In Russia, 50% of News Must Be Happy

Several readers sent us to the New York Times for disturbing news on Russia's vanishing press freedoms. The story tells of how one of the few remaining relatively independent radio outlets in Russia recently acquired new managers, reportedly loyal to Vladimir Putin. Quoting: "At their first meeting with journalists since taking over Russia's largest independent radio news network, the managers had startling news of their own: from now on, they said, at least 50 percent of the reports about Russia must be 'positive.' In addition, opposition leaders could not be mentioned on the air and the United States was to be portrayed as an enemy, journalists employed by the network, Russian News Service, say they were told by the new managers, who are allies of the Kremlin."

In Soviet Russia

[by Anonymous Coward]

freedoms vanish you?

Probably a Good Idea

[EmbeddedJanitor (597831)]

While many may argue that this supresses truth, is it really so? Does American-style "free" journalism really give a balanced view of what is happening in society?

I argue not. Most "news" is heavily slanted to doom and gloom. Why? Probably because doom and gloom sells. People have a voyeuristic tendancy to be drawn to shootings, car crashes etc. In reality, 99.99% of were not in a car crash, got raped or any such mishap. Many had a good time.

The media is not interested in truth, they are interested in what attracts eyeballs, and thereby ratings and advertising, and need to compete with comedy shows and other entertainment.

Re:Probably a Good Idea

[morcego (260031)]

Most "news" is heavily slanted to doom and gloom.

That is what I enjoy the most on TV are the commercials. Everything is wonderful, lasts forever, makes live better. If you buy this product, you will be much happier, just like these nice folks how are willing to share their experiences.

Really, nothing like a good commercial to boost your mood :)

Re:Probably a Good Idea

[I'll Provide The War (1045190)]

They may be true to some extent, but there is still positive news of substantial import that goes unreported.

For example how often do we hear that the murder rate in the US is the lowest since 1966?
Or that the robbery rate in the US is the lowest since 1968?
Or that the rate of vehicle theft in the US is the lowest since 1968?
Or that the rate of rape in the US is the lowest since 1977?

It must not be reported very often since most Americans seem to believe that they are living in some kind of unprecedented Mad-Max dystopia that requires their children to be on lockdown 24/7.

Stats from: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm [fbi.gov]

Re:In Soviet Russia

[shark swooner (1077115)]

In Putin's Russia, the In Soviet Russia joke writes itself

And in America...

[ushering05401 (1086795)]

No pictures of caskets coming home from the mideast...

This whole thing is just a matter of degrees.

0% of any country's news must be proven factually accurate from what I can tell. Can we get some journalistic standards in the house? Anybody?

Re:And in America...

[by Anonymous Coward]

This whole thing is just a matter of degrees.

As is anything for someone with a brain. But it is fairly obvious that the matter of degrees difference here is like a Siberian winter vs Phoenix in the summer. Remember what they have done, forced the media to demonize one country and idolize themselves. This is nationalism at its worst. And with Putin's changes like appointing governorships (versus elections), Russia is becoming a totalitarian state.

It is always wise to be very careful about a rabidly nationalistic totalitarian state. Over 100,000,000 people died in the last century from those entities.

And before someone wants to criticize me by saying that the US is just as bad, I suggest you understand the meaning of the degrees of difference. Bush has abused the laws and now has a ~30% approval rating and is now a lame duck. Putin has abused the laws and has a >70% approval rating and the power to do anything he wants. If you don't see the difference, you are blind.

Re:Enforced vs. voluntary censorship

[scrondle (805647)]

What facts specifically do you think Gore is "fast and loose" with? I'm asking because I am not a climate scientist, but my wife is doing climate research at the moment. I haven't heard anyone in a position to know say anything other than it was pretty accurate for a powerpoint presentation by a politician. Also, he's been working on this for a long time, that makes him opportunistic how? Also, what is the "other side" of the story? That we had carbon levels like this before there were modern humans on earth? WTF?

Re:And in America...

[MightyMartian (840721)]

They key difference is that NBC, CNN, CBS, the New York Times and so on aren't bound by it. That's why you have Administration mouthpieces trying to blame the New York Times for their mistakes. Even the President of the United States does not have the power that Putin has grabbed to essentially turn Russian media back into a state-controlled resource.

No enemy?

[Southpaw018 (793465)]

From what I remember of American Military History, during the Cold War, many American textbooks kicked off the discussion with something to the effect of "There are two world superpowers, the US and Russia, locked in a struggle..."

Many Russian textbooks of the same era, however, took this approach (again, paraphrasing, not quoting anything): "There is one world superpower, and they mean to oppress us..."

During that time, just as afraid as we were of Communism, they were afraid that we were going to nuke them if the blinked twice.

Now, it appears, that Russia is reentering the thinking that there is one world superpower, and that they must fight against it. The problem with that, of course, is that our propaganda is currently directed elsewhere. I wonder what they'll fight against when the supposed enemy isn't fighting back?

Re: No enemy?

[Black Parrot (19622)]

Now, it appears, that Russia is reentering the thinking that there is one world superpower, and that they must fight against it.

I think the real issue during the cold war wasn't communism vs. capitalism, but rather who's the biggest kid on the block. I was skeptical about the proclaimed end of the Cold War, because that issue will never go away, and no country will willingly accept the loss of status that Russia did. It's hardly surprising that they would want back in the game.

Problem for them is, they may now be #3 rather than vying for #1.

The problem with that, of course, is that our propaganda is currently directed elsewhere.

Which makes it an ideal time for them to play a weak hand.

US must b presented as a enemy..

[by Anonymous Coward]

They are trying to compete with the US media!

Is this such a bad thing?

[Illserve (56215)]

We in the western world (either the states, or the UK where I currently live) might be much better off if the media were reporting some good news once in a while. The culture of fear is increasingly pervasive and it's fueled, in part, by the media scare-wagon, which cannot help but tell us about a new thing that is going to kill us or ruin our lives every week.

Enough is enough. Let's do the Putin thing.

I might actually pay attention...

[josquint (193951)]

If the news featured more positive stories.

American news THRIVES on depressing and horrifing scenarios. It's, well, depressing.

The world isnt a kind and gentle place, but must it be a manufacutred hell?

Examples

[AaronW (33736)]

I wonder if these would count as examples of good news:

Blue Angles Jet Did Not Kill Anybody on the Ground And Five Pilots Are Alive and Well [yahoo.com]

Bush's Ratings Above Zero

At Least One Person Says Gonzolas Should Stay

Fallujah To Get Another New Chief

Space Engineer Will Not Get Any More Mediocre Job Reviews

Street Evangelists Rescues 300 Souls [theonion.com].

I guess it's possible to turn bad news into good news, but then everything will start to sound like The Onion [theonion.com].

Note that I am not trying to make light of any of these issues but to show how idiotic the new Russian stance is.

China more realistic enemy of Russia

[ConfusedSelfHating (1000521)]

Although the United States is an increasingly unpopular country, China is a more likely enemy. The greatest points of conflict with the United States would be over Russian business deals with "anti-American" countries. The United States is unlikely to invade any more countries in the near future given the numerous complications of the Iraq war. Iraq was one of the biggest business partners of Russia and the countries did not come to blows over it. A great number of the conflicts that Russia has with the West are also with Europe. There has been a great number of conflicts over oil. As far as the "War on Terror", the US and Russia are natural allies. With Russia's occupation of Chechnya (which makes the Iraq war look like a visit to the playground http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_ War/ [http]), they have had repeated attacks by Muslim terrorists.

Russia has a lot of land and massive natural resources. China has a thirst for natural resources, severe internal conflict and a huge disproportially male population. If the effectiveness of Russia's nuclear arsenal was thought to be limited (perhaps by the development of new missile defence technologies), then China may invade Russia. The Chinese may be willing to lose ten million men to take a substantial part of Russian territory. A war for territory may move many of the disgruntled young Chinese men to the frontline.

I think the US is chosen as an enemy because America bashing is very easy right now. If the Russian government were to look at its most likely enemies, it may compromise it's business agreements.

Something to smile about

[BillGatesLoveChild (1046184)]

> at least 50 percent of the reports about Russia must be 'positive.'

"Slow News Day in the Bureau today, Dimitri. We've only got one story: Another Russian Dissident mysteriously dying of radiation poisoning. I say let's split it: Dissident Dead, Putin under investigation, Polonium Stocks Up, KGB hiring"

"Ivan, I think you meant FSB. The KGB no longer exists."

(Hearty Laughing)

tagged

[RLiegh (247921)]

backintheussr putin tag YOU

Example news report - 50% positive.

[stfvon007 (632997)]

Today in the news, War has broken out between Eurasia and Oceania, with billions dead in the initial fighting. On a positive note, a mandatory survey taken earlier this week shows that people believe kittens are cute. More at 11.

Re:tag: backintheussr

[frogstar_robot (926792)]

Most of the Western USSR states became part of NATO. That is about a big a hint as I can think of that the USSR as we knew it isn't ever coming back. Getting back places like Poland, Romania, and a good chunka Germany mean risking nuclear war. There's other real estate on their frontiers that won't get our panties in nearly as much as a twist. As an added bonus, it'd give some of these islamist nutjobs another target to play with.

No, you shut up, moron

[QuickFox (311231)]

The practical differences between being part of the Warsaw pact and being part of the USSR were small, if you contrast them with the differences between being part of the Warsaw pact vs being part of NATO.

Confusing the two is sloppy, but it's certainly not moronic, as the practical differences were comparatively small.

Your over-the-top reaction, on the other hand...

Re:tag: backintheussr

[rucs_hack (784150)]

The first step in establishing a dictatorship is to define an enemy, preferably one that you know either cannot or will not defend itself. America will never attack Russia, Putin knows this, so they are a safe bet to be the enemy he needs.

Once people have an enemy they believe in, you can blame all kinds of crap on them, and claim that you are trying to save your people from those evil people.

Interesting, it's exactly the same tactic the Nazi's used, although they picked the Jewish community.

Re:tag: backintheussr

[QuickFox (311231)]

The first step in establishing a dictatorship is to define an enemy, preferably one that you know either cannot or will not defend itself.

Like terrorism?

Re:The USA doesn't have freedom fo speech either

[iminplaya (723125)]

Yep, looks like I have freedom of speech.

Yeah? Try posting some Scientology text.

Re:The USA doesn't have freedom fo speech either

[Fancia (710007)]

The GP is probably referring to this [slashdot.org] case; the Church of Scientology issued a DMCA takedown notice asking Slashdot to remove a comment containing Scientology texts, and Slashdot complied.