Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   Justice Department to RT: You are nothing but a Russian propaganda machine. Time to register as a foreign agent and reveal your funding   ( thehill.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Foreign Agents Registration, Agents Registration Act, U.S. intelligence community, Justice Department, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Donald  
•       •       •

3243 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Sep 2017 at 6:01 PM (18 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



63 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-09-12 04:35:49 PM  
I assume POTUS doesn't know about this yet.
 
2017-09-12 04:37:32 PM  
I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.
 
2017-09-12 04:38:05 PM  

hobnail: I assume POTUS doesn't know about this yet.


You can't spell Trump without RT
 
2017-09-12 04:41:35 PM  
It's been noted on FARK.
 
2017-09-12 04:50:25 PM  
I would have put the Spiffy tag on there.
 
2017-09-12 04:52:21 PM  
Does registering as a foreign agent really restrict their free speech?
 
2017-09-12 05:12:30 PM  
Fraud is a crime committed entirely by communication.  There are other issues than simply 'free speachez!!!!one21!'
 
2017-09-12 05:30:28 PM  
Wasn't expecting that to come out of this Justice Department.
 
2017-09-12 05:32:50 PM  

hobnail: I assume POTUS doesn't know about this yet.


I assume POTUS's Keebler Elf doesn't know about this yet either.
 
2017-09-12 05:33:02 PM  

ginandbacon: Wasn't expecting that to come out of this Justice Department.


Down is up these days. Haven't you heard?
 
2017-09-12 05:33:21 PM  
Does that mean no more checks to Fark?
 
2017-09-12 05:42:55 PM  

WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.


This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.
 
2017-09-12 05:46:19 PM  
it would require any reporting to be labeled as being influenced or financed by the Russian government.

This story brought to you by Vlad's Vodak Emporium, for all of your propaganda needs.
 
2017-09-12 05:59:00 PM  

anustart: There's danger here. What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries


Making snake oil salesmen illegal doesn't affect licensed Doctors unless they're also selling snake oil.  The slope is not that slippery.  It has a pretty good amount of friction.  Do not fall down, you will skin your knees.  Etc.  Etc.
 
2017-09-12 06:01:39 PM  

anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.


Good point. I believe the distinction between RT, CBC and BBC depends on the news organization's behavior. If it primarily follows a foreign government's propaganda and agenda without objectivity, DoJ should link them as a foreign agent.  The CBC & BBC demonstrate independence from their governments, well except for their coverage of the Queen.

Doesn't mean it cannot be abused. Remember Fox News is owned by an Australian citizen, right?
 
2017-09-12 06:03:28 PM  
Can we quit linking them on this site now?
 
2017-09-12 06:03:48 PM  
Does this mean Fark has to register as a foreign agent for all those RT links?
 
2017-09-12 06:06:31 PM  
Hey, thanks Fark.com.

You were just doing your patriotic duty by posting all those Russian propaganda links during the campaign. And all those farkers who shouted down people who objected to the links? You must be very proud. Guess things went the way you wanted them to.

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-12 06:07:14 PM  

hobnail: I assume POTUS doesn't know about this yet.


He doesn't remember the channels above 10.
 
2017-09-12 06:11:21 PM  

WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.


Free speech doesn't equal stealthy speech.

fark stealthy speech.
 
2017-09-12 06:12:02 PM  

Slaxl: Does registering as a foreign agent really restrict their free speech?


Yes, because foreign agents are treated as non-citizens by US law for ITAR and FEC purposes amongst others.
 
2017-09-12 06:12:06 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-12 06:12:19 PM  

whither_apophis: hobnail: I assume POTUS doesn't know about this yet.

You can't spell Trump without RT


UMP

Dammit, you're right!
 
2017-09-12 06:15:03 PM  

fusillade762: Does this mean Fark has to register as a foreign agent for all those RT links?


Only those who have submitted their links.
 
2017-09-12 06:16:26 PM  

AirForceVet: anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.

Good point. I believe the distinction between RT, CBC and BBC depends on the news organization's behavior. If it primarily follows a foreign government's propaganda and agenda without objectivity, DoJ should link them as a foreign agent.  The CBC & BBC demonstrate independence from their governments, well except for their coverage of the Queen.

Doesn't mean it cannot be abused. Remember Fox News is owned by an Australian citizen, right?


I'm not sure what revealing their funding sources has to do with regulating what they can and cannot say. I'm not the smartest otter in the room here though - maybe I'm missing something?

I mean, unless it's a "Unless we're anonymous we don't feel safe to say these things" type of deal, but that's trying to avoid social responsibility for speech considering that the 1st Amendment protects them from GOVERNMENT action against them.
 
2017-09-12 06:16:43 PM  
I should add: we will never stop money from talking. We can reveal who is talking, and that is everything a consumer trying to figure things out needs.

I know that sounds off to those indoctrinated into the awesomeness of Murica at a young age, but the founders didn't foresee everything. Indeed, they foresaw that they couldn't possibly.

Granted, they wanted reasonable legislation and governors to address what they missed, but modern day senators are in many ways more powerful than kings of old, so meh. I'll take it how I can get it.

Too, even in less free speech countries like Britain it is hardly some dystopian hell hole. There is plenty of room for reasonable discourse.
 
2017-09-12 06:16:48 PM  

anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.


Registering as a foreign agent doesn't suppress their free speech at all. They can still quite whatever they want. They just have to disclose who's paid what and by whom.
 
2017-09-12 06:17:22 PM  
If the name has Russia in it, I'd say it would be safe to assume it's slanted. Doesn't mean everything coming from them is inaccurate, but it does mean that everything is put out thre by them to benefit them.

I liked the special they did on human experimentation because it's something that doesn't get enough coverage any other way. But I know better than to expect them to have the well being of the US in mind at all, no.

I like to get my information from a variety of sources...will still draw the limit at crap like breitbart and newsmax and infowars, though.
 
2017-09-12 06:23:21 PM  
Haha... remember when it was a thing for all those edgy free-thinking fark libertarians to unwittingly carry water for Russia's contrary to our own?  Good thing that phenomenon didn't result in unmitigated political disaster.
 
2017-09-12 06:24:47 PM  
On Monday, Yahoo News reported that former Sputnik reporter Andrew Feinberg had a lengthy interview with the Justice Department office that handles Foreign Agents Registration Act issues.

Feinberg, who worked at The Hill in 2012, provided law enforcement with a thumb drive of thousands of internal emails and documents he had downloaded from his work computer before he was fired from his reporting job there.


That must burn their asses to no end. Plus this means if he had access to docs our government found useful, the rest of the reporters there do too and are probably being monitored.
 
2017-09-12 06:26:44 PM  

anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.


The CBC and BBC funding is publicly announced.  We already know they're funded by foreign governments because they told us so.  Russia Today obscures its funding deliberately.
 
2017-09-12 06:27:11 PM  
Oh, well look at that!  The horse is out.  Somebody get the gate - I'll get the lights.
 
2017-09-12 06:27:17 PM  

karmaceutical: Haha... remember when it was a thing for all those edgy free-thinking fark libertarians to unwittingly carry water for Russia's contrary to our own?  Good thing that phenomenon didn't result in unmitigated political disaster.


Hey some of them wanted Trump elected so they could keep their gunz. Whatever it takes.
 
2017-09-12 06:29:54 PM  
"The word 'propaganda' has a very negative connotation, but indeed, there is not a single international foreign TV channel that is doing something other than promotion of the values of the country that it is broadcasting from," Simonyan said, according to an article in Business Insider from January. "When Russia is at war, we are, of course, on Russia's side."

Hey, look at that, Putin's entire media strategy in a nut shell.... 'See, fellow Russians, its like this EVERYWHERE.  Its no big deal that the media runs only with the approval of the government.  Or that our elections are sort of rigged.  They do the same thing in the U.S.!'
 
2017-09-12 06:31:02 PM  

anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.


How is having to say where their money comes from restricting what they say?
 
2017-09-12 06:33:23 PM  

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Hey, thanks Fark.com.

You were just doing your patriotic duty by posting all those Russian propaganda links during the campaign. And all those farkers who shouted down people who objected to the links? You must be very proud. Guess things went the way you wanted them to.

[img.fark.net image 328x214]


It amuses me when people think dark is such a big player on the US political scene that anyone would bther usingnitnforn"propaganda" in any organized manner. Almost as laughable as the idea that there are people paid to post here on behalf of certain policies or parties.

Even if every Fari user voted identically along party lines it would have an immeasurably insignificant impact on any given election result above the approximate level of Sanitation Commissioner for Greater Pocatello.
 
2017-09-12 06:36:45 PM  

hobnail: I assume POTUS doesn't know about this yet.


You'll pardon his inattention.  Or he will.
 
2017-09-12 06:37:43 PM  

Natalie Portmanteau: anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.

How is having to say where their money comes from restricting what they say?


It doesn't.  But what it DOES do is make the DOJ suddenly the arbiter of what is "real news" by forcing people funded by Governments they don't like to self-discredit everything they publish as Propaganda regardless of the specific content in question.

I don't disagree with combatting the influence of RT, but do it by putting out a better, more accurate message, not by admitting you're afraid of theirs.
 
2017-09-12 06:44:43 PM  
I've a solution: If you unwittingly ran Russian b propaganda as news, you should be publicly censured and forced to publish a correction at regular intervals until the person negatively impact by the propaganda has died.  If you wittingly ran Russian Propaganda, let's stand you in front of a post and let five guys blow your brains out.

farking traitors, I've got no love for them.
 
2017-09-12 06:46:20 PM  

backhand.slap.of.reason: I've a solution: If you unwittingly ran Russian b propaganda as news, you should be publicly censured and forced to publish a correction at regular intervals until the person negatively impact by the propaganda has died.  If you wittingly ran Russian Propaganda, let's stand you in front of a post and let five guys blow your brains out.

farking traitors, I've got no love for them.


Well, money is money. And I'm sure RT and Sputnik and ZeroHedge and all the other Putin the Murderous Dictator's sites paid good money for clicks.
 
2017-09-12 06:50:43 PM  

anustart: It doesn't.  But what it DOES do is make the DOJ suddenly the arbiter of what is "real news" by forcing people funded by Governments they don't like to self-discredit everything they publish as Propaganda regardless of the specific content in question.


The DOJ is the arbiter of who needs to register as a foreign agent, which is well within their purview. The type of business or representation doesn't matter at all. RT can always refuse funding from the Russian government if they think its harming their business. And it is propaganda. Open propaganda, not even thinly veiled to anyone paying attention. This is you falling for it.

I don't disagree with combatting the influence of RT, but do it by putting out a better, more accurate message, not by admitting you're afraid of theirs.

The Russian government doesn't have rights to operate propaganda outlets in our nation. This isn't a free market issue.
 
2017-09-12 06:51:05 PM  

anustart: but do it by putting out a better, more accurate message


Those things are out there. Propaganda works because it is easier to believe than the truth for some people. More of the truth won't change that.

And someone has to decide what "real news" is, because the American people sure as shiat can't tell the difference. That's part of the reason we form governments... to come together as a society to do things that individuals are not able to do themselves. If we can't trust the DOJ to differentiate between truth and lies, "free speech" concerns are the least of our problems.
 
2017-09-12 06:51:54 PM  

anustart: Natalie Portmanteau: anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.

How is having to say where their money comes from restricting what they say?

It doesn't.  But what it DOES do is make the DOJ suddenly the arbiter of what is "real news" by forcing people funded by Governments they don't like to self-discredit everything they publish as Propaganda regardless of the specific content in question.

I don't disagree with combatting the influence of RT, but do it by putting out a better, more accurate message, not by admitting you're afraid of theirs.


Problem is, more cogent journalism and reporting does exist, but it's being drowned out by RT, Sputnik, et. al.

While it is impossible to go after domestic fake news outlets (Like Breitbart), I see no downside in labeling RT as a hostile foreign entity that must register as a foreign agent.

It's not that we are 'scared' of Russian reporting, but by forcing RT to register as a foreign agents, we can see which of these fake narratives are born in Moscow and which are hatched stateside.
 
2017-09-12 06:56:06 PM  
I think I just heard the barn doors close, but I have been watching the horses in the field for months.
 
2017-09-12 07:08:31 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-12 07:12:45 PM  

hobnail: I assume POTUS doesn't know about this yet.


I'm assuming the Attorney General doesn't know about this yet
 
2017-09-12 07:14:52 PM  

weddingsinger: anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.

The CBC and BBC funding is publicly announced.  We already know they're funded by foreign governments because they told us so.  Russia Today obscures its funding deliberately.


Exactly this. The problem isn't foreign government funding; the problem is secret foreign government funding.
 
2017-09-12 07:16:37 PM  

AirForceVet: anustart: WorldCitizen: I'm not much in favor of restricting freedom of speech, be it propaganda or not. However, one has to see some fun in making RT register as a foreign agent since that is how Russia has been restricting the activities of human rights organizations and other NGOs in Russia by labeling them as foreign agents if they take any donations from outside Russia.

This.

There's danger here.  What's to prevent the US from deciding the same applies to the BBC, CBC or other public broadcasters form other countries?  The CBC is funded partially by the Canadian government, but it's hardly a mouthpiece for them. In fact, it's often their harshest critic. Same goes for the BBC, funded in large part by UK taxpayers.

RT is a special kind of biased, but I don't see anything in the cited law that protects genuine journalism from being suppressed like this if the DOJ decides they don't like the people in charge of the Country of origin.

Good point. I believe the distinction between RT, CBC and BBC depends on the news organization's behavior. If it primarily follows a foreign government's propaganda and agenda without objectivity, DoJ should link them as a foreign agent.  The CBC & BBC demonstrate independence from their governments, well except for their coverage of the Queen.

Doesn't mean it cannot be abused. Remember Fox News is owned by an Australian citizen, right?


Murdoch became a US citizen in the 1985 in order to buy Fox the broadcast channel.
 
2017-09-12 07:23:32 PM  

anustart: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Hey, thanks Fark.com.

You were just doing your patriotic duty by posting all those Russian propaganda links during the campaign. And all those farkers who shouted down people who objected to the links? You must be very proud. Guess things went the way you wanted them to.

[img.fark.net image 328x214]

It amuses me when people think dark is such a big player on the US political scene that anyone would bther usingnitnforn"propaganda" in any organized manner. Almost as laughable as the idea that there are people paid to post here on behalf of certain policies or parties.

Even if every Fari user voted identically along party lines it would have an immeasurably insignificant impact on any given election result above the approximate level of Sanitation Commissioner for Greater Pocatello.


You know, I have to yield to an expert on Fark.com. You have a powerful mind and persuasive argument skills. So I'll just bow to you and quote your very first entry on Fark.com.

"You sound fat."
 
2017-09-12 07:29:34 PM  
Does Fox News have to register as a domestic agent?
 
Displayed 50 of 63 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report