357
submitted 1 day ago by OutForARip@lemmy.ca to c/world@quokk.au
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] npdean@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago

Dismissing Russian media reports occurs way more commonly but no one says anything then.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 7 points 9 hours ago

Russian sources arnt legitimate, and are filled with propaganda, so its generally ignored. it would be deleted on reddit as it would here as well.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 11 points 19 hours ago

What-aboutism. I love how generic and useless you're being.

[-] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 16 points 23 hours ago

Ah, so now we're on to classic whataboutism fallacy. Pointing out that Russian media gets dismissed (often for good reason) doesn’t make it logically valid to dismiss any report just because of its origin.

If you think The Kyiv Independent is questionable, that's fine! Interrogate the claims. Ask:

What are the sources?

Are they independent?

Can they be verified elsewhere?

The same rules apply to Russian media and every other claim.

But using other fallacies doesn't justify your response. Saying “Well, people dismiss Russian media too” isn’t a defense. It’s just avoiding the argument again.

[-] bigboismith@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

Russian media rarely if ever cites their sources, and when they do they are dubious at best

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 9 hours ago

and mostly because putin control what russian media puts out as well.

[-] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

These ones certainly aren't.
From the people who gave us the Ghost of Kiev and the Snake Island fantasy

[-] loudwhisper@infosec.pub 1 points 9 hours ago

Did they report on those at all?

I searched their websites and I got 0 hits on the Ghost of Kyiv, and 1 hit on Snake Island (this).

[-] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

"From the people who gave us the Ghost of Kiev" is not specifically that rag.
The whole western propaganda machine in and out of ex-ukraine lies.
From the begining, when the Russians were supposedly out of ammo or gas to the claims they had to use shovels.

But I'm sure the KievIndependent is totally independent and neutral.
How could they not be, started with Canadian (full of WW2 ukronazi diasphora offspring) and European NED money.

And one look at who works for them can confirm that:

  • its contributing editor, Liliane Bivings, used to work and write for the NATO think tank The Atlantic Council, specifically covering Ukraine. Producer ​​Elina-Alem Kent worked for the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv in 2017; not exactly the background one would associate with grassroots, independent media. Chief financial officer Jakub Parusinski was previously employed by the International Center for Policy Studies, a Ukraine-focused think tank sponsored by numerous Western governments. In 2020, culture reporter Artur Korniienko was awarded a fellowship to work for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, an organization that The New York Times once described as a "worldwide propaganda network built by the CIA." Meanwhile, contributor to The Kyiv Independent Lucy Minicozzi-Wheeland previously worked for the Council on Foreign Relations, was given a scholarship by the State Department to study Ukraine, and also worked at the Ukraine Crisis Media Center, an organization directly funded by the U.S. government.

The unquestioned star of The Kyiv Independent, however, is defense reporter Illia Ponomarenko, who, in a short time, has built up a following of over 1.1 million people on Twitter. From the front lines, his tweets and videos go viral daily and provide the basis for much of the Western media's reporting on the conflict. Yet Ponomarenko is far from a neutral actor, and spends an inordinate amount of his time embedded with the Azov Battalion, the Neo-Nazi group whom he describes as his "good friend[s]" and his "brothers in arms." *

Why don't you cut out the middle man and ask the US regime directly what the facts are in ex-ukraine.

[-] loudwhisper@infosec.pub 1 points 2 hours ago

There is no such thing as "neutral" in a war, but facts are facts, and lies are lies. If the position people take means people say lies, you disprove the lies.

From all this word-soup I see that you have effectively not a good example of false reporting from the Kyiv Independent, and you cast a wide net to the whole "western media".

What is an example of neutral media in your opinion that you consider factual and trustworthy?

this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
357 points (100.0% liked)

World News

476 readers
440 users here now

Please help and contribute as we vote on rules:
https://quokk.au/post/21590

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS