this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2025
91 points (100.0% liked)

MeanwhileOnGrad

1847 readers
240 users here now

"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"

Welcome to MoG!


Meanwhile On Grad


Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!


What is a Tankie?


Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.

(caution of biased source)


Basic Rules:

Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.

Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.

Apologia(Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.

Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users as it handwaves their extremism.

Tankies can explain their views but may be criticised or attacked for them. Any slight infraction on the rules above will immediately earn a warning and possibly a ban.

Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post as opposed to arguing.

You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction will double the amount. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Modlog: https://lemmy.world/modlog?userId=15392422

Join the lemmy.ml boycott today and help foster a better Lemmy-verse! No more posts, comments (Except to counter their propaganda ofc!) or upvotes on any comms on the Lemmy.ml instance!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Radio free Asia. In this case it's actually radio free Europe.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh well to be fair that is a US propaganda outlet.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

all fake news is propaganda, some fake new is US propaganda, Radio Free whatever is US state department sanctioned propaganda targeted at foreigners similar to Russia today or whatever sheepooh is running for CCP

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RFE/RL

Additional considerations apply to the use of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). RFE/RL should be used cautiously, if at all, for reporting published from the 1950s to the early 1970s, when RFE/RL had a documented relationship with the CIA.

RFE/RL may be biased in some subject areas (particularly through omission of relevant, countervailing facts), and in those areas, it should be attributed in the article body. There is no consensus as to what subject areas require attribution. The scope of topics requiring attribution of RFE/RL should be decided on a case-by-case basis.

It hasn't been true for some time now and is generally found to be credible and fairly unbiased and RFA is seen in even a more positive light:

Radio Free Asia can be generally considered a reliable source. In particularly geopolitically charged areas, attribution of its point of view and funding by the U.S. government may be appropriate. Per the result of a 2021 RfC, editors have established that there is little reason to think RFA demonstrates some systematic inaccuracy, unreliability, or level of government co-option that precludes its use.

And MBFC:

In contrast this is what RT looks like:

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It hasn’t been true for some time now and is generally found to be credible and fairly unbiased

And I have a bridge to sell you. It’s as much a CIA cut-out as it ever was.

And MBFC

MBFC is shite. Of course it’s going to give RT a worse rating than RFE: It’s run by an American physical therapist as his side gig.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

And I have a bridge to sell you. It’s as much a CIA cut-out as it ever was.

Source

MBFC is shite. Of course it’s going to give RT a worse rating than RFE

You're a tagged Tankie. Cult followers angry at an org calling out their dear leaders' propaganda outlet calls it "shit". Next up, water is wet.

If you think it's shit, then provide credible sources to backup your claim.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My man, I watch their content, I know what they shill.

It is a step above CNN on regime whoring scale, but under NPR and PBS.

But all of them shill propaganda for the benefit of the owner class and their regime including US geopolitical interests around the world. In fact, RF specifically shills US geopolitical interest in a manner that the target can accept and/or get behind themselves.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Let's say you're 100% right, "Between CNN and NPR/PBS" is still not a bad spot and certainly not ban/removal worthy. Considering they turn around and allow shit like RT which spreads straight up conspiracies....

So now, here's question for you, what news source do you trust? Who in your mind isn't a shill and can be trusted?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

i am a shill and my source is wikipedia

on more serious note, these new "agencies" are just old version of filters... i don't trust any of it, just got to work with facts as they happen. propaganda taints everything else.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Ok, but then where do you get said facts then if not from a "news agency". I assume you're not rich and able to just jet around the world all the time to see everything that happens in person lmao

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I don’t think it’s fake news. US propaganda is very sophisticated and it usually focuses on the facts—at least, the ones they want you to know. But it being directly created by and for the benefit of the US government sets it apart from other types of biased media. It’s understandable to me why it might be viewed with suspicion, despite being factual. Good propaganda can speak only truth yet very effectively mislead people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A lot of Radio Free Asia literally is fake news. Most of their “sources” are anonymous/unnamed. They’re just, “trust me bro.” They make stuff up all the time, especially about North Korea, because they know no one’s going to fact-check them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

especially about North Korea,

Oh boy, let me guess DPRK is actually a utopia that's being kept secret from everyone amiright?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

fake news = propaganda. i guess at the end of the day everything is propaganda. i shill here all day.

i guess if you define fake news = factually wrong information, i will agree with your position.

but as you said, skilled propagandist will use factual information to misinform the target.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I guess I don’t like the way that term has come to be used. Fake news to me would be something wholly fabricated without any basis in reality. This type of coverage is actually fairly uncommon outside of fringe sources.

We have other, more specific words to describe coverage that is biased or created specifically to influence people but is describing real events. Why not use them instead? The term fake news has itself become propaganda. By which I mean, information or news intentionally designed to influence people in a specific way. I don’t agree that all news falls into this category, though it does have other types of bias.

But yeah I mean I also engage in propaganda for the causes I believe in, as do most people. But propaganda from nefarious people or organizations certainly should be viewed with suspicion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Radio Free Asia/Radio Free Europe