Western propaganda

whir wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Are international testing accosiations like PESA being controled by the western empire?

No, but PISA is somewhat rigged, not because of some conspiracy but because several countries like Denmark or South Korea have special programs to prepare it.

kvs wrote:IQ is a broken concept.   It is not merely "political correctness" to diss it.   The results depend on things such a knowledge of
western cultural norms.

I'm sure Emotional Intelligence tests are more useful and not totally broken. IQ tests have their uses, aside from bragging rights, when used properly. People like to despise everything that challenges their intelligence because most are terribly immature when dealing with failure.

A commonly chosen confidence interval is 68 percent. Suppose you are trying to predict what an 11-year old child’s IQ score will be at the age of 21 and you know that there’s a .70 correlation in the general population between IQ measured at age 11 and IQ measured at age 21 (this correlation is at the upper end of what is typically found). Based solely on that information, what range of IQ scores can you expect he will obtain on his twenty-first birthday?

It depends how confident you want to be. If you are only 68 percent confident, you can expect that the child’s true score is somewhere within 10 points of his 11-year-old score (in both directions—10 points higher or 10 points lower than his original IQ score). But that’s with only 68 percent confidence. As Alan Kaufman notes, “I wouldn’t cross a busy intersection if I had only a 65% to 70% probability of making it to the other side.”

For high-stakes decisions, test administrators have the option of increasing their confidence interval to 90 percent or even 95 percent. Of course, higher confidence comes at a cost: it widens the range of possible IQ scores. In the example of this 11-year-old boy, if you want to be 95 percent confident of what this child’s IQ score will be at age 21, you’d have to expect a range of 20 points in either direction.

An article published in think tank Chatham House's The World Today magazine claims that the Western media needs "to come up with new ideas" to win what it calls "information warfare" with Russia.

According to the author, Keir Giles, the biggest obstacles to that are InoSMI ("Foreign Media"), a website which offers translations of foreign media articles and the Federal Security Service's SORM system, which can track Internet activity under a court order.

When it comes to SORM, the author does not make it clear what obstacle the system creates for viewing foreign media, although he says that it is not as well-known, in his own words, "unlike similar systems in the West." Giles' article was republished by the Moscow Times daily, which is distributed in paper form free of charge in Russia.

In the case of InoSMI (a part of Rossiya Segodnya media group together with Sputnik), Giles' argument has some merit. Without being submerged in an overall Western media narrative, individual articles may appear nonsensical to readers to the point of being amusing, such as a recently translated listicle titled "5 Reasons Why the U.S. Remains the World’s Only Superpower," which includes having the world's tallest rollercoaster.

Others, including opinion and analytical articles, which can make sense to readers when they are subjected to a certain media narrative, can similarly become nonsensical or even aggravating. Aimed at a domestic audience, they are essentially part of a view of reality in which some claims are treated as fact while certain facts that do not fit the picture are ignored.

When US Ambassador to Russia Will Stevens tweeted Giles' article, his audience was left confused about his motivations, asking questions about Edward Snowden.

Quality of translation also does not seem to be an issue, as even materials originally in Russian from government broadcaster sources such as Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Voice of America, Deutsche Welle and others are published.

So a solution has to be found as to how to make people in Russia watch Western media, according to Giles.

A former producer at the Gazprom Media-owned entertainment channel TNT and now a sort of crusader against Russian state media outlets, Peter Pomerantsev suggested covering more local news and creating "docu-soaps about schools or hospitals; reality shows exploring ethnic tensions."

It is not clear who would be interested in such programming in Russia, and Pomerantsev, who worked at TNT for ten years likely knows that even topics such as corruption, political favoritism and abuse of power are not taboo in Russian entertainment. It could, however, land Pomerantsev a pretty sweet gig as a senior producer if he pushes through the idea, considering that he is one of the few vocal supporters of the idea to have such a level of experience.

But even if you could make Russian viewers absorb the Western media narrative, would you really want them to? Pomerantsev brings up the case of "Estonia, where viewers who followed rival Russian and western stories about the downing of flight MH17 over Ukraine last year ended up disbelieving both sides."

And what would happen if Russians were exposed to Western media? While outlets such as Voice of America and BBC Russian Service were extremely popular in the Soviet Union because they put a twist on events in a society controlled by censorship and taboo, today they simply provide an alternative editorial position only interesting to a niche audience. If interest groups and governments want to influence Russian public opinion with media distribution, they should begin by making their goals transparent, at least to themselves.

kvs wrote:"State media" like the BBC(*) and CBC(*) but vastly more objective.    The CBC in Canada is brazen Harperite pro-Kiev regime propaganda.
If you watch so-called "state media" in Russia there is no goose stepping conformity and no "narrative" being shoved down your
throat.  I see posts in various fora routinely claim that Russian media is no better than the NATO media.   This is utter rubbish based
on total lack of knowledge of the coverage.  

The tone of this Sputnik article is the same liberast pro-NATO crud you could find previously in RIAN.  It highlights an important
fact:  Russian media is infiltrated heavily with a pro-NATO 5th column.   Routinely these articles use the standard NATO newspeak
yapping about "pro-Kremlin" political parties and "state-run media".    Pavolvian trigger phrases designed to lubricate the penetration
of the NATO narratives about Russia as some "tyranny".   The real tyranny is the NATO empire of the USA.   The NATO media
coverage of events in Ukraine totally discredits it as any sort of objective and fair collection of independent organizations.   It
is nothing more than a parrot chorus for the imperial elites running NATO.   Daily slaughter of civilians by the NATO installed
coup regime in Kiev is converted 1984 style into "the rebels/terrorists are shelling themselves".   Thousands of volunteers from
Russia are claimed as regular Russian army invasion forces.    Of course the question of why Russia would not use its air power
and even properly equip these "land forces" is never answered.   As if Russia could not deploy more than 9000 troops to Ukraine.

(*) Neither is private and just because they claim to be arm's length operations from the government means diddley squat.
The proof is in the pudding and the bias of the BBC and CBC is brazen and primitive.

PapaDragon wrote:
Morons...morons everywhere...

British Expert Names Two Biggest Obstacles for Western Propaganda in Russia

A new article by a Chatham House think tank fellow offers up two obstacles for the Western media in Russia and one pundit finds a solution.

http://sputniknews.com/analysis/20150805/1025436018.html

According to the author, Keir Giles, the biggest obstacles to that are InoSMI ("Foreign Media"), a website which offers translations of foreign media articles and the Federal Security Service's SORM system, which can track Internet activity under a court order.

Prince Darling wrote:

i think this video is absolutely great, you can compare the brilliant central europe and balkans metaphore for European distorted view of the balkans in the 90s, to todays view of EU political elite (not soo much the majority of the population) of Russia.

its just soo simple in the minds of spin doctors

Werewolf wrote:Just had to post this and how indoctrinated and through and through inbred the west and majority of westerners are by being educated since childhood to hate russians which some do not make even a secret out off it and just say what they truelly think.

And they are more than happy to see russians die but poor poor bacon and precious democratic west.

American Eagle wrote:Do you mean the False Flag GRU operation in Odessa???

American Eagle wrote:It was a joke! But I admire our friendly Ukrainian nation for their determination in repelling foreign aggression in ODessa.

American Eagle wrote:harsh circumstances require equally harsh actions... remember?

There is beauty in applying Controlled Terror, like we do in Iraq & Syria.

Werewolf wrote:Just had to post this and how indoctrinated and through and through inbred the west and majority of westerners are by being educated since childhood to hate russians which some do not make even a secret out off it and just say what they truelly think.

And they are more than happy to see russians die but poor poor bacon and precious democratic west.

American Eagle wrote:Short term interests of the Ukrainian state require maximum possible suppression of anti-Ukrainian sentiments accross the country using all means deemed necessary.

Long term interests include removing all elements bearing anti-Ukrainian sentiments from Odessa and replacing them with pro-Ukrainian population coming from Lviv and areas around it. This can't be done yet and it's implementation requires military victory in Donbass.

ISIS aren't our guys really... But it does not mean we can't use them to our own advantage - just bomb them hard enough to prevent serious expansion but not hard enough to destroy them. THis gives us a good card against Iran and is also FUN - isn't it?

American Eagle wrote:It was a joke! But I admire our friendly Ukrainian nation for their determination in repelling foreign aggression in ODessa.

American Eagle wrote:The Russian problem in Southwestern Ukraine should be solved using the principle of minimum effort - do only as much - but no less - as you need to achieve the goal. This means non-voluntary relocation.

Do you even know who runs the entire ISIS show? Baghdadi is a figurehead It's old ex-Saddam guys who run the entire thing. Religion is just a cover-up.

American Eagle wrote:The Russian problem in Southwestern Ukraine should be solved using the principle of minimum effort - do only as much - but no less - as you need to achieve the goal. This means non-voluntary relocation.

Do you even know who runs the entire ISIS show? Baghdadi is a figurehead It's old ex-Saddam guys who run the entire thing. Religion is just a cover-up.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Just had to post this and how indoctrinated and through and through inbred the west and majority of westerners are by being educated since childhood to hate russians which some do not make even a secret out off it and just say what they truelly think.

And they are more than happy to see russians die but poor poor bacon and precious democratic west.

I think that was sarcastic...unless I haven't understood the background of this.

American Eagle wrote:It was a joke! But I admire our friendly Ukrainian nation for their determination in repelling foreign aggression in ODessa.

Rodinazombie wrote:About more propaganda, the BBC news was on at work last night and they had a piece on the fragments of a BUK missile being found by the investigators.

Naturally, not a word about ukraine possessing BUKS, or the possibility that rebels could have stolen one. No, they only mentioned that the missile was of 'russian origin'.

Fucking bastards.

Makes me sick to be able to see from the other side and have the whole lying and distorting charade of our media ripped open and seen for what it really is.

Fred333 wrote:

Rodinazombie wrote:About more propaganda, the BBC news was on at work last night and they had a piece on the fragments of a BUK missile being found by the investigators.

Naturally, not a word about ukraine possessing BUKS, or the possibility that rebels could have stolen one. No, they only mentioned that the missile was of 'russian origin'.

Fucking bastards.

Makes me sick to be able to see from the other side and have the whole lying and distorting charade of our media ripped open and seen for what it really is.

Same shit here in Dutchyland. For the record, I think it was the separatists who shot down the airliner and don't care so much where the Buk came from (it's the guy who pushed the button who is responsible after all), but I find it very unbecoming of the media and unprofessional to boot that all these insinuations are flying around without proper evidence to back it up yet. Zum kotzen.

GarryB wrote:What sort of rebel force could capture a system like BUK and actually use it in combat effectively?

Standard operational procedure with night vision devices is to put a bullet in their objective lens if capture appeared imminent... with a BUK air defence system then disabling it would be much much easier... any BUKs the rebels had would not be functional.

The only functional BUKs in the region were operated by Kiev at the time of the shoot down and within range to actually hit the airliner.