In Russia, 50% of News Must Be Happy 551
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 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Watch Russian Censorship in the USA (Score:5, Insightful)
Compare RT to Deutsche Welle Television [germantv.info] (DW-TV). The Germany government funds DW-TV, and it broadcasts German news to the USA and other countries. DW-TV sometimes broadcasts news that is highly critical of the German government.
These attempts at censorship by the Russian government are very disturbing. Check your local PBS television programming. Many PBS stations air both RT and DW-TV.
If we have investments in Russian companies through global depository receipts (GDRs), should we be concerned? Will bad news about corrupt business practices in Russia now be censored? How can I judge the value of my investments if the only information that I can get is falsified to be "positive"?
Probably a Good Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:4, Informative)
If an event is 'happy' then it is probably not news. News is a deviation from the norm, and the debate on what constitutes the norm is the frequent cause of bias. Its real purpose is to give people information they can use to adjust their own actions so as to maximize their livelihood (or however you want to say it). The Economist, for example, contains what is most appropriately termed news, because all of that information is reckoned to affect money markets and anyone with an interest in those markets. Most news that actually affects people gets drowned out either in gossip news, mostly inconsequential public tragedies (like earlier this week) and day-to-day crime.
The problem is the focus on the wrong kind of doom and gloom, not too much of it. If you want 'light' or inconsequential news, then what you're asking for is not news, but entertainment.
Re:Probably a Good Idea (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
If there's no problem, then there's nothing to report. It doesn't affect anybody. There are a million things that are *not* going wrong with society. How about the news only report everything that goes well, and let us deduce from the process of elimination what went wrong? Instead of the obituaries page, make a list of people who are still alive! If you don't see a relative's name on it, then, well...
I'm just taking the conservative stance that freedom of press has always worked, so we ought to maintai
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This is a good point, and is especially driven home by the ridiculous coverage of the recent Virginia Tech shooting. Every pundit and talking head is now discussing what can be done in colleges, etc to prevent this in the future, when in fact 68 people have died in the last 40+ years in college campus shootings, and most of those were from just 3 incidents.
Re:Probably a Good Idea (Score:5, Funny)
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:In Soviet Russia (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
oblig (Score:4, Funny)
And in America... (Score:5, Insightful)
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... (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, nobody will agree on it; neocons will probably worship him like Republicans do Reagan, and sensible people will rue the 300 votes he won Florida by.
Next cycle (Score:2)
It does get a little more complicated than that but general trend is when a high profile member from party X is doing that bad the only other option is to put vote in the guy from Y to see if he can do any better.
Sorry for the heavy dose of cynicism but we are talking politics.
Re:And in America... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is sort of a mutually contradictory statement. If he really was an autocrat who could do anything, he wouldn't be a lame duck -- he'd just dissolve Congress and install himself as President-for-Life. That he is going to walk out of the White House in a few short months, and in the meantime is basically restricted to whining and doing what he can to make Congress miserable, shows that he is in fact not very powerful at all -- it shows in fact, our system working pretty well.
There are a lot of valid criticisms of our government; heck I'm generally the first to haul off with them. But I don't think that you can use the fact that Bush is both a lame duck and somehow all-powerful at the same time.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
At least it took some degree of force to get the Russian media to comply. The American mass media was voluntarily willing to "demonize one country and idolize themselves". Except in the American case, "one country" has ended up being many: North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan, and Libya, just to name a few.
Enforced vs. voluntary censorship (Score:4, Insightful)
Then could you explain what the difference is between censorship laws and censorship by the back door because the press don't want to loose their privileged access to the president? At least with censorship laws you know that you can't trust the press. I find the voluntary censorship of the US press far more insidious.
The approval rating argument just doesn't carry weight...afterall it was only a few years ago that the candidate with the highest approval rating in the actual polls lost the election in the US. I've yet to see that happen in modern Russia.
Re:Enforced vs. voluntary censorship (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm old enough to remember Senator Gore speaking at my high school - and old enough to remember Tipper Gore as a huge advocate of age labels on record albums.
I remember a general disdain for Gore in Tennessee leading up to the 2000 election - a feeling that he had abandoned his roots. We'll see what happens in days ahead.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Here's a video clip from MSNBC showing an clear example of at Fox News.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oulh6_lOif0&mode=re lated&search= [youtube.com]
It shows a "daily editorial memo" dated Nov. 9, on how and where to slant the news--the memo is followed a few hours later by "news" that surprisingly matches the memo.
They found an internal memo that instructs the Fox News to "be on the lookout for statements from Iraqi insurgents who must be thrilled at
Re:And in America... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you did work there however, you could probably sell an editor on it, given the relevance of Sufism to the current national situation. Plenty of Muslims in New York.
A nice thing (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmmm. I wonder why that is???
It was SOOO much better when I was a kid and watching the 6:00 om news that reported on the dead in vietnam on both sides. Why is was so positive that they were killing 10-20 of ours a day, but we were killing 100s to 1000s of theirs. Then I remember that break-in. Minor thing being reported between the news about how this energy crisis thing was going to disappear very shortly. Happened in the water ga
No enemy? (Score:5, Insightful)
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? (Score:5, Insightful)
Problem for them is, they may now be #3 rather than vying for #1.
Re: (Score:2)
have they won your mind? (Score:2)
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.
If you accept the notion that to be "great" you must "do as I say," the communists have won your mind. We are hearing from a lot of the same kinds of people in Washington these days. They talk about sacrifice, struggle, security and other unAmerican nonsense.
If you want to
Re: (Score:2)
US must b presented as a enemy.. (Score:5, Funny)
Is this such a bad thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Enough is enough. Let's do the Putin thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I might actually pay attention... (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
Or do you man up and realize that in order for things to get better, we need to recognize the problems and work to fix them.
Ignoring them only serve make things worse. Bad news sucks, but it needs to be heard.
Re:I might actually pay attention... (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, come one. Just yesterday I tuned on to Fox just to catch a report about two cutest little kittens abandoned behind a dumpster and then rescued by some good people. I am not joking.
Re: (Score:2)
BUT
This isn't mandating that news as a whole be 50% positive. It's asking that anything that speaks about Russia has to be 50% positive.
America is an enemy? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Who leaked!? (Score:4, Funny)
Who leaked this script of this season's 24 to the Russians?!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
ex: American Idol or some such show will be mistranslated as: "We're going to slaughter you all... lalalala.... we're going to eat your babies at the weekend BBQ... alala... cuz' we
Putin (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It may be that the only way to hold Russia together and keep order is Putinism.
China is doing well without democracy, and theocratic Islam is expanding. Democracy is fine for the West and countries heavily influenced by it, but for some cultures it may not be of use.
Democracy isn't just a Rich White Folks thing. (Score:4, Informative)
Democracy starts slowly, and gradually improves itself... in early-stage democracy, it's more about the promise than the actuality. The United States had a small issue with slavery, as you may recall, and with its treatment of the indigenous peoples. Still, it's a lot better today than it was even forty years ago. Democracy, with it's partners Human Rights and Rule of Law, allows progress to happen.
I harbor contempt and distrust for the mindset that certain types of people are somehow genetically exempt from modern forms of self-government... to my ears, it sounds suspiciously like "Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law only applies to rich white people, because they're the only ones intelligent and enlightened enough to benefit from it."
(That said, forcing change from the outside at gunpoint seldom works well - for any governmental system imposed. See: Iraq. Engagement in the form of clever political pressure, applied covertly inside the nation and through geopolitical maneuvering, works somewhat better. This is the best course of action in Russia's case.)
SoupIsGood Food
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The level of force required to break down social barriers is that we used in WWII. We cannot use that level of violence against civilians nowadays, so we cannot "break" countries as was done to Germany and Japan.
"certain types of people are somehow genetically exempt"
None of the example countries that became modern democracies were Islamic. Religion that demands theocracy cannot tolerate democracy
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to break it to you, but the lines dividing secular from religious power in Islamic society were broken by the Umyyad Dynasty less than a hundred years after the death of Muhammad. You may want to spend some time with Wikipedia on the history of Islam and Arab culture... and no, the two are not the
Oh Heck... (Score:4, Funny)
Russian point of view (Score:2)
Examples (Score:5, Funny)
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.
reporting standards (Score:4, Interesting)
In Russia, editors choose according to whether they will keep their job or not.
Fortunately, in the west we have 100 cable news channels to choose from...In Russia their are 2
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And they're all owned by the same five media conglomerates. Those five media conglomerates have the same customers (advertisers), same business model, same conflicts of interest, and on most topics the same political bent. Those five companies also control most radio stations. With recent deregulation, they are starting to buy up newspapers as well. 95% of all media the average American is exposed to comes from those five companie
Some happy russian news for you... (Score:2)
At least they look like they're happy...
Reportedly loyal (Score:2)
Is this some kind of fee
Martial Law in Beijing... (Score:3, Interesting)
This news from Russia makes me wonder whether USSR isn't dead, but, as Calvin and Hobbs liked to say, "transmorgrified". If so, then Americans have been deceiving themselves that they have somehow "won" the Cold War.
Re: (Score:3)
The USA sees Russia as a competitor and wants to "divide and conquer" it by all means possible - such as permanent colored revolutions, or paid dissidents, or by poisoning some irrelevant guy in a 3rd country, or by ordering shooting of some media figures and then blaming Putin... Instability in Russia would greatly benefit the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
What's that saying... (Score:2)
Let's see how long it takes before he starts whining that nobody gives him any attention whatsoever.
China more realistic enemy of Russia (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ahh, but one thing stands out: China and the USA are business partners. Sometimes unwilling business partners, but partners nonetheless. Every once in a while you'll hear about some (relatively) minor trading dispute. Put a tariff on Chinese-ma
Something to smile about (Score:5, Funny)
"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)
Its a great improvement (Score:2, Funny)
Sounds good to me... (Score:2)
who owns the Soviet media? (Score:2, Interesting)
The long road to democratic fee market (Score:4, Interesting)
The biggest problem in Russia is that things like Agriculture have never bee privatized. Privatizing agriculture would seem to be a great idea to us in the west, but if Putin were to do it in Russia, it would destroy the country. Many industries have been privatized in Russia, with disastrous results. Basically the government divvied up the cooperatives and companies by distributing stock to citizens, hoping that citizens could take ownership and make a profit. What happened is that organized crime and other opportunists saw an ideal opportunity for a grab. They went around and offered citizens much less than the face value of the stock. Since the stock had no value to the average person, most people happily sold their stocks for pennies on the dollar. This has led to major problems with monopolies and even crime organizations. Remember, these people have never had any experience with a western-style economic system, let alone a democracy. They were just no match for the wits of the opportunists. Hence agriculture in Russia will not be privatized anytime soon. Can you imagine the massive land-grab?
Anyway, this is the major reason why Putin is reluctant to allow Russians to experience this great thing we call Liberty. It's not that he wants to be a dictator or stalin, but that he recognizes Russia can't transform herself all at once. I think it will take at least 2 generations myself. Along the way, Putin has drawn the ire of the western world and many critics at home.
I am not going to condone his actions. I just want to make sure we all understand the underlying situations and conditions that exist in Russia and the former republics of the Soviet Union. If they move to quickly to western-style economics and politics, chaos will ensue. Think 1930's mob rule in America, but only with 21st century technology, money, and power. It's a precarious situation, and very delicate. If Putin allows media too much power, and allowed them to print too many doom and gloom, down with the government stuff, not only will his government fall, but the entire country will fall into anarchy and mob rule. Is there another way? I'm sure there is. But let's make sure we have a full understanding before we spout off on this subject. Reacting prematurely is the very thing that leads to the fallacies that Bush used in justifying the Iraq war
Good news, everyone! (Score:3, Funny)
Hey, (Score:3, Funny)
tag: backintheussr (Score:3, Insightful)
tagged (Score:5, Funny)
Example news report - 50% positive. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:tag: backintheussr (Score:5, Interesting)
No, you shut up, moron (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No, you shut up, moron (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:No, you shut up, moron (Score:4, Informative)
No. Seriously, you have absolutely no idea what are you talking about. USSR was a federation, so position of USSR member was similar to US state, with slightly less autonomy due to Executive branch of the government participating in the Union-wide management of industry.
Warsaw Pact countries had more political and economic connections than NATO, however members were independent countries with no participation in anything that even remotely resembles a federal structure within USSR.
Re:No, you shut up, moron (Score:4, Informative)
Living in the USSR you had the KGB, living in GDR you had Stasi. Indeed there were some differences, Stasi was generally considered slightly worse than the KGB, the dictatorship in the GDR slightly harsher than that in the USSR. (Or at least West Germans felt this way, I don't know if everybody agreed.)
Now contrast this with the huge differences between living in a Warsaw-pact country versus living in a NATO country. Freedom of expression, freedom to create and join organizations, high productivity, wealth. A completely different experience.
Lots of people in the West didn't know much or care much about the differences between living in the GDR and living in Estonia.
Note also how Czechoslovakia was invaded in 1968 when it deviated from approved policies. In this regard the Warsaw-pact countries were not really independent.(*)
Being careless about the differences is certainly sloppy, but not moronic. Or do you have difficulties struggling to understand the meaning of the word moronic?
(*) -- Of course arguably the same could be said about the countries where the US stopped socialist governments that were democratically elected by the people.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:tag: backintheussr (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The 'War on Terror' is big on rhetoric, but short on facts. The UK is dropping the term, because it's misleading.
Where is this global organisation of evil people bent on destroying the west? Seems to me their more interested in killing each other, and it's not the majority, just a scattered set of minority groups with a lot of nasty weapons.
Personally I think what is going on is an Islamic Civil War. They're never good things, wars, and I find it very upsetting, but to my knowledge
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Right, here it is just about locking in a permanent Republican majority. Totally different.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In the USA, all speech is protected, because (a) the constitution prohibits any restrictions on speech, and (b) the constitution has not been amended to say otherwise. Without such an amendment, any law that says anything different was not made with authority that descends from the constitution, and that means that the law is based upon coercion - use of force and threat of use of force - and that is the very definition o
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And whoever modded this troll? You're delusional. Off-topic? Yes. Flame-bait? Certainly. But not trolling.
Anyway on subject: Although silly and pointless, the regulations do contain one decent idea! Half of all news should be positive. Now, I'm not advocating ignoring the bad news. No, that is why the idea is insane. No, I mean find some positives. Those stories we used to see about how the blind woman with the ironically blind seeing eye dog found love in a deaf man wit
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Um, Didn't you just commit treason? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Hello, this is the U.S. Service. We have recorded your IP address of 127.0.0.1 and are coming to arrest you for threatening the President -- immediately.
Thanks,
Agent Smith
U.S. Secret Service
Re:The USA doesn't have freedom fo speech either (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah? Try posting some Scientology text.
Re:The USA doesn't have freedom fo speech either (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If somebody says X is true, I want my news outlet to verify if X really is true, and if not, call them on it. If they are reporting on government offic