Media Coverage of Ukraine Before and After the War

submitted by Tarrock from media.communities.win

all 18 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]kilo 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Also Ukraine just outlawed all opposition parties. WHAT A SHINING EXAMPLE OF DEMOCRACY LOL!

[–]ShekelPa 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's the "democracy" those jackasses always talk about when demanding justice in any way is regarded as a "threat to our democracY"

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

In my simulation the theorem that states that it only can be funny to watch flags turning when the wind changes has been implemented a long time ago.

[–]jagworms 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

it's not a crisis, it's an opportunity.

[–]Site_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

So is this just an FYI, op? Or is there something broken in your brain which says the two sides are mutually incompatible?

Btw - The "embroiled in trump's impeachment mess" probably doesn't mean what you think it does, if you think it's something which reflects badly on Zelenskyy. There's nothing in that story which reflects badly on him.

Such a weird post. Like - do you deny that the fight for Ukraine is a fight for liberal ideals? How? Explain it. So if you agree the right side stories are as true as the left side....then what's the point of this shitty post?

[–]Newzok 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Not OP but the point is that the media spins angles in order to influence public opinion when it suits the powers that be. In this case we go from a general antipathy towards a minor ex soviet state to emphasising their Western values - manufacturing consent of US involvement in what is in some parts a proxy war. It's complex but it is good, imo, to acknowledge that our media manipulates us. Essentially, enjoy the propaganda but be aware that's what it is.

[–]Site_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

media spins angles in order to influence public opinion

That could only be true if the ten stories above are 100% of all media produced on Ukraine, ever.

Do you think that it's impossible to find a "positive" story from before the war and a "negative" on dated afterwards?

Is it not more correct to say:

the point is that the curator of this shitty meme spins angles in order to influence public opinion when it suits

Whoever put this crappy macro propaganda together has a clear agenda. You can't conclude the same about the handful of publications surveyed, from this sample of eight headlines

[–]Insider 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

ahh..so BBC reporting that there's a far-right/neo-Nazi problem in Ukraine before the war:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30414955

And then after the war saying it's all Russian disinformation:

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-60853404

That's really fact-based reporting ain't it. No agendas here.

Beep beep boop. Too much free speech on Saidit, must insert pedophile propaganda. -signed Site_sux

[–]Site_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Come on, your brain is bigger than that.

No, the BBC in your march 2022 link did not say that it's "all russian disinformation". If you watch it, they even interview an Azov member about the supposed Nazi symbol and talk about how, at the formation of Azov, there were members who were Nazis. It's right there in the video you said it shouldn't be in.

Is your point that all media coverage of all countries must focus on the presence of right wing shitbags in a country, when covering events there? Wouldn't that draw a lot of undue attention to boards like saidit?

That's really fact-based reporting ain't it

I can see you wrote this sarcastically but accidentally all you linked to was some fact based reporting. So maybe your brain isn't so big after all.

must insert pedophile propaganda

I think there are support groups out there for people who keep thinking pedophilic thoughts, if that's what's bothering you

[–]Newzok 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well yeah fair point. OP has his own agenda too.

[–]SoCo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

If you compare the closed door testimony of former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, to the rest of the Trump Ukraine impeachment gaslighting performance, you'll hear her explain how it was right for her to be replaced, how she was engulfed in formal accusations of corruption, how those who accused her of corruption went to blow the whistle in a non-conventional way, and seemingly were punished by the US criminal justice system for doing so. She also explains how Trump requesting a show of interest in non-corruption, an extended olive branch, she referred to it as, from Ukraine before sending the next shipment of US anti-Tank weapons, was customary and expected of Trump. (It was also done by his predecessors). Trump asked for help investigating 3 of the most major US-Ukraine related corruption scandals: questions of US officials pressuring the former prosecutor out of his position, investigation of the oddly shelved investigation into the Bidens' Burisma corruption, and the single purported actual evidence of the Russia Election Hoax, which was a handwritten receipt conveniently found in an office in Ukraine. She explains how this wasn't what he was expected to ask, but fit what was expected of him and he was likely goaded into doing as a setup.

[–]Site_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Pdf here

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/04/776075849/read-former-ukraine-ambassador-yovanovitchs-testimony-to-congress

Zero uses of the term "olive branch"

The term "anti-tank" appears once on page 189, and rather than trump asking for anticorruption measures, he's asking for Zelenskyy to look into Biden dirt.

So I'm not sure if your post is really grounded in reality

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The Javelin anti tank weapons, were material support the US had agreed to give Ukraine. They were talked about extensively in the testimony; how she agreed with arming them, pressuring Russia through doing so, and how it affected the EU/US relationship with Ukraine.

She detailed extensively how this wasn't "Biden dirt", but a serious corruption issue that plagued our State Department's efforts in supporting Ukraine an their anti-corruption overhaul. She explained how companies would hire on to their boards, prominent foreign people, to buy credibility, how Burisma was suspected of corruption, how the investigation was simply put on hold, and how all the things Trump asked about, where current and relevant large and long standing corruption issues related to the US and Ukraine, not personal dirt on a rival....like the falsified Steele Dossier.

Yet, you are right, the part about the olive branch is missing and so is her explaining when an ambassador should step down, before being confused at why she was fired, explaining how the accusations against her, fit the reason to step down, without realizing it.

There is also additions about Russia, and what seem more like current Ukraine/Russia propaganda, I don't recall being there. I think I will see if I can dig up a backup copy, in case the currently hosted one might be altered.

[–]Site_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Clearly you're trying to gaslight and lie to the fine truthseekers of saidit. I don't know if you're a paid cabalist shill or not, but I can prove you very wrong here.

The Javelin anti tank weapons, were material support the US had agreed to give Ukraine. They were talked about extensively in the testimony;

She detailed extensively how this wasn't "Biden dirt", but a serious corruption issue

'Anti-tank' appears once in the text on page 189. The word 'Javelin' appears 12 times and not once does she say they're held up for anything other than trump's domestic politics.

Q: Then immediately after President Zelensky mentions the Javelins, on the top of page 3, President Trump mentions CrowdStrike, and then he also says, The server, they say Ukraine has it.

A: Yeah.

Q: Do you have any understanding of what the President was talking about there?

A: Well, I didn't at the time that I first read this summary, but obviously, there has been explanation in the news.

Q: And what's your understanding?

A: Well, that the server that was used to hack the DNC

The fact that you think someone altered congressional record to cover up for trump's crimes speaks to your total derangement, nobody could be as crazy as your suggestion that the record has been altered, that's how I know you're probably a paid shill for the trumpist cabal

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Why don't you just try reading the whole thing instead of searching for keywords, which never works well on crap PDF scans of documents.

Yes, we were giving anti-tank javelin rockets to Ukraine. That was really well known and not something you need to rely on this testimony to know about.

Don't worry, I was busy this weekend, but I have a backed up copy from before to verify. The part of the olive leave/branch line was in her into statement, which she dropped to the press before her deposition, in fear that she would be misrepresented by the Congressional investigators. Yes, lots of history gets rewritten on the Internet very regularly. Documents get altered, the Wayback machine gets it's history cropped, and Wikipedia gets its change log trimmed, especially for political reasons. A good example of that happening is here.

[–]Site_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

try reading the whole thing

Because it's 317 pages long and I have better things to do than reading 317 pages of dry testimony. You're the one saying it's relevant - why don't you go and read all 317 pages instead of telling others to. Then tell me which pages to look at.

That's like me saying - there's a flying spaghetti monster around mars. And it's existence is very clearly proven in the text. But you'll have to go read the entire corpus of human literature to find the proof because I'm not going to tell you where it is.

Here are a few of the unsubstantiated points you made, which aren't backed up in the text you cited.

  1. Trump was goaded/"set up" to ask for domestic political support.

  2. Trump just wanted some anti corruption measure before sending the agreed weaponry.

  3. She admitted to being corrupt and said those who blew the whistle on her were punished by the US criminal justice system.

The real truth is that Giuliani, Lev Parnas and corrupt prosecutor Lutsenko cooked up a "drug deal" of disinfo and accusations against Ambassador Yovanovic and trump was either stupid or crooked enough to believe them.

Now because the written record proves that, you're having to make up and spin a bunch of nonsense where she actually says the exact opposite of what she is recorded as saying. That's called gaslighting, and like trump, you're either stupid or a crook to go along with it

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You didn't read all this back when it was happening? Then you probably shouldn't have an opinion on this....

You are nit-picking super hard.

...and you've heavily misrepresented what I've said with your shitty numbered list.

You are not arguing in good faith.

[–]Site_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Bruh it's not nitpicking, I'm pointing out how virtually everything you wrote is unsupported in the evidence you cite. You're not grounded in reality.

Oh you didn't read about the flying spaghetti monster yet? It's right there within the text, there in the entire corpus of human writings, and don't you dare hold an opinion on whether a flying monster made of spaghetti can exist in the vacuum of space until you've read it, because that would make you a hypocrite