I didn’t. I refuted it with just as strong a claim as they made. if you think you can get them to provide a source, go for it. I happen to know it’s untrue, so I don’t care to bicker with them about it.
No it doesn’t. Operation mockingbird implies that every government tries to influence the narrative of the free press, and literally always has. And the CIA was no exception.
If you see no difference between an attempt to influence the narrative of the free press by the state, and not having a free press at all, only a literal extension of the state serving propaganda as the narrative, I don’t know what to tell you.
this is splitting hairs, and makes no difference in whether it matters that rt is an official government channel. it doesn’t because all media is propaganda.
Excellent rebuttal backed with facts.
I provided just as much evidence as the comment to which I was responding
You could have asked them for a source then instead of doing something as useless?
I didn’t. I refuted it with just as strong a claim as they made. if you think you can get them to provide a source, go for it. I happen to know it’s untrue, so I don’t care to bicker with them about it.
I mean…. She did go to a gala celebrating the 10th anniversary of Russia Today, which is state controlled propaganda.
so? operation mocking bird implies every us news company is a CIA asset.
No it doesn’t. Operation mockingbird implies that every government tries to influence the narrative of the free press, and literally always has. And the CIA was no exception.
If you see no difference between an attempt to influence the narrative of the free press by the state, and not having a free press at all, only a literal extension of the state serving propaganda as the narrative, I don’t know what to tell you.
this is splitting hairs, and makes no difference in whether it matters that rt is an official government channel. it doesn’t because all media is propaganda.
Amazing take.