Rich in that coppery, vanadiummy, thing

The European Values thinktank, which has received money from the UK and US governments, as well as the European commission, recently published a report that listed more than 2,000 US and European politicians who have appeared on RT.

Monika Richter, the report’s author, said RT’s purpose was “to fundamentally pollute the information space”.

“People who don’t understand this issue very well might think it’s harmless to appear on a satirical show, but it’s a failure of judgment and a lack of imagination in understanding how insidious the whole machine is,” she said.

There is an actually EU owned and run TV station. But, you know, obviously, that propagandises for the right and just values on the taxpayers’ money so that’s alright then.

10 thoughts on “Rich in that coppery, vanadiummy, thing”

  1. The European Values thinktank, which has received money from the UK and US governments, as well as the European commission, recently published a report that listed more than 2,000 US and European politicians who fundamentally pollute the information space.

    Only 2,000?

    You’d have thought they’d have at least put some effort in.

  2. The Septic Deep State efforts against RT are of a laughably low standard. As is the entire “Trump/Russia ” cockrot.

    And best of all several numb cunts are trying to extend it to saying that the Russians hacked Brexit as well.

    Is there nothing those Ruskies can’t do? Apart from feed their people, win the Cold War and avoid mass alcoholism.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    So their lies are better than “our” lies? Perhaps we need better liars in charge.

    No one objected to Russian disinformation when it mattered – half the EU leadership supported Soviet lies about the Vietnam War. The protests were largely manufactured and paid for by the Soviet Union. It is absurd to see people who bought into it then complaining now.

  4. Solid Steve 2: Squirrels of The Patriots

    This half-hearted new McCarthyism is so weak even homeopaths think it’s bollocks.

    What’s interesting isn’t the tinfoil tampon conspiracy theories about OMG PUTIN HACKED BREXIT AND CATALUNIA AND HILLARY CLINTON’S BRAIN AND… is that they’re observably less believable than even the most nakedly dishonest of previous official scares, such as Saddam’s magic WMD.

    It’s as if they can’t be arsed coming up with plausible villains of the week anymore.

  5. The “fake news” thing is just classic collusion between existing producers. And supported by “their” politicians against the new politicians using the new media.

    Not going to win, of course.

  6. Steve etc:”It’s as if they can’t be arsed coming up with plausible villains of the week anymore.”

    They can’t even be arsed coming up with plausible anything any longer.

    Compare the success of the JFK “Lone Nut” caper with the Boston Bombers Swiss-cheese-of-plot-holes mess let alone the Vegas debacle. They are having to shut down stories in the MSM in a matter of days/weeks now because that many frayed ends are sticking out begging to be pulled on.

    The stuff they come up with nowadays is so turgid, confused and just piss-poor that if their evil did not show up their moral bankruptcy their Hollywood-like lack of new ideas and love of tired old remakes would.

  7. Bloke in North Dorset

    I cant remember if I said it here or elsewhere, but it’s worth repeating, there’s a serious amount of the world that considers the BBC to be a government propaganda arm that is trying to destabilise their country.

    It’s pure arrogance, verging on racism, to believe we alone are virtuous and foreign aren’t.

  8. @Chris Miller

    I have and at the time I did, it was a bit weird.

    I think it had the same basic problem that would afflict a pan-European newspaper – it’s just the wrong-shaped arena.

    What’s major news in France (local elections or a close parliamentary vote or yet another strike or some scandal or death of a politician no non-frog has ever heard of) may hardly be worth a snippet of coverage in neighbouring German or Spanish media, let alone in the Finnish or Greek or Polish or Irish press. There isn’t the time or space to jump around getting the views from 30-odd relevant European capitals. And if you stick to stories that have cross-border importance, then you might as well stick to the more traditional kind of global news.

    There are different levels at which news coverage makes sense: local, regional, national, international. “European” doesn’t seem to be a good fit between “national” and “international” – there just isn’t really, at least yet, a genuine “European perspective”. And as such, a “European news agenda” looks like a cobbling-together of quite random stories, with a feeling that you must be missing stuff of equal priority from those states that didn’t get picked in the draw today, particularly from wherever you’re actually interested in, and that you really can’t bring yourself to care about many of the pieces that have reached the screen. The TV channel is inconveniently linear; unlike a website or news magazine, you can’t just skip the bits that don’t concern you in any way and focus on the regions you do.

    There might be a Brussels perspective, of course, but that’s really not quite the same thing. One for the wonks to follow, not us plebs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *