Re:Julian Assange's stay in London embassy untenable, says E...
by travmatt on Tuesday January 09, 2018 @09:12PM
(#16112050)
You don’t see any logical inconsistency in saying that being paid by Putin doesn’t imply that Assange works for him?
Besides the fact that I see quite a difference between RT and the other outlets you’ve mentioned (I don’t remember multiple journalists quitting from those other organizations because they were ‘being used to spread propaganda’), my answer was to show the multitudes of questionable connections and even more questionable judgements can’t just be reduced down to something that is conveniently dismissed.
I'm getting tired of that one.
I don't have a dog in this race, and have little opinion on Assange's actions, but media opportunities are media opportunities.
I have absolutely no trouble considering RT and their opinion to be spun, but I don't automatically associate Neil deGrasse Tyson with the opinions of Fox News or Bill Maher for simply being a guest and using the media opportunity to speak to an audience.
RT spins things. BBC spins things. NYT spins things. Fox spins things. MSNBC spins things, it should be no surprise that media outlets, most especially ones funded by a nation state, have a hard bias.
Serious question : if Assange was seeking a media soapbox to sit on top of, what other network choices did he have, being implicated in a feud with western agencies?