While it is easy to use phrases like “use critical thinking”, this is not easy for elders or cousins in families to be told, as this is not lucid to understand in a snap. It is essential for criticism to be easily communicable to ordinary people that watch Google Feed or MSN News daily, and I feel that such criticism is not even easy to access or read, considering ordinary people have been cornered from MSM, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and rest of Big Tech and Western media apparatus.
If you love your BBC and CNN feeds, avoid this post, this is not for you.
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy 🔍
If your post meets the following criteria, it’s welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
- 0 users online
- 217 users / day
- 934 users / week
- 2.44K users / month
- 5.59K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 3.07K Posts
- 119K Comments
- Modlog
I don’t understand the last part. If someone loves BBC/CNN they are incapable of criticising them?
Yeah that’s kinda weird. The BBC is not out their intentionally doing bad journalism at an institutional level, but I’m sure it happens. It’d be good to learn about these cases and their causes.
BBC intentionally does dishonest journalism.
https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/1414061311986524161
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rqlRddGgdY
The difference is that the BBC is openly using a US funded Australian cyber expert as a source.
The story is about Chinese state funded influencers not operating openly.
Can you not see the difference?
What’s happened to Hong Kong press freedoms since China took it back?
USA calls Australia its Deputy Sheriff in Asian region, and has a military base where Australians are prohibited from entering. Australia is a vassal state of USA. I wonder if there must be a conflict of interest, especially with Australia’s balls tightly clutches with ASPI funded by US weapon manufacturers.
Can you not see the problem?
Do I even have to elaborate on Council of Foreign Relations, Bilderberg and Murdoch media, USAGM outlets, NED funded news and media outlets, NGOs, “independent” presstitutes? Do I have to elaborate on Julian Assange?
Hong Kong is still higher on Freedom Index than USA. Freedom and democracy are in no way tied to Anglo neoliberal
dictatorshipdemocracy model.Come on, mate. Hong Kong’s freedom index score is 42, USA is 83, Australia is 95 (source). At least try and avoid making things up if you want to seem like you’re having a good faith discussion.
Does that mean USA and Australia don’t have problems? Of course they have problems, big ones even, you mentioned some genuine problems here in your comment. That’s not the issue at hand though. Nobody is claiming these countries are problem free. It’s you who is claiming certain news outlets are untrustworthy propaganda pieces. You made a claim, got a reasonable response and now it seems you are gish galloping.
It’s starting to feel like you have an agenda though to be honest. I personally find your assertion that people who love BBC/CNN are incapable of criticising them quite unhealthy. We can and should be critical of things especially things we are fans of.
> you are gish galloping.
I can see why its futile to talk to westerners. I will talk to someone and then someone like you will come and shit all over like a crow and fly away. Brandolini’s Law takes effect and people like us are forced to spend 10x the effort to correct misinformation.
Hong Kong used to be at #3 while USA was at #17. How come the very day Hong Kong gets freed of UK colonialism after more than 90 years, and implements National Security Law to protect itself, its “freedom” drops down? Is being a vassal state or colony of UK/USA the marker of freedom in these indexes? If so, the index seems to be a marker of how much of a western bootlicker a country really is, making “freedom” just a brand name with no worth.
It is a well established fact that Hong Kong “protest” was a CIA manufactured riot. Even Ted Cruz went to cheer rioters. What if a major Chinese politician went to USA to cheer Jan 6 insurrection? All of you would screech blackboards over it.
I think this would be useful for you to reflect on.
Also Wikipedia has a great article on Gish galloping if you’re in a country where you can access that.
I doubt you can be saved. West needs to fall and doom beyond recovery and be unable to exploit rest of non-Anglo world, so that morons like you are forced to act in line.
I think it is better for me to not engage with a dishonest manipulative white saviour. And I can read anything I want from India, and could use VPNs in China, Russia, and all the places western circus clowns call bad.
Fair enough, I agree a lot of the western countries do messed up shit and should definitely be held to account. I just don’t have such a rosy eyed view of the dictatorships of the world either (glad you were able to circumvent the censorship laws while you were there btw although not sure why you would want to do that? Do you disagree with the states views?). I’d also suggest trying to stay away from the saviour retoric though, it’s never healthy no matter who is using it and in this case it just comes across as a bit of a bad joke if I’m honest, particularly as I don’t even live in a western country.
Anyway, India is a really beautiful place, wish you and your folks all the best.
Damn bro, you handled that like a boss.
I hate your kind of Western people even more, with this sugarcoating tactic meant to defuse the very animosity that is born of your “holier than thou” attitude of “we know whats best for you”. Stop being so fucking arrogant, Anglo-Saxons. We hate it. And its best to stop acting like you folks know what is best for rest of the world.
Your comments reek of this “we know whats best, stfu” attitude. Get a reality check, because you people live in lalaland off of centuries of our exploitation. Western countries are not democracies and China/Russia are not dictatorships. This black and white nonsense created by West needs to stop.
Go wish yourselves the best instead, because Western countries will need a lot of luck in trying to work themselves up after the non-West hegemony is fully functional, and burned bridges rebuilt with the impossibility of further exploitation.
Well, I guess we can’t all be as humble and level headed as you.
If there was a shred of altruism and morality, a yearning for communism and a hatred for oppression and holier than thou arrogance, there would lie a chance for humility and working towards the greater good rather than individualist imperialism with an impulse to capitalise and leech everything possible.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=3rqlRddGgdY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Yes.
Seems that you have a strict view of how someone should “love” something. Not everyone is like that. I read the BBC and fully appreciate it but I am very open to any and all criticism of it.
More like BBC is dishonest and evil and works on behalf of Royal Family to disseminate British imperialist propaganda.
https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/1414061311986524161
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rqlRddGgdY
Is it not possible to consume a variety of different media outlets and form your own opinion based on the information available across the spectrum rather than decided to blanket ban specific news outlets?
Possible but only if you are honest with yourself and not see yourself tied to “preserving Anglo empire” and are not their parrot. What you feed your brain, you become that. So by constantly viewing all of the global news media, out of which roughly 90% is Western media controlled by handful groups (NED/CIA, Bilderberg, Murdoch and CFR), you will see the same bullshit but differently phrased across 90% of the entire global media you seek to consume to form your own opinion, and end up not forming your own opinion. You will see the 2% Chinese and Russian media as not representative of majority of news, where majority of news is already invented by West to manufacture consent from you to act as their mindless parrot.
Can you suggest good places in your opinion to get news on the Chinese/Russian situations?
In order of difficulty and depth: Hakim, The New Atlas, The Deprogram, Silk and Steel Podcast, Revolutionary Left Radio
Big media companies are made up of people. Even the best journalists are prone to making mistakes. Sensationalist stories should always be read at an arms length. And even some respectable news organisations hire viral copywriters to generate ad-views. Don’t read that shit.
But do read news from real journalistic publishers with a professional principal editor. Don’t fall into the deep end conpiracy snuff trap.
No one is going to flip to your position in a simple argument. If you disagree with them youll need to understand why. Start trying to find out about their position rather than evangelizing yours. If you do that they might open up doubts about theirs.
They blindly repeat what western politicians say, including war propaganda (like alleged “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq). When politicians from other countries say something against the western agenda, it is completely distorted to paint them as evil. Its not fact based at all, and doesnt even pretend to be neutral.
The Iraq and Afghanistan War examples are blatant and nice, but there should be more and easier ways to communicate the gist of the idea. It is hard, that is why I made the post. It is a real, big problem.
Follow some of their citations and quotes, especially in terms of “Billy Bob, an expert on <insert socialist country or general enemy of the West>.” Research those people. I’ve found that way too many of them are less than credible.
Not even the worst example I’ve seen: