Re:Radiation spikes in Chernobyl
by nopenopenopeno on Friday February 25, 2022 @09:17PM
(#30474734)
I was countering a claim of Russian peoples’ awareness vs American peoples’ awareness. I can very confidently say that Americans, in the aggregate, are vastly more ignorant and unaware of any given political issue or how to responsibly think about any given political issue. The causes of that can be up for debate, but the difference is too stark to debate whether or not it is the case.
Re:Radiation spikes in Chernobyl
by ineedasername on Friday February 25, 2022 @10:05PM
(#30474934)
I'm not going to comment on American ignorance. My statement was in regards to access to information or the ability to speak/publish it without reprisal, specifically in comparison with Russia.
How people make use of that, or ignore it all together, are a separate topic.
Re:Radiation spikes in Chernobyl
by nopenopenopeno on Friday February 25, 2022 @11:19PM
(#30475193)
Information access is has diminishing relevance in an attention economy.
Re:Radiation spikes in Chernobyl
by ineedasername on Saturday February 26, 2022 @09:03AM
(#30477626)
That's actually an excellent point. I don't concede my overall argument that having access is still superior, even if rarely used (compare to this [0]) but your comment-- simply stated but deeply meaningful-- raises an important question: how much does the distinction between access & active suppression matter when other forces render the outcomes substantially similar? Trying to answer that with any substance is probably beyond the scope of a message board, so I won't try except to give my brief opinion that yes, the distinction still matters.
But thank you for revealing the question to me with such clarity.
[0] from the "live" log on WaPo, so I don't have a direct link to this entry: "MOSCOW — Russia’s tech and communications regulator launched a probe Saturday into 10 independent media outlets that have not parroted the Kremlin’s line on the invasion of Ukraine
I heard prominent counter opinions over invading Iraq & WMD's in the lead up in 2003. An NPR interview with a retired Marine general at the time sticks out in my mind, and was very influential in my skepticism of the invasion. NPR is, in part, publicly funded by the US government. I don't think that any media funded by Russia is voicing similar skepticism over the Ukraine invasion.
Also don't ignore the matter of degrees. I'm not saying that media isn't influenced, that Western leaders don't attempt their own manipulation. I'm saying that Western media is at least a little (often a lot) more open than Russian media with respect to POV's that disagree with the "state".
By saying "this simply isn't the case" you are casting it as a black & white issue, when in reality it's all shades of gray. And if accurate information is the lighter side, then Western media is shifted towards lighter shades of gray than Russia.