←back to thread

524 points mhga | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.221s | source
Show context
molteanu ◴[] No.44496775[source]
I still cannot get over the fact that we, in Europe, have banned RT on the grounds that it is a publication sponsored by a "foreign" government and, as such, it cannot be trusted.

For one, so many publications here in Europe are financed by the local governments and we have no problem allowing them to function and act in the interest or said governments. Two, it flies in the face of an independent, free individual who can choose what to read and discern what the truth is. By blocking it, you are saying, "You, as an individual, are not able to take your own decisions, you are not able to separate truth from lies and fiction." If, supposing the later is actually the case, then all this "free" media is actually dangerous as it becomes a game of "don't trust them, trust us!" and whoever has the better image, the best marketing and exposure wins over the others.

replies(5): >>44496938 #>>44496954 #>>44496960 #>>44497188 #>>44499982 #
notpushkin ◴[] No.44496938[source]
As a Russian, I wouldn’t trust anything that comes out on RT. Banning it though is a really bad move – something I would expect from the Russian government itself, not Europe. One of the reasons I’ve become disillusioned in EU recently.
replies(2): >>44497005 #>>44497048 #
atmavatar ◴[] No.44497048[source]
> Banning it though is a really bad move

Why? With how confidently you state that, I'm rather curious what reasons you have.

replies(1): >>44497274 #
int_19h ◴[] No.44497274[source]
Because free people should be able to decide for themselves what to read and listen to.

If you want a longer answer, George Orwell penned an eloquent one all the way back in 1944: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...

replies(1): >>44497646 #
atmavatar ◴[] No.44497646[source]
The problem is, we've seen how that ends up: you get bad actors masquerading as news (e.g., Fox News, Info Wars, OAN, etc.) and people flocking to low information, high entertainment vendors over good faith (if sometimes or even often flawed) traditional news (e.g., Associated Press, Reuters, BBC News, etc.).

As such, you end up with a large cohort of people believing immigrants eat their pets, vaccines have microchips in them and are more harmful than the diseases they protect against, 5g towers cause cancer, chemtrails are a thing, and trickle-down economics benefits working people.

Now, I may ultimately accept the idea that no matter what we do, we're always inevitably screwed, and even the smallest attempt to curtail speech will always end in an even worse outcome (like how there exist some infinities larger than others), but even I get a little uncomfortable being that nihilistic.

replies(2): >>44498331 #>>44504860 #
1. int_19h ◴[] No.44504860[source]
The problem with the opposite is that you get bad actors deciding on what you are or aren't allowed to read.