More freedom at RT than at CNN or NBC or Fox

With all due respect to the folks on here who work in TV, "breaking news" is the most-overused term in that business. Remembering when Prince died, it was still "breaking news" 10 hours later!

 

Believe me, you're preaching to the choir with most of us. A station in town slaps "breaking news" on damn near everything that happened in the last 24 hours.

 

You post here. You get a free pass from that crap here.

 

I can see that. Who's actually watching the English version of RT? Besides political analysts, the insane, the mildly curious and folks like that?

I imagine a feeling of Tra-la-la-who-cares? permeates the whole organisation from top to bottom.

 

The network averages about 700,000 regular viewers. Didn't even become available on my carrier (DirecTV) until September 2017.

Nobody shouts. You don't have interviews where two people are interrupting each other and talking over one another. And no "side" is always viewed as evil. That's three checkmarks in its favor over CNN and Fox News.

 

Is Zombie Larry King still doing a show on the Putin Network?

 

Wow, that is amazing. I would've figured that viewership would be much more like Voice of America than the BBC World Service.

 

I did my part to help. Nielsen sent us a questionnaire a few months ago, along with $2. Promised $5 more if I filled it out and sent it back. I listed RT as my most-watched network.

 

First time I watched RT was actually in Russia. It was one of the only English channels we got. My friend and I laughed and laughed at the hilariously distorted depiction of America. We joked about it for months afterward.

I thought @BTExpress’s main goal here was to make the point that our view of Russia is similarly distorted, a message I certainly take to heart. But if it’s to the point of straight up praising RT and turning to it for news of any sort, that’s hilarious in its own right.

 

I come not necessarily to "praise" RT; only to point out that what's often said about it (all editorial comes directly from the Kremlin, etc.) doesn't seem to be the case. And I watch it more to see "that point of view" than I do for any gospel of news. There was a CNN segment a few months ago where Chris Cuomo and Kellyanne Conway just shouted at each other (and over each other) for 20 minutes straight. Just painfully unwatchable. RT doesn't tend to do that.

I have no idea at what point (or which RT) you were seeing (they have RT America, RT United Kingdom, etc.), or if that RT was specifically directed toward a Russian audience.

I actually find the RT America of today somewhat dry, as I don't see many cartoonish depictions of anything. Because it's directed toward an American audience, there is little news about Russia (which I AM interested in). And half the programming is documentaries. It's only been widely available to US viewers for less than two years, so I have no idea if its style has undergone any kind of change over the years.

 

BTE - For a long time, you could say similar things about Fox News. Especially during the first half of W's presidency, the political bias was rarely overt (or it was much less overt than it is now). It's funny that Sanchez points to the fact that he has never received a mandate or censorship from the Kremlin, because that could just as easily be interpreted as evidence that his bosses did a good job of hiring. Do pawns ever recognize that they are on the front lines of a game being played?

 

Looking for something else, I found an interview Larry King did with Eric Andre on a web network or something. It was at some point after the 2016 RNC, so somewhat recent. Eric Andre was hilarious, but Larry King was sharp enough to keep up with him and not melt into a puddle of confusion, but just enough bothered and confused to make the interview great.