Left anticom section of the "Blackshirts and Reds" explains it the best.
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
54 points (88.6% liked)
Memes
55095 readers
940 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
Here some non-western source free from the empire
Looks inside
pro-Russia propaganda
Related post from YPTB: https://lemmy.ml/post/44625171
Also your posts from TASS and RT downvoted on ML as well.
Russian propaganda is when maybe the Uktaine war didn't just start one day by itself for no reason
Have fun getting all your information from the modern equivalents to Goebbels
I don't think sources like TASS are any different.
You say both are bad yet you default to only trust western sources
I'm not a westerner. But TASS and RT are like Fox News in the US. Those are simply bad sources.
Your comment reveals a lack of media literacy. There is a fundamental difference between Russian outlets like TASS and RT, which are state-controlled, and Fox News, which is corporate-owned. State media acts as the direct voice of the government, whereas corporate media answers to advertisers and owners. This makes the bias in state media far more explicit regarding national interests; their agenda is transparent. Conversely, Fox News still operates within a framework of journalistic standards and market competition. It contains valuable context depending on the situation, so dismissing it entirely is a mistake
I know this. I just don't think state-controlled media is much different from corporate media under oligarchy. US don't have state media (edit: state-owned, not just state-funded) as far as I know, but if they were, those media would simply change bias toward the ruling party.
I mentioned Fox News because they feel similar in spirit: conservative and usually not trustworthy.
State media is biased towards it's ruling party/class and therefore not trustworthy. I'll assume whatever media source that confirms my bias is trustworthy
Sounds like an echo chamber
Also
US don’t have state media
PBS, NPR, CSPAN, VoA, RadioFree, etc
Parenti and Chomsky to some degree argue that private corporate media is closely aligned to media interest, due to its intertwining with intelligence services
I’ll assume whatever media source that confirms my bias is trustworthy
Why are you making up what I think?
PBS, NPR, CSPAN, VoA, RadioFree, etc
I realized that I wrote "state media", while I wanted to write "state-owned". Media you listed are state-funded, while TASS is state-owned.
Why are you making up what I think?
Because it's essentially what you're saying in subtext. You're free to clarify
I realized that I wrote “state media” when I meant “state-owned.” The media you listed are state-funded, while TASS is state-owned.
Yet either way you try to (re)define it both reflect either states ruling class bias and you arbitrarily decide to dismiss one of those and didn't even realize about the existence of the other.
I’m saying that some sources are worse than others.
And I'm saying it's a logical fallacy to dismiss it in it's entirety, as there exists context where these sources of information are valuable.
Because it’s essentially what you’re saying in subtext.
No, I didn’t imply any of this.
I don't like any of the media we mentioned in this dialogue. Not because of where they get their funding, but because of their content. I explained why I don't like TASS above in this comment section.
Whether you like or dislike a source is a personal reaction that doesn't determine its factual accuracy
Yeah, but their content does.
On an article to article basis dependent on the context. Not as the entire outlet like you suggest. You're intellectually dishonest to yourself if you do
US don’t have state media as far as I know
Lol
The Acacia Strain's "Step into the light" is a modern classic.
Doesn't matter whether you think it's pro-russian or propaganda, only thing that matters is that it's true
