BBC Reporter asks about 10 year old girl killed in shelling in Ukraine, can't find anything relating - Polidicks

[url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32137302[/url] [quote=BBC]Information war has been a huge part of the Ukraine conflict, with both sides accusing the other of manipulating the media. With Ukrainian channels off air in the rebel-held Donetsk region, the population there relies entirely on Russian media. Russian television stations recently report claims that a 10-year-old girl had been killed by shelling. The BBC News team of Natalia Antelava and Abdujalil Abdurasulov tried to find out what happened to the girl, and discovered that all was not as it seemed.[/quote] This quote is basically all of the news story that was written because the story itself is based on this video, which can be found here in the post or in the link. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW-4a0P8sjs[/media]

Does not surprise though while media here in the US can be guilty of all quoting the same source for a story, they clearly understood it was fake yet because they're Kremlin controlled it doesn't matter

Force a person through fear and you will always have trouble controlling them. Convince a person through information manipulation to willing follow and you will have a truly dedicated follower.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47485311]Does not surprise though while media here in the US can be guilty of all quoting the same source for a story, they clearly understood it was fake yet because they're Kremlin controlled it doesn't matter[/QUOTE] The US media (and government) perhaps isn't so completely blatant in their lies and bias, but if anything I would say that makes them worse. The little lies are much harder to spot. [QUOTE=Kigen;47485329]Force a person through fear and you will always have trouble controlling them. Convince a person through information manipulation to willing follow and you will have a truly dedicated follower.[/QUOTE] This is "just" propaganda; I think too many people think of propaganda as something from the past, those posters from WWII perhaps, when in reality it has only become more integrated into our lives. We're surrounded by lies and bias, little and big.

It's Ironic to see BBC "uncovering truth" behind russian media propaganda while they are knee deep buried in their own methods of manipulation, for example by removing entire journalist reports from their site [url]http://russia-insider.com/en/military_media_watch/2014/11/12/11-48-09am/mh17_witnesses_tell_bbc_they_saw_ukrainian_jet_bbc[/url] [quote]On July 23, two days after the Russian Ministry of Defense presented a radar track of a Ukrainian SU-25 fighter climbing to within three kilometers of MH17, the BBC’s Russian service aired a report by correspondent Olga Ivshina. The report originated when Ivshina and her cameraman went in search of the field outside the town of Torez, where the US government claims an SA-11 BUK surface to air missile was launched at the Boeing 777 on July 17. Instead of finding witnesses who saw or filmed with camera phones a SAM launch plume that would look like this test firing of an SA-11 in Russia, what Ivshina found instead were people who heard two loud explosions in the sky and described Ukrainian fighter jets near the MH17 crash scene. As Ivshina described in the opening of her report, these Donbas locals were certain the Boeing airliner was shot down by the Ukrainian Air Force. As RT reported in late July, the [B]same night the video was posted on the BBC’s Russian service website the British-taxpayer funded network immediately took the video down.[/B] The ‘404 not found’ ghost URL of the video can still be found here, but the content is gone. Russia Today reported on the removal here, including the Russian blogosphere’s suspicions that this was a blatant act of censorship by the British government in order to protect Kiev.[/quote] Ofcourse there are more than few examples of blatant propaganda in russian media sphere. But truth is, in regard of coverage of ukranian conflict, there is no unbias coverage and eventually any news agency goes down the drain. German example: [url]http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150216/1018353538.html[/url] [quote]A German media monitoring organization has filed a complaint against federal channel ZDF over false reporting on the situation in eastern Ukraine, Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten has reported. The complaint, filed by a citizens' group known as the Permanent Open Committee of Media Monitoring, revolves around a photo accompanying a recent news segment airing on ZDF about alleged Russian military presence in eastern Ukraine. The segment, which described the alleged movement of Russian tanks and missile systems into eastern Ukraine, featured a photo with the caption "Russian armored vehicles moved through Isvarino in the Lugansk region, February 12, 2015," citing "Ukrainian army spokesman Andrei Lysenko in Kiev." The only problem is that the image in question was actually taken several years earlier, in 2009, and in South Ossetia, not Ukraine. In their complaint to ZDF, one of Germany's largest broadcasters, the Open Committee notes that "it would be interesting to know why such an image, which has nothing to do with the news in question, is being repeated, meant as it is to convince a third party of the truthfulness of assumptions about an "invasion by [Russian] armor." Maren Mueller, one of the founders of the Open Committee and a former media worker herself, believes that much of German coverage of events in eastern Ukraine is tainted by distortions, half-truths and outright lies. Mueller says that "the coverage of events in Ukraine by the media has reached the height of fantasy, and is not worth taking seriously." She notes that the tank story is just one example of the kinds of distortions that regularly occur. Recently, German media watchers forced an ARD correspondent to retract his words on the deaths of two civilians in Krasnoarmeysk, after the latter had erroneously claimed that the deaths were caused by "the bullets of the new rulers," meaning the anti-Kiev rebels. The channel has since been forced to issue an apology over the mistake. Ms. Mueller believes that among the biggest problems of the German media's coverage of events is the "dangerous closeness" between the media's line and that of the description of the conflict being provided in the government. [/quote] It only seems shocking because you want to believe it's otherwise, but when you think of it, politically allighned reporting is a guilty pleasure, no matter how "independant" newscast claims to be. As long as their report fit with general tone that their audience accepts (we are good, they are bad), they make quick bucks by throwing more sensationalist logs in fire of hysteria. Ukraine does it, Russia Does it, and whole rest of the world does it as fucking well.

It doesn't matter that this particular story was made up, I'm pretty sure a lot of kids died in this dumb war anyway

The BBC'S shit is a separate issue [editline]9th April 2015[/editline] Talking to karimatrix [editline]9th April 2015[/editline] Talking to karimatrix

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;47487710]The BBC'S shit is a separate issue [editline]9th April 2015[/editline] Talking to karimatrix [editline]9th April 2015[/editline] Talking to karimatrix[/QUOTE] I remarked it being ironical and delivered my opinion on why. Not to mention that if RT was in that position instead of BBC, providing debunk on Ukranian propaganda myth, you would pull same argument without a doubt.

No, because that's not the issue, and making a dumb argument because you think someone else would if the rules were reversed is beyond silly

So this one girl never existed, doesn't mean children haven't died in Donetsk.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;47487724]No, because that's not the issue, and making a dumb argument because you think someone else would if the rules were reversed is beyond silly[/QUOTE] OP uncovers issues with made up propaganda and raises discussion regarding infromation manipulation. I shared opinion in regard of aproach toward information in general, explaining how example in OP is less than exclusive. Did i try to defend propaganda myth? Did i argue to whitewash media behind it? No. My post was as relevant as it should be and i don't see you arguing with rest of posters before me.

[QUOTE=karimatrix;47487699]It's Ironic to see BBC "uncovering truth" behind russian media propaganda while they are knee deep buried in their own methods of manipulation, for example by removing entire journalist reports from their site [url]http://russia-insider.com/en/military_media_watch/2014/11/12/11-48-09am/mh17_witnesses_tell_bbc_they_saw_ukrainian_jet_bbc[/url] Ofcourse there are more than few examples of blatant propaganda in russian media sphere. But truth is, in regard of coverage of ukranian conflict, there is no unbias coverage and eventually any news agency goes down the drain. German example: [url]http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150216/1018353538.html[/url] It only seems shocking because you want to believe it's otherwise, but when you think of it, politically allighned reporting is a guilty pleasure, no matter how "independant" newscast claims to be. As long as their report fit with general tone that their audience accepts (we are good, they are bad), they make quick bucks by throwing more sensationalist logs in fire of hysteria. Ukraine does it, Russia Does it, and whole rest of the world does it as fucking well.[/QUOTE] Ok, I'm gonna take these one at a time. [QUOTE]On July 23, two days after the Russian Ministry of Defense presented a radar track of a Ukrainian SU-25 fighter climbing to within three kilometers of MH17, the BBC’s Russian service aired a report by correspondent Olga Ivshina. As RT reported in late July, the same night the video was posted on the BBC’s Russian service website the British-taxpayer funded network immediately took the video down. The ‘404 not found’ ghost URL of the video can still be found here, but the content is gone. Russia Today reported on the removal here, including the Russian blogosphere’s suspicions that this was a blatant act of censorship by the British government in order to protect Kiev.[/QUOTE] Ah, yes, the SU-25 that can magically climb over 10,000 feet in the air, more than twice the altitude it was meant to engage in, to down a civilian aircraft. I'll keep my point short for this one. Deleting a video =/= inventing a story about a little girl who got blown up By the way, while we're on the topic of MH17, what did happen with the analysis of it? [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/07/21/world/europe/wreckage-offers-clues-on-why-flight-17-went-down.html?_r=0"]Oh right.[/URL] I think the Dutch investigation is still ongoing though, so maybe they'll shed a different light. [QUOTE]The segment, which described the alleged movement of Russian tanks and missile systems into eastern Ukraine, featured a photo with the caption "Russian armored vehicles moved through Isvarino in the Lugansk region, February 12, 2015," citing "Ukrainian army spokesman Andrei Lysenko in Kiev." The [B]only[/B] problem is that the image in question was actually taken several years earlier, in 2009, and in South Ossetia, not Ukraine. In their complaint to ZDF, one of Germany's largest broadcasters, the Open Committee notes that [B]"it would be interesting to know why such an image, which has nothing to do with the news in question, is being repeated, meant as it is to convince a third party of the truthfulness of assumptions about an "invasion by [Russian] armor."[/B][/QUOTE] In other words, the only objection was that the segment used an incorrect picture. This is about as scandalous as CNN running an Iraq war picture when it was meant to display an Afghanistan war picture. There were no qualms about the 'news in question' itself, the actual subject of the segment being the Russian tanks and missile systems moving into eastern Ukraine. Neither of these come anywhere close to fabricating the existence and death of a little girl so don't you dare think you can get away with saying they are in any way comparable.

[QUOTE=Hidole555;47487870]Ok, I'm gonna take these one at a time. Ah, yes, the SU-25 that can magically climb over 10,000 feet in the air, more than twice the altitude it was meant to engage in, to down a civilian aircraft. I'll keep my point short for this one. Deleting a video =/= inventing a story about a little girl who got blown up By the way, while we're on the topic of MH17, what did happen with the analysis of it? [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/07/21/world/europe/wreckage-offers-clues-on-why-flight-17-went-down.html?_r=0"]Oh right.[/URL] I think the Dutch investigation is still ongoing though, so maybe they'll shed a different light. In other words, the only objection was that the segment used an incorrect picture. This is about as scandalous as CNN running an Iraq war picture when it was meant to display an Afghanistan war picture. There were no qualms about the 'news in question' itself, the actual subject of the segment being the Russian tanks and missile systems moving into eastern Ukraine. Neither of these come anywhere close to fabricating the existence and death of a little girl so don't you dare think you can get away with saying they are in any way comparable.[/QUOTE] I did not knew there was some "scale system" as in regard of comparison of faked news or political adjustment. Does a denial of certain deaths or lack of coverage fits in that system? Sure, yes, i am not going to counter fake newsreport of dead child by looking for same sort of fake dead child elsewhere. My point was not about comparing identical fake incidents, but rather simply remark that when a news agency that allows itself to eliminate reports that do not fit with general opinion (yes, only that, not the argument about context of report), goes on a mission to debunk other media is rather ironical move. Soo yeah, i dare.

karimatrix you have a real problem with posting in threads like these you see, you tend to completely go off on this really bizarre tangent of "WELL how about (insert non-Russian news source), they are completely unreliable! Here, have a Russian source about it!" also, see how when someone says that the BBC is a separate issue, you immediately defend yourself by saying "I merely shared my opinion!" you seriously cannot expect us to not question your reasoning when you do shit like this.

[QUOTE=Boaraes;47488443]karimatrix you have a real problem with posting in threads like these you see, you tend to completely go off on this really bizarre tangent of "WELL how about (insert non-Russian news source), they are completely unreliable! Here, have a Russian source about it!" also, see how when someone says that the BBC is a separate issue, you immediately defend yourself by saying "I merely shared my opinion!" you seriously cannot expect us to not question your reasoning when you do shit like this.[/QUOTE] i don't see where i outright call them unrealiable.One more time. read them posts through. I remarked that it was ironical to see such report coming from BBC, since as i stated, they are not the most clean agency themselves. does it mean they are the sole example and i am calling them unreliable? Does it mean they are separate issue, if it's their report in OP? Nope and Nope again. Then i added up to discussion regarding modern information manipulation providing reason of my thinking regarding issue as whole, not only exclusively to russia and added an example surfaced on web. If it is soo painful for everyone that it's not only russian mass media who got bad history novadays, well i am sorry. We live in a world where media control thing was not invented by Putin in a first place. Perfected a bit, yeah, maybe.

If you admit to both the BBC and Russian news sites being corrupt, then why did you cite Russian sources for your claims of BBC's supposed hypocrisy?

Karimatrix make your own separate thread about BBC being evil and source RT

Is karimatrix going on about that photo shopped picture "proof" Russia today threw together of a fighter jet and mh-17 in the same google earth satellite picture. Because that's fucking fake also its lesser known that the Russian government actually funds people to shit propaganda on every site on the internet.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47489250]Is karimatrix going on about that photo shopped picture "proof" Russia today threw together of a fighter jet and mh-17 in the same google earth satellite picture. Because that's fucking fake also its lesser known that the Russian government actually funds people to shit propaganda on every site on the internet.[/QUOTE] No no he's going off the bogus information about the SU-25 the Russian government wants people to believe, even though one of the main engineers for the SU-25 Frogfoot says it's physically impossible for it to climb to the height of a Boeing 777, and even if it did and fired on it, it wouldn't have shotgunned the side of the cockpit like what happened to MH17, it would have locked onto an engine.

"They're killing our children!" is one of the top three arguments the people over here use. One death being fake won't stop the others being real to them, I imagine. It's still nice that they're taking apart the propaganda machine, even if piece by piece.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47489250]Is karimatrix going on about that photo shopped picture "proof" Russia today threw together of a fighter jet and mh-17 in the same google earth satellite picture. Because that's fucking fake also its lesser known that the Russian government actually funds people to shit propaganda on every site on the internet.[/QUOTE] Which is what I seriously think he is, check out his other posts

i think karimatrix is legit part of [url]http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/27/interview-russian-troll-factory-employee/[/url]

[QUOTE=Scot;47492374]i think karimatrix is legit part of [url]http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/27/interview-russian-troll-factory-employee/[/url][/QUOTE] He has heavily criticised the Russian government several times though and has acknowledged that Russian media is bias. If he was such a mercenary troll poster he isn't doing very well. To say he is, is more likely someone trying to fit in with a crowd, than someone legitimately coming to that conclusion themselves.

[QUOTE=Scot;47492374]i think karimatrix is legit part of [url]http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/27/interview-russian-troll-factory-employee/[/url][/QUOTE] i was just about to post the same thing [url]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/revealed-putins-army-of-prokremlin-bloggers-10138893.html[/url]