zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. SV_Bub+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-05-03 04:54:20
Agreed on the point, but your example brings up a different problem for me.

100,000 dead Russians, is very likely the propaganda number. Maybes it’s right; maybe it’s not, IDK, but I know that there has been zero negative Ukraine news since the conflict started (ghost of Kiev anyone?), and the media machine definitely only works one way on this topic.

I mean, Russia isn’t the good guy here, but I don’t excuse propaganda just because it tells a story I want to hear.

In this case, I don’t care what the US or Ukraine says the number is. That isn’t news. It’s narrative, true or not.

So, I feel like the score should take into account if how likely an article is to be narrative vs purely an event.

replies(1): >>amoss+u7
2. amoss+u7[view] [source] 2023-05-03 06:08:51
>>SV_Bub+(OP)
The estimate is 100 000 casualities (20k dead and 80k wounded), and it seems to be correlated with several different intelligence sources.

The number is news because Russia is waging a large-scale invasion of another country using cannon fodder tactics. Reporting on that invasion is not simply propaganda.

replies(1): >>afterb+fg
◧◩
3. afterb+fg[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-05-03 07:21:40
>>amoss+u7
> The estimate is 100 000 casualities (20k dead and 80k wounded)

Since December

[go to top]