In a nutshell: Woman reporter with Vlad Putin’s Russian propaganda channel pulls a female Ted Baxter on Dana Loesch and says we should be angry at our government for sending military to Afghanistan. She apparently doesn’t realize the pejorative manner in which she frames their mission which proves Loesch’s point.
RT is essentially a glossy brochure for Putin’s strongman statism. Lots of attractive presenters with no idea what they are talking about. With a few rare exceptions, everything they pump out is designed to present America as a failure and thereby subtly suggest that, hey, maybe things aren’t so bad in dear old Russia.
Relatively fresh in the fight for carriage in American cable markets, Russia Today stumbled into the ring with all the grace of a drunken Moscow ballerina.
From the outset it was clear that RT was a propaganda effort controlled completely by the Kremlin. The Kremlin put up more than $30 million to get it started and spend double that to pay a staff of over 100 reporters in just its first year of operation.
This comical weblog/RT report keeps with that quality.
“Dana thinks that troops are fighting to keep us safe.”
How would RT know? I asked Loesch in an email this afternoon prior to writing this piece. They didn’t speak with her. At all. They literally made up a quote and attributed it to her. This after RT smeared Loesch on Twitter before turning around and asking her repeatedly for an interview. Loesch says she simply deleted their emails.
The propagandist reporter also refers to herself in third person plural “we” when referencing liberals and liberal reactions. See in media, if you’re going to attempt to paint yourself as an anchor, at least have the wit to not disclose your partiality — and take care to pronounce the subject’s name correctly. Of course, since they made up a quote and attribute it to Loesch without even speaking with her, they can’t be expected to get much else right. It’s the same quality “analysis” as videotaping oneself talking into one’s hairbrush in the mirror and interviewing imaginary guests. RT could have saved money and scrapped the green screens.
It’s payback as Big Journalism has been showcasing the egregious bias at the fledgling RT. They will get more attention from being on this site than their regular webcast.
Here is some other of RT’s bizarre “reporting.”