[Closed] Alex Salmond to host a chat show on Russia Today

What's wrong with going on RT?

A politician on state sponsored TV - whatever next? 🙄

Jamba - you do know he gives much of his money to charity don't you?

You;re grammar is bollocks

What is wrong about being paid by Russia Today is what was wrong about being paid by Der Sturmer.

😆

Moral difference between Russia today and fox news?

Whatabboutery.

Oh, and stealth edit from "daily mail" to "fox news" hoping to get more people on your side.

Not at all.

Either will do - I thought Fox news a more apposite comparison.

Now can you give me what the moral difference is between Russia today and either Fox news or the Daily mail?

Oh, and stealth edit from "daily mail" to "fox news" hoping to get more people on your side.

Whats the difference RT and bbc news is the question i'd ask, both are biased far as i can see, wouldn't say one is much worse than the other. I'd say fox and the daily mail are much worse than both.

Oh, and stealth edit from "daily mail" to "fox news" hoping to get more people on your side.

Great catch 🙂

Russian state money vs US (Australian) private money is chalk and cheese. I am sure you can agree that TJ ? Also don’t we see daily pieces about the implied negative connotations of Russian money supposedly supporting Trump, Brexit etc ... ? Russian involvement bad - no ?

As for giving most of his money to charity, well he certainly gave his Westminster MP “resettlement” allowance (designed to soften the blow for MPs losing thir seats/job) to his own chairty (in his mothers name) even thoigh he went straight into another job and even returned to Westminster as an MP. The moral thing to have do e would be not to take taken the money (£60k I believe)

BBC must be one of the most balanced anywhere in the world. If that’s not good enough fkr posters here maybe you should see a world with only private commercial news

Fox / murdoch use their money for political ends conti9nually buying politicians all the time.

Nope - have to come up with something better than that to find a moral difference.

IIRC he also gave his first ministers allowance, refused a pay rise and while he had two salaries gave all that to the charity as well as well as his first ministers pension. Rather more moral than many.

Russian state money vs US (Australian) private money is chalk and chees

why?

Does that mean british state money is also bad?

And why is Russian involvement in anything automatically bad?

BBC must be one of the most balanced anywhere in the world. If that’s not good enough fkr posters here maybe you should see a world with only private commercial news

make up your mind, are you for state funding or not? 😆

Russian state money vs US (Australian) private money is chalk and cheese.

You know where Theresa May was last night, right after she fired Priti Patel? Having dinner with Paul Dacre, editor of the Daily Mail.

The distinction between state and private money is pointless - they both use their massive wealth to influence politics.

Interesting the programme will be produced by his production company, no fool is Alex very tax efficient that as we have seen from the Paradise Papers.

I always find it a particularly odd attack tactic

Hatred of Salmond and the uppity scots gives big motivation to find a stick to beat him with.

Will there be any comedy artists on the chat show ...?
Not that I take much notice of Scottish politics..but he seemed an ok kind of bloke ..much better than his successor Jimmy Krankie.
Will he be appearing on the show ?

Forget about bias, media influence, Putin, Murdoch and all that pish.

We don't need to look any further than wee Eck's weel kent love of the limelight to explain this.

Salmond remains a political operative who enjoys the game too much. Sturgeon is to the left of him and is much more interested in results than the game for its own sake and is very competent as first minister compared to any other political leader in the UK

I don't trust RT or the BBC. Particularly BBC Scotlandshire.

The BBC takes its impartiality from the midpoint of the london press so is automatically biased to the right as a result and is far far to the right of Scottish opinion. In Scotland they give SNP with 50% of the vote equivalence with UKIP with under 1% of the vote

The BBC is briliant as right wing frothers think its left wing and Left wingers think its pro establishment/right wing.

IMHO its establishment , consensual and conservative with a small c [ western liberal status quot bias] with left leaning tendencies of the majority of reporters - as the intelligentsia tends to be gently left wing.

I don't normally agree with jambalaya's views, but RT is an aggressive propaganda channel. Yes, all state broadcasters engage in "soft power", but channels such as the BBC are still able to be self critical. You can't equate Beeb with RT. I do watch RT though as it offers useful analysis, but it will never report truths that go against Russia's self-interest.

In my view this is an appalling move by Salmond. He will lose a lot of legitimacy for being controlled by Russian money.

He will also give some legitimacy to Russia Today.

This is an outlet of which one of its own reporters - on resigning over its coverage of the MH17 incident said "We are lying every single day at RT. There are a million different ways to lie, and I really learned that at RT."

controlled by Russian money.

Seems he's sold his soul has oor Alec! 😆

We are lying every single day at RT. There are a million different ways to lie, and I really learned that at RT.

[i]Jamba - you do know he gives much of his money to charity don't you[/i]

I don't, do tell.

man, youse live on another planet!

What are you getting at?

A wee side note. It's difficult to see propaganda when you agree with it! 😆

It's difficult to see propaganda when you agree with it!

Which is why I quoted someone who actually worked for RT and evidently was prepared to go along with their line for a while before eventually becoming disillusioned with it. More from her here: [url] https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/vd8ba3/sara-firth-russia-today-boeing-mh17-interview-345 [/url]

Seosamh77 you think the BBC is just as bad as RT. I challenge you to post a link to an RT piece which is critical of Putin. In return I will post a link to a BBC article which is critical of any person or entity of your choice.

@seosamh77, where possible, it helps to get into specifics and facts, e.g. how often does RT ever say anything critical about Russia? How often is a Russian politician grilled on RT? This is routine in the UK. I don't deny for a moment that the Beeb promotes a particularly worldview (or ideological account) of the UK. It's even in its remit to do so (see the [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/tools_we_use/public_purposes.html ]Charter[/url]), but RT and the Beeb are apples and oranges.

If you want balanced and factually accurate news you need news from three sources.

wwaswas - Member

Jamba - you do know he gives much of his money to charity don't you

I don't, do tell.

Give it a quick google. He set up a charity in the mane of his deceased mother to support the sorts of things his mother supported,. IIRC mainly small grants to disadvantaged groups and people. ( this is all from memory) He paid into this fund his first ministers pension while he was also an MP, also the second salary he got while both a msp and MP and some of his income from journalism and also the pay rise MPs awarded themselves when he was at westminster. Basically he said the £60 000ish he got from one job was enough to live on and the rest of his income was given to others.

Basically he said the £60 000ish he got from one job was enough to live on and the rest of his income was given to others

Does much of that not end up in the charity as well? I thought it did but can't be bothered googling it.

Whatever the detail surely we can agree its a good thing. the only other politician I know who does this is Brown. If all politicos did this rather than just using their position to enrich themselves then the world would be a better place

RT was my go to channel for few days in the Syrian conflict. There seemed to be a news blackout on the other international channels (including French) about anything other that Russian air strikes whereas on RT they covered all the missions being flown and missiles launched by anyone. A few days later hte reporting on the other channels I watch rose to RT levels.

the only other politician I know who does this is Brown

jimjam - Member
If you want balanced and factually accurate news you need news from three sources.

yip, look at all the biased opinions then decide on your own biased opinion.

need news from three sources

Sorted 😉

saxabar - Member
@seosamh77, where possible, it helps to get into specifics and facts, e.g. how often does RT ever say anything critical about Russia? How often is a Russian politician grilled on RT?

in a uk context RT isn't really a local russian channel so hardly surprising that there's not many russian politicians on it, it's aimed at the western market, who don't care about russian politicians all that much.

Anyhow, I'm not here to defend them, I'm just arguing against the idea that anything russian is the devil incarnate. I thought the cold war finished?

It's pretty obvious they have an agenda, it's fairly easy to see through though.

Junkyard - lazarus
need news from three sources

Breitbart
Trump Tweets
Fox News
Sorted

aye variety of source is important! 😆

scotroutes - Member

the only other politician I know who does this is Brown

You might want to look a little more closely at that....

YOu mean he doesn't or others do? Brown certainly has put a lot of money he has earned outside parliament into charity.

I don't know of any other politicians who do this but maybe more do

I'm just arguing against the idea that anything russian is the devil incarnate. I thought the cold war finished?

I do not and will not watch it

I find it odd

Considering that prominent Tory & Labour Brexiters were on RT heavily in the run up to the referendum, im surprised jambs would be upset.
Galloway had no end of MPs lining up for his show and Farage was hardly off there, pushing Putins plan to get us out the EU.

I still think salmon is a dick for doing this

It's pretty obvious they have an agenda, it's fairly easy to see through though.

Whats the difference RT and bbc news is the question i'd ask, both are biased far as i can see, wouldn't say one is much worse than the other.

In your case Seosamh77 it seems that RT has achieved exactly what it was created to do. You think that BBC news and RT are on a par - both spewing propaganda.

Junkyard you overstate how bad it is. It's not that bad. Some interesting stuff n it from time to time.

Tom, my view of the BBC has nothing to do with rt. I came up with that opinion long before rt was on the airwaves.

So no.

But you think they are equally bad?

You know where Theresa May was last night, right after she fired Priti Patel? Having dinner with Paul Dacre, editor of the Daily Mail.

Yep, got very little news coverage. Politicians should be banned from socialising with press barons / editors etc.

I don't think the BBC is a propaganda organisation but I know in its coverage of Scotland it is very pro establishment biased and does not reflect the political balance in Scotland

you overstate how bad it is

Seriously no one does propaganda like the Russians do and all of its output falls under this umbrella. I have never denied they are very very skilled at it ;if you want to partake of it then that is your choice.

Whats the difference RT and bbc news is the question i'd ask, both are biased far as i can see, wouldn't say one is much worse than the other.

Do a piece on gay rights and watch what happens.

Do a piece on how rich Putin is (and where his money is), and see what happens.

I do not and will not watch it

Which shows your contribution to this thread is ideological rather than objective. Watch it and then get back to us.

Trump, Putin, May - all leading their countries in directions which are not in the interests of anyone but their elite citizens with the collaboration of those elite citizens and their media-mogul allies.

jambalaya - Member
Well you couldn’t make this up !!

Based on his Newsnight interview he seems to be happy to take the Russian Rouble in order to whine about the Tories and Westminster.

No you could make it up if you liked, happens to be the truth though so unlike lying Tories who manipulate news topics for their own political gain Alex is going to expose and kick the Tories in the balls over a worldwide News Feed.

Very happy with that Jamba, in fact couldn’t be happier.

Junkyard - lazarus
you underestimate how good they are

how would you know? 😉

Junkyard - lazarus
I do not and will not watch it

Which shows your contribution to this thread is ideological rather than objective

I have never seen child porn - am i allowed an opinion on that or must I watch it first?

I dont watch Fox news either so I will assume that is also a bastion of impartiality until such time as I have watched enough of it to pass the edukator threshold of entitlement to have an opinion on it
It all depends sometimes one has to see things to be certain/form an opinion sometimes not. IMHO none of those scenarios above is one of them

EDIT: Oh and his was funnier as well as more relevant.

One does not have to go to the north pole to know its cold just like i dont need to watch RT or fox to know they are biased.

still think salmon is a dick for doing this

Yeah...that in a nutshell ^

shittest analogy ever junkyard, come on you're usually better than this.

It's fairly obvious that to form an opinion on a news service you need to actually watch it.

You don't need to watch child porn to know that it's wrong.

I dont read the daily Mai or Katie hopkins - its perfectly ok to form an opinion of them without reading their drivel - not reading does not equal not aware of/no knowledge/no understanding. You do not need to partake of it to know their agenda or bias.

Granted it was OTT and extreme but i dont think anyone will be trying to argue i need to watch it to form an opinion so it did , crudely, prove my point.

You're not doing your point any favours there.

All you are doing is admitting you're happy to take 2nd hand opinion as your own.

I'd rather find out for myself.

Do a piece on gay rights and watch what happens.

Do a piece on how rich Putin is (and where his money is), and see what happens.

You could also say try doing a piece on how mad Brexit is on the BBC.....

All news outlets have some bias.

and when you have found out for yourself we will still both agree its biased

and imo, Not really all that different from the bbc in that respect.

Junkyard - lazarus
you overstate how bad it is
you underestimate how good they are
Seriously no one does propaganda like the Russians do and all of its output falls under this umbrella. I have never denied they are very very skilled at it ;if you want to partake of it then that is your choice.

Junkyard - lazarus

I dont read the daily Mai or Katie hopkins - its perfectly ok to form an opinion of them without reading their drivel - not reading does not equal not aware of/no knowledge/no understanding. You do not need to partake of it to know their agenda or bias.

The problem there though is that you only become aware of what they do or say when someone shares something egregious on social media and that just deepens your bias. I don't read the Daily Mail but I assume there must be some actual information in there. There have to be stories about ordinary people that don't have a premeditated political subtext.

During the Las Vegas shooting I watched the Fox news live stream and it was eye opening really. I was very surprised at how "anti-gun" a lot of the commentators and analysts were. Obviously some of them were spinning their wheels but it wasn't the thoughts and prayers fest you might imagine.

What I think RT is trying to achieve, and what Alex Salmond is helping them to achieve by selling them some of his legitimacy, is a consensus view where all news outlets are equally biased.
In this world view there are no facts, only opinions. The world is too confusing to make sense of and the mob can be moved by any charismatic leader.
This kind of world is much easier to command and control if you are a Putin or a Trump.

what news sources do you use tom?

Agree with point about 2nd hand opinion – I do watch RT as much of the global analysis is very good (often better than the Beeb). Disagree with claim that UK watchers do not care about Russian politics. Also, I take it you're not arguing that they save the self-critical pieces for a home audience?

Lots to get into on the objectivity question (especially when considering misinformation over disinformation) and what a balanced news diet consists of. And there's the question of responsibility – should citizens take responsibility for engaging in a news diet beyond what appears in Facebook filter bubbles?

A bit of Guardian and Independent, the Economist, some BBC news website, Private Eye, occasionally the Daily Telegraph for a laugh. Anything that interests me for more detailed analysis or which my normal sources haven't covered I tend to have a look at the sources google news or wikipedia gives.

You could also say try doing a piece on how mad Brexit is on the BBC.....

All news outlets have some bias.

I suppose it comes down to how comfortable you are with that bias. I'd say the BBC has fairly minimal bias.

So almost an entirely British pov.

a consensus view where all news outlets are equally biased.

When you say this, it's essentially true, world view is largely dependent on where you are look at it from.

I'd don't agree with equally, as that's absurd, some are worse than others, but bias is human nature.

peak whataboutery.
Russia wants to destabilise the west, break up the EU, emasculate NATO, and have America turn inwards and take less interest in the world outside its own borders.
Trumps election, the EU vote in the UK, are so far the most successful parts of this strategy.

There are many weapons used to achieve their aims;
The use of RT as a Russian Government mouthpiece.
The hacking deployed against Clinton via wikileaks (which weirdly never publishes things embarassing to the Russians?)
The direct funding and implicit support of Nationalist groups throughout Europe and the UK.

There was even a recent attempt to set up a California independence movement (Calexit, after Trumps election) by a guy who later moved to ... Russia. The attempt failed, but was largely pushed online by (later found to be) russian social accounts. They even had a few rallies and gained the support (and visit/speech/fundraising) from one Nigel Farage .. who, in other news, also paid at least one secret visit to the Ecuadoran embassy.

I'm about the furthest from a conspiracy theorist that you could get, but theres a lot of cash and influence being pedalled towards Russias ends.

If you know that and you still think that a briton being paid to appear on RT (and that includes tories, labour, SNP anyone) is a harmless thing and equivalent to the BBC? Then thats what I meant (up there) by peak whataboutery.

@ben I am a supporter of Hacked Off, have had meetings with my MP about the campaign and told her face to face in no uncertain terms that the 2017 manifesto commitment to NOT hold Levenson 2 was a disgrace.

The fact May went to the Daily Mail celebration thing likewise.

I am delighted that Fox / Sky bid has been referred. IMHO Murdoch and sons are not fit and proper people to be invokved in UK media full stop.

Anyway on Salmond it’s very bizarre he’ll take Russian state money. As I have said before if they where helping to fund say an iS campaign there’d be uproar.

I imagine Salmond’s expenses bill is double or treble his £60k “enough to live on” salary. Easy to live on a relatively low salary when you are eating out on expenses regularly and not paying any travel.

It's amazing how Russian evil genius-ism 😆 seems to increase the more incompetent western leaders become.

if i was a cynic I'd think there might be some correlation there!

seosamh77
Its certainly given then something to work with. Either way the election of Trump and the Brexit vote have hardly strengthened any of us internationally.