
| Even if he was an antisemite at one point in his life or
| even his entire life, how does that change what the
| original poster said about him - that he was brilliant?
|
| I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this kind of knee-
| jerk response across many avenues (e.g. x is an antisemite,
| is hitler, is a facist, is a commie, is a trump supporter)
| and I don't understand it.
|
| In the medieval era most people participating in European
| civilization would qualify for the modern definition of
| antisemitism. Should I simply disregard the good works of
| writers and thinkers from that time period and geography?
|
| If anything I am pro-semite but it's a struggle for me to
| grasp why the antisemitism of an individual should affect
| my opinion of their work or ideas. Even though I don't
| approve of their opinions regarding a people group it
| simply does not follow that I ought to dismiss everything
| they have ever said.
| gre wrote:
| Was Elizabeth Holmes brilliant for defrauding Silicon
| Valley for over a decade with Theranos? By your
| standards, yes.
|
| If Solzhenitsyn writes a brilliant but mostly exaggerated
| and fictitious account of Communist Russia, do you really
| want to celebrate this achievement? I do not and that's
| why I posted.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Even if The Gulag Archipelago was mostly fictitious,
| which it certainly is not, it would still be a staggering
| work of literary brilliance. There is quite literally no
| other work I'm aware of in Western literature that is
| even comparable. The prose is incredible, moving, at
| times dark and punishing, and in a turn hilarious and you
| really feel the wight of the exercise of having written
| the thing while reading it.
|
| The broad facts are well supported by what's come out of
| Soviet archives since the 90s and further details are
| supported by the Mitrokhin Archive. The surviving Stasi
| archives also paint a similar picture.
| powerslacker wrote:
| > Was Elizabeth Holmes brilliant for defrauding Silicon
| Valley for over a decade with Theranos? By your
| standards, yes.
|
| It's not just my standards. I could be wrong here, but I
| think most people would find her brilliant. That's part
| of why her fraudulent behavior was so successful.
|
| Not sure you meant to, but you've dodged my main
| question. Why should I factor in his antisemitism
| (alleged or not) when considering his brilliance?
|
| You originally said Solzhenitsyn was antisemitic, now you
| are claiming he wrote an exaggerated account of Communist
| Russia. Either or both of those claims may be true. I
| don't know the veracity of either and I'm not arguing
| those. I'm asking *why I should disregard his purported
| brilliance altogether even if those claims are true*?
|
| Washington owned slaves. Edison likely exploited his
| workers for his own gain. Martin Luther was an
| antisemite. Nelson Mandela had ties to terrorists. Joan
| of Arc was a heretic. Theodora was effectively a
| prostitute at one point. These men and women all did and
| said things we would not approve of, and yet there are
| qualities they held and actions they took which we
| celebrate to this day. I don't see how some corrupt part
| of their character gives cause to dismiss them entirely.
| gre wrote:
| He is brilliant, sure. This is the problem.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| I don't read Russian, so I can't comment on that article.
|
| I don't find the anti-semitism charge very credible, he
| speaks out against anti-semitism very strongly in both the
| Gulag Archipelago, and several essays. He also claimed that
| an anti-semitic essay attributed to him was a hatched job
| by the KGB, which seems at least possible. I also stand by
| my claim that he was a brilliant writer. I think if you try
| to take everything in his descriptions of the Gulag system
| as literal fact, you'll find historical discrepancies, but
| his work isn't meant to be wholly historic, but rather more
| expansive.
| polskado wrote:
| It's not credible, and anyone who has read more
| Solzhenitsyn than a summary of _Two Hundred Years
| Together_ knows that.
|
| When he published it he spoke of Jewish friends praising
| Russian silence on the history he covered. This is kind
| of the same thing. There is a really unfortunate tendency
| by certain groups to equivocate criticism of historical
| Jewish actions with criticism of the Jewish people, and
| the word antisemitic has lost almost all meaning as a
| result. Reaction to that book is far from the sole
| example.
|
| It is possible to criticize the behavior of certain
| historical Jews without filling your heart with hate for
| an entire people and preaching Hitler's ideologies. That
| is a nuance that is lost by Jewish people who call others
| "antisemitic" at the first hint of criticism. That said,
| however, it is also somewhat fair because the Jewish
| people have endured unspeakable horrors in a blink of
| history.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| I've read The Gulag Archipelago and some essays, but not
| Two Hundred Years Togethers so I can't comment on that
| work. I generally get the sense from his work that I have
| read that he harbored no ill will towards anyone based on
| ethnic or Religious identity.
| frabbit wrote:
| > I think if you try to take everything in his
| descriptions of the Gulag system as literal fact, you'll
| find historical discrepancies
|
| What ones stand out for you? I am relatively ignorant on
| the subject. Your comment stimulated me to google a bit
| and I came up with this1 critical (and currently topical)
| criticism of him for anti-semitism in which he is accused
| of blaming Jewish people for playing a leading role in
| the red terror:
|
| His reported self defense included a reference to the
| Kiev/Kyiv Cheka (precursors to OGPU and NKVD): 'To
| explain the actions of the Kiev cheka [secret police]
| only by the fact that two thirds were Jews, is certainly
| incorrect."'
|
| 1. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jan/25/russia.b
| ooks
| ch4s3 wrote:
| I think he gets some fair criticism for reporting some
| third hand accounts of some mass executions and
| publishing some inflated numbers, but I don't think his
| intention was to pin those down precisely, but rather to
| give account of the magnitude of the tragedy.
| frabbit wrote:
| Sidenote: regardless of the merits of the book or its
| criticisms I thought this was a funny line: "This book is
| a weak one professionally. Factually, it is so bad as to
| be beyond criticism. "
| ch4s3 wrote:
| So I found a translation of that article and another
| article by the author. It seems like the gripe is that
| Solzhenitsyn wrote about some Bolsheviks and gulag camp
| administrators in a way that drew attention to their Jewish
| identity, and that leads some critics to believe he was in
| fact an anti-semite. Is that a fair reading?
|
| I don't actually see any evidence that his portrayal of
| life in the Soviet Union was anything but accurate, at
| least from the perspectives available to him at the time.
| I'm sure there were a great many possible life experiences,
| especially for people born after the terror, but the terror
| too was part of the Soviet experience.
| tgv wrote:
| How does every Russian joke begin? By looking over your
| shoulder.
| figaroniguzo wrote:
| Europe just banned Russian TVs from broadcasting because they
| didn't agree with the content...
| https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-bans-rt-sputnik-bann...
| vernie wrote:
| What TVs are made in Russia?
| jagrsw wrote:
| I used to have Viesna (spring) -
| https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/ussr-tv-
| vesna-c-276-3d-...
|
| It even had an additional electronic component which made it
| accept PAL signal, in addition to its native SECAM.
|
| PS: Some say SECAM was technically superior to PAL, but
| dunno.
| vernie wrote:
| I think SECAM and PAL were roughly equivalent and both had
| better spatial resolution than NTSC but the 25 Hz frame
| rate never sat well with me.
| eljlk34yl34 wrote:
| IanDrake wrote:
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-03 23:02 UTC)