• Veraticus@lib.lgbt
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Yet certainly this has more nuance than that idiot who sees literally no difference between VOA, WaPo, BBC, and RT?

    • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Look up the concept of hyperbolic statements in conversation.

      All they were saying was that they don’t trust the Washington Post for foreign news. They weren’t literally putting WP in line with RT.

      • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Washington Post is an american propaganda outlet when it comes to foreign policy articles. You might as well be linking VOA or RT.

        They are literally putting WP in line with RT. This statement is still wrong in exactly the way I’ve described numerous times here.

        • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That quote is meant to be taken figuratively.

          Propaganda in the loosest definition just means reporting in a biased manner to push a political agenda. You can be 100% accurate with what you say and it still can be considered propaganda due to the manner in which it is presented.

          While WP or VoA, in contrast to RT, don’t outright lie or deceptively create fake stories, they do have a pro-USA bias. That’s why it’s a hyperbolic statement. It was just meant to elaborate on the distrust for the article.