• Aurix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    3 months ago

    This isn’t what I said. I associate with truth in such a context as a documentary-Wikipedia style of delivery and already that is quite difficult to do neutral, as sources and claims will diverge, e. g. about losses.

    • ABCDE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 months ago

      I associate with truth in such a context as a documentary-Wikipedia style of delivery and already that is quite difficult to do neutral, as sour

      Expecting that is silly.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      If you really believe that, you should know that it’s VERY obvious Russia is lying all the time. There’s a reason it’s Russia and not Ukraine that censor news channels in Russia and news sources on the Internet. That reason being that Russia needs to do that to keep the truth from the Russians.

      • Aurix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        At no point I stated Russia’s news are trustworthy. Declaring a propaganda TV interception as if it is just reading out a Wikipedia article is wild to say the least. Ukrainian official statements can’t be taken for granted, at some point in the Kursk incursion the independently verified territorial gains were at about 800 sq. km. vs claimed 1200. Neither is the cultural and media market truly open, as it is wartime and the Russian Orthodox Church is too close to the government to be allowed to operate anymore. Also getting journalistic permits for the Ukrainian frontlines is nowadays more impossible than ever before in this war.

    • Lightor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      So you care about format, not content? And you rely on a crowd sourced wiki for unbiased information. Dear Lord.

      • Aurix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        “quite difficult to do neutral” -> “unbiased information. Dear Lord.” Is your reading comprehension alright? We are talking about TV high-jacking showing some historical soviet afghan war footage and pictures of gored russian soldiers. Declaring this as the ultimate “truth about war” is hyperbolic.

        • Lightor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Unbiased and neutral can easily be used interchangeably here, anyone with common sense could crack that code bud.

          Jesus dude, you honestly need to talk to someone. You legit seem to have a narcissism problem.

          • Aurix@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            You imply I think Wikipedia is per default unbiased and all truthful which it isn’t and I stated clearly otherwise with “quite difficult to be neutral”. So I am not sure where the misunderstanding comes from.

            Bad rep for going down the personal route in a discussion.

            • Lightor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I believe you when you say you’re not sure.

              Bad rep for going down the personal route in a discussion.

              You come at my reading comprehension then try to high road the convo. Dude, you’re displaying every characteristic of someone who is chronically online. Take a breath and reflect lol.

    • doodledup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t understand why you’re being heavily downvoted for being critical. Your argumentation is perfectly reasonable. I suspect these downvotes come mostly from bots or people that expected to circle-jerk in this thread.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        3 months ago

        Ukraines or even the Wests propaganda can’t even come close to the barrage of Russian propaganda.

        Russia is almost at the level of North Korea at this point.

      • Aurix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        It is because people think they are on the right side of politics so much, that whatever they say or do, can’t be criticized to the slightest extent. I dislike the declaration of “truth” in wartime quite a lot as it doesn’t seem to be sensible. The black-white thinking is an absolute cancer in this internet society as you can tell by the amount of comments thinking I would side with Russia when criticizing the wording of the article, not even the Ukrainian action itself.

        They just assume whatever statement isn’t in full accord with them, means you are in full accord with the extreme opposite end of whatever spectrum. I highly advise to avoid political movements and friend groups with such extreme tendencies which favor shouting down over any discussion as they will circle jerk themselves into pure insanity.