1y ago

Your source is biased, bro

You're viewing a single thread.

211 comments

I don't know about US but EU has a bunch of news agencies that are fairly credible. Some local smaller ones don't have a reason not to be.
The international community in the picture is all that matters. Change the size of the countries in the map by the size of their economies and that's all that matters. Change it by the factor of their diplomatic influence and the change would be even greater.
- What a tone deaf world view.
  
  Also the realistic world view.
  
  If you ever talk about an international community, these are the only countries that actually COMMUNE. Almost all the rest are too involved with themselves to have a diplomatic strategy beyond their narrow short-term self interest. That's also why that's the only international community that matters. That's not a tone deaf world view, that's the reality.
  
  So organizations like the Arab League don't exist?
  
  They exist, many organizations exist, but they are only a collection of countries each looking for its own short sighted benefits.
  
  Oh yeah, the U.S., UK, etc. never do that.
  
  Sure they do, but I'm not into nitpicking specific situations or argue about edge cases.
  They don't really like each other, mostly they see themselves as competitors and their treaties are situational, worth nothing except in the best of times when everything is going well for everyone.
  
  Edge cases? Are you serious? Since when does the U.S. give a shit about anyone but the U.S.?
  And saying that the U.S. respects its treaties shows a laughable ignorance of history.
  
  Ok, you are absolutely right in everything you say, I can't believe I was so wrong.
  Have a nice day, bye!
  
  No, these are the only countries that destabilised entire continents to get what they wanted in the last few centuries and now they wash their hands off of them. The countries that are left behind are still trying to clean the shit up the West has created.
  
  No, we aren't talking about the reason for the situation, but the situation as it is.
  
  Oke, let's narrow it down then.
  
  You mean the only ones you hear about communing as a westerner. Pretty much every geographical region has political and economic collaborative institutions for long term stability and growth, and then there's also things like BRICS that's not just bound by geography. The BRI is a plan so incredibly long term election-based democracies could never even dream of it, that spans East, Central and West Asia, and is economic, political, social, infrastructural etc etc. Just because you never bothered to broaden your horizon doesn't mean the entire fucking rest of the world doesn't collaborate with each other just like Europe and western countries in general do.
  
  No, I don't mean what you wrote. Yes, I know there are many organizations in the world.
  BRICS? LOLOLOLOL. Do you know anything about BRICS? If you want to broaden YOUR horizon, check which countries are in BRICS and the level of cooperation they have between them. BRICS is a joke. 5 countries, each pulling in its own direction, each too busy trying to deal with it's own national mess. They meet PR once a year so they look important. Two of them are absolutist dictatorships to the point that one leader can't even travel to visit the other ones. Two of them are even attacking each other.
  Are you effing kidding me!?? Broaden my horizon? Bro!?
  
  That part about brics was the funniest shit. Let me know when they get past their infighting to actually do something other than dream big
  
  a plan so incredibly long term election-based democracies could never even dream of it
  What types of democracies aren't election based?
- The majority of the world doesn't matter bc no money :(
- The picture is showing most of the Global North (no Russia and China), which is The West. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_North_and_Global_South
  The international community in the picture is all that matters.
  And is that a problem? I'm asking you a moral question.
  
  Of course it is. I dont think that's a moral question, it's a problem on almost every level of international relations.
- The EU news is real bare bones, that's why you get the feeling they're credible. They only parrot what someone else wrote already. Please put your Google Translate on and look at news sites from countries outside your country or region. And then make up your own mind. It's the only way to evolve yourself.
  
  You are very wrong. Each country in EU has its own news agencies and many of them have reporters all over the world, even in conflict zones. It is simply not possible to push narratives through such an amount of channels, like they do in the US. Of course some news gets parotted, that's how news works, but a Slovenian reporter, reporting from Ukraine doesn't care what NYT said about anything.
  
  I don't know, I read European news sites first and there really is less debt to them than other sources. Or it's just a few paragraphs without the background or history etc... I have to admit, the last few years some have mitigated this by doing more research, filing it under 'dossiers' and I really like their fact checking. But maybe you're right and they can't put everything out there.
  
  You don't know WTF you're talking about and it shows. You obviously have no formal training in journalism or mass communications, but here you are spouting off like the self-appointed armchair "expert" you are. Just consuming news doesn't make you an expert; it makes you a consumer with a poorly-informed opinion. Again, you obviously have no idea how any of this works.
  
  Yes, sure :)

211 comments