• Match!!@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    your source says the VOA is a US government official news arm, you don’t see how they might have a bias when reporting on Russia?

    • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They might, but being state-run is actually no guarantee of bias! Some state-run media is certainly very biased (RT). Others less so (VOA). This might surprise you but you have to do things like “research” and “consider the source,” in addition to determining where its funding comes from.

      • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Actually being state-run is okay when our guys do it”

        Before you whine, let me add that RT is a rag, though every now and then it has a good article and sometimes covering things western outlets refuse to is a good thing (like the recent-ish stuff with Seymour Hersh), but to say that VoA isn’t notoriously propaganda or that BBC articles aren’t mostly rightwing drivel is unhinged neoliberal bullshit.

        (BBC does have some good TV programs, but those are fiction and documentaries, the news is awful)

        • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Actually being state-run is okay if those journalistic institutions can be independently verified to offer high-quality, objective reporting, based on nothing more than an analysis of that reporting – especially with regards to that institution’s stances of its government’s actions.”

          Not sure why this is so hard for you all. Like, actually, in order to determine if a news source is good, we have to – shockingly! – examine the output of that news source. By this metric, the VOA and BBC are pretty good… uh, single Tweets notwithstanding.