/begin sarcasm/
Stop the presses! You mean Russia funds a media outlet called Russia Today (RT) that tries to influence public perception in the English speaking world to be pro Russian? I'm glad someone used our tax dollars to expose those sneaky Ruskies - they probably branded it RT so we would forget the R stands for Russia. (Just like Kentucky Fried Chicken uses KFC to avoid using the word Fried.)
/end sarcasm/
This just in from the LA Times review of the intelligence report on potential Russian involvement in the recent election: "Moscow also used its state-run propaganda outlets, including the English-language news channel Russia Today, to try to hurt Clinton’s chances, according to the report."
http://www.latimes.com/…/la-na-pol-russia-clinton-20170107-…
If it's true then maybe that's because Hillary expressed more willingness to start a confrontation (which could have led to war) with Russia in Syria, Crimea, and Georgia?
Lest we forget, Congress has been funding similar propaganda efforts on our side for over 66 years. From our own propagandists' web site:
"Radio Free Europe was founded in 1950 and initially broadcast to Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and Romania. Three years later, RL began broadcasting to the Soviet Union in Russian and 15 other national languages. RFE/RL began broadcasts to Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in 1975
Initially, both RFE and RL were funded principally by the U.S. Congress through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), but RFE also received supplemental private donations.
In 1971, all CIA involvement ended, and thereafter RFE and RL were funded by Congressional appropriation through the Board for International Broadcasting (BIB) and after 1995 the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). The two corporations were merged into RFE/RL, Inc. in 1976."
http://www.rferl.org/p/5796.html
As a matter of fact, it's snowballed and now Congress spends about $750 million (unclassified) dollars per year influencing the media narrative around the world. If that number sounds too big to believe, here's the budget:
https://www.bbg.gov/…/03/FY2016Budget_CBJ_Final_WebVersion.…
Am I saying our own propaganda hasn't been helpful or that we shouldn't get our own message out there to counter other propaganda? No. Although, if we're looking for budgets to trim, I think we could start looking there.
What I am saying is that the recent brouhaha is an effort of the current administration (and the main stream media) to delegitimize the next administration, it reeks of hypocrisy, it's no reason to restart a Cold War, and the losing candidate has herself to blame.
Stop the presses! You mean Russia funds a media outlet called Russia Today (RT) that tries to influence public perception in the English speaking world to be pro Russian? I'm glad someone used our tax dollars to expose those sneaky Ruskies - they probably branded it RT so we would forget the R stands for Russia. (Just like Kentucky Fried Chicken uses KFC to avoid using the word Fried.)
/end sarcasm/
This just in from the LA Times review of the intelligence report on potential Russian involvement in the recent election: "Moscow also used its state-run propaganda outlets, including the English-language news channel Russia Today, to try to hurt Clinton’s chances, according to the report."
http://www.latimes.com/…/la-na-pol-russia-clinton-20170107-…
If it's true then maybe that's because Hillary expressed more willingness to start a confrontation (which could have led to war) with Russia in Syria, Crimea, and Georgia?
Lest we forget, Congress has been funding similar propaganda efforts on our side for over 66 years. From our own propagandists' web site:
"Radio Free Europe was founded in 1950 and initially broadcast to Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and Romania. Three years later, RL began broadcasting to the Soviet Union in Russian and 15 other national languages. RFE/RL began broadcasts to Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in 1975
Initially, both RFE and RL were funded principally by the U.S. Congress through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), but RFE also received supplemental private donations.
In 1971, all CIA involvement ended, and thereafter RFE and RL were funded by Congressional appropriation through the Board for International Broadcasting (BIB) and after 1995 the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). The two corporations were merged into RFE/RL, Inc. in 1976."
http://www.rferl.org/p/5796.html
As a matter of fact, it's snowballed and now Congress spends about $750 million (unclassified) dollars per year influencing the media narrative around the world. If that number sounds too big to believe, here's the budget:
https://www.bbg.gov/…/03/FY2016Budget_CBJ_Final_WebVersion.…
Am I saying our own propaganda hasn't been helpful or that we shouldn't get our own message out there to counter other propaganda? No. Although, if we're looking for budgets to trim, I think we could start looking there.
What I am saying is that the recent brouhaha is an effort of the current administration (and the main stream media) to delegitimize the next administration, it reeks of hypocrisy, it's no reason to restart a Cold War, and the losing candidate has herself to blame.
