Remix clone Hacker News

Americans live in a society lying to them by omission. You have to have learned AlJazeera, RT or Xinhua exist, because they're not going to be shown to you by normal channels, and you almost certainly go on a watchlist if you visit too much.

The whole point is to remove anything that may cause a passive media consumer to question what is presented to them.

▲

JumpCrisscross 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> You have to have learned AlJazeera, RT or Xinhua exist, because they're not going to be shown to you by normal channels

They’ve each run ads on billboards in New York. I distinctly remember Xinhua’s in Time Square.

▲

fidotron 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Recently?

Al Jazeera America closed down some years ago. (2016 apparently).

▲

JumpCrisscross 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Definitely after 2016, but before Covid.

	▲	fidotron 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		At the risk of a tangent, were Xinhua seriously fishing for a US audience? Or was it more kudos from the billboard? My parents used to be addicted to Al Jazeera, then some unspecified incident occurred and we were never to speak of it again. All very strange.

▲

reaperducer 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You have to have learned AlJazeera, RT or Xinhua exist, because they're not going to be shown to you by normal channels

Al Jazeera is widely known across the country, and during the time I had cable television was available in every city in which I lived.

RT is available over-the-air on free regular broadcast channels in some American cities. You can't get less restricted than that.

You speak like someone who's never even been to the United States.

▲

throw310822 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It doesn't matter what media are available as long as you manage to control their impact- that is, the vast majority of your citizens don't really watch them. The moment one becomes impactful, you can shut it down citing dangerous foreign interference (and it's true!).

▲

fidotron 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Al Jazeera America stopped in 2016.

RT America was removed from most services as of 2022 and hasn't been broadcasting since.

This is changing in the wrong direction and you are getting less free over time.

> You speak like someone who's never even been to the United States.

You speak like someone who's never left it.

▲

throwawayq3423 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Both AJ and RT are widely available online. Your bar of "American cable networks must grant licenses to broadcast hostile foreign state propaganda" is one that no other country abides by.

In fact, even the idea of allowing CNN or BBC to broadcast into people's homes in Russia is so laughable, I don't know why you even brought it up, or what your point is.

▲

fidotron 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> In fact, even the idea of allowing CNN or BBC to broadcast into people's homes in Russia is so laughable, I don't know why you even brought it up, or what your point is.

No one's talking about availability in Russia except you.

And to add some substance about why AJ and RT can be accessed I will quote another commenter who put it better than I did: "The reason you can is that very few people actually do. As the Tik Tok affair shows, the moment the US suspects it might have some real competitor in controlling the narrative, it shuts them down. Maybe it's the right thing to do, but it's worth taking note that it's how things are."

▲

throwawayq3423 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> No one's talking about availability in Russia except you.

That's the other side of the coin. Why do you expect one country to be totally open and allow the other to be totally closed? How is that a standard that makes any sense?

> "The reason you can is that very few people actually do."

I don't see what consumption habits have to do with anything. This is also contradicting what you just said, that people in the US don't have access to this content.

> As the Tik Tok affair shows, the moment the US suspects it might have some real competitor in controlling the narrative, it shuts them down.

Who is the "US" here? The U.S. government? A specific company? Without specifics you aren't really saying anything at all, just implying some greater unfalsifiable conspiracy.

▲

fidotron 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> This is also contradicting what you just said, that people in the US don't have access to this content.

The point is that their other media so promotes a lack of curiosity by providing a false impression of being comprehensive. If you risk bursting that bubble suddenly you are first mocked, then they try to buy you, then they block you, and tell you it is your fault.

The US is held to higher standards because that is how it promotes itself. Many of us outside the US are actually saddened by a betrayal of these values, because we are all too aware of how lacking many places are, and we need the US to be better than this.

	▲	throwawayq3423 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> The point is that their other media so promotes a lack of curiosity by providing a false impression of being comprehensive. If you risk bursting that bubble suddenly you are first mocked, then they try to buy you, then they block you, and tell you it is your fault. I'm not being funny but I honestly couldn't follow that. > The US is held to higher standards because that is how it promotes itself. You are right, they are. That's why they didn't prevent TikTok from operating and growing domestically for years. Then the Chinese government starting using it as an asset of their espionage apparatus, so in response the U.S. STILL didn't ban the content in contains, but rather told the (apparently) independent company operating TikTok that the content is free to remain as long as it's not controlled by a hostile foreign government. The refusal to sell is the most obvious public facing proof that they are in fact Chinese government controlled. All of that is how the U.S. is different, but as evidenced by this conversation and multiple other threads, no one really cares about the nuance. And the greater context to this discussion is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance > if intolerant ideologies are allowed unchecked expression, they could exploit open society values to erode or destroy tolerance itself through authoritarian or oppressive practices. The application of this principle can be seen when closed societies maintain complete control over their domestic media, while spreading as much toxic nonsense as possible abroad[1]. At the same they are completely intolerant of speech at home, they exploit the openness of the west by pushing disinfo they know to be wrong (and harmful) aboard. They continue to muddy the waters by pretending their information warfare is "just asking questions" (RT's moto is "Question More"). It's an extension of their hybrid warfare efforts, and shouldn't be seen as anything less. [1] For example, domestic Russian media encourages citizens to get vaccinated against COVID19, while promoting anti-vaccine conspiracies abroad. This is one of thousands of examples. https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/russia-china-iran-covid-...

▲

reaperducer 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You speak like someone who's never left it.

Darn it, then decade I spent in Asia and the 100+ trips to Europe and the Middle East didn't prepare me for the rapier banter of some rando on the internet.

	▲	fidotron 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Dishes it out but can’t take it? How appropriate.