Is Western Media independent and factual unlike Propaganda in Russia and Other Third World Dictators

[Mortimer]

That is the narrative: "A liberal democracy has free speech, independent media, factual reporting". "Russia or replace with any other enemy has Propaganda brainwashes their people". Right?

Now I think Ukraine is only the favorite because of political reasons, and just like Obama won the Nobel peace price. Why did Obama won the Nobel peace prize?

https://www.puls24.at/news/entertain...ZfJHGnS1iz2CPw

[NSXD60]

The Woke Press went fully into gear when Obama won, and of course he accepted his undeserved Nobel Prize like all Black professional victims would. The only unwoke US national tv news network is Fox.

[Anglo-Celtic]

Seriously? Was Goebbels an honest commentator?

[Cossack]

lmao

[sean]

Is Western Media independent and factual unlike Propaganda in Russia and Other Third World Dictators?

All Western media outlets are biased. But at least they have a variety of sources with different viewpoints. Any information passed through their "filter" have their own biases, opinions, and other subjective changes/additions but they still depend on stressing viewers out as much as possible to keep them engaged. In short, almost everything that is told is not 100% accurate.

Russian media on the other hand is completely state-owned, their level of censorship and state propaganda is almost like China (only difference is they don't censor movies). For example, Putin drastically changed the entire management of the famous NTV channel in 2004 as it was critical of his regime (now they receive funding from government via Gazprom). Dozhd TV got shut down, among others, because of the state-wide censorship regarding Ukraine. We don't do that here.

The average Russian is quite well-informed about our goings-on because every single one of West's political blunders is immediately dissected and mocked everywhere from National TV to print media. During the 2015 refugee crisis they actually took a stand against the invasion for instance, they also openly mock Western politics while presenting Russia as the good guys all the time. As a result we just get to see a side of the news that the Western media doesn't like to depict so people assume it's less biased. It's both free entertainment and keeps the image of an external enemy alive for common Russians.

Why did Obama won the Nobel peace prize?

Nobel peace prize is given to people who the committees believe should serve as a role model to other leaders and people across the world. Obama was made into a saint by the media in 2009 because Europeans were glad to see Bush gone, he was considered a weak fair-boy by most world leaders (Europeans love a weak America after all), he also embarrassed America on the world stage by going around apologising to everyone.

Anyway, he served our interests by setting race relations in America back to Jim Crow era tier lel, he also blew up arab kids with drones, thus sparing the world of future terrorists. Giving Obama the prize was literally a gamble.

[Teutone]

Anyway, he served our interests by setting race relations in America back to Jim Crow era tier lel, he also blew up arab kids with drones, thus sparing the world of future terrorists. Giving Obama the prize was literally a gamble.

Bann this subhuman already

reported.

[Ruggery]

They have their agendas however even so the Russian propaganda is not better for anything.

[Hektor12]

Why all high chairs have to be jews in western media? is a good question.

[Pro.crasti.nation]

That is the narrative: "A liberal democracy has free speech, independent media, factual reporting". "Russia or replace with any other enemy has Propaganda brainwashes their people". Right?

Now I think Ukraine is only the favorite because of political reasons, and just like Obama won the Nobel peace price. Why did Obama won the Nobel peace prize?

https://www.puls24.at/news/entertain...ZfJHGnS1iz2CPw

Western media, especially British, American and German, suffers from toxic levels of propaganda. It's probably not as bad as North Korean or Middle Eastern media but, certainly not in the business of presenting the "truth" or in any sense, an objective, unbiased depiction of things.

IIRC, there was a German journalist, a prize-winning, much lauded fellow, who came out to admit that he'd been a mouthpiece for US intelligence (CIA), for much of his professional career. Passing off their propaganda as news and analysis.

There was an intelligence mouthpiece in the NYT (though that paper's full of thick-as-pig-shit takes), another (MI5?) in the Telegraph (long since dead paper), and got knows what sort of three-letter soup is in the Guardian (and what sort of STDs).

I think George Orwell said that the BBC was founded with the intention of being a professional propagandist outfit.