The United States on September 13 said the Russian news outlet RT is taking orders directly from the Kremlin and working with Russian military intelligence to spread disinformation around the world to undermine democracies.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the United States has gathered new evidence that exposes cooperation between RT and four other subsidiaries of the Rossia Segodnya media group, and it intends to warn other countries of the threat of the disinformation.

In addition to RT, Rossia Segodnya operates RIA Novosti, TV-Novosti, Ruptly, and Sputnik, but the announcement on September 13 focused largely on RT. The outlet, formerly known as Russia Today, has previously been sanctioned for its work to allegedly spread Kremlin propaganda and disinformation.

  • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
    51·
    2 months ago

    So, we have a first amendment, we actually cannot prohibit or penalize someone for distributing propaganda to our citizens, that law would be illegal to make. We can make them register as foreign agents, that’s how the tenet media people got in trouble, that and being shady with where their money was coming from. We have no charges for propaganda distribution though, despite the very clear evidence of the behavior.

    To your other question, like I said, I have no real good ideas on concrete steps we can take that might prove useful. Unless we want to repeal the first amendment or something, which I don’t think is a good idea.

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      14·
      2 months ago

      So your idea is rules for foreign entities, not our own?

      Who will serve as a check for what’s true and when terms are *redefined, if it’s our darlings, whether media moguls or politicians, doing the redefining?

      • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
        51·
        2 months ago

        For the third time, I don’t have any good ideas. I don’t have a “my idea” and haven’t presented one. That’s why I asked for yours, since maybe you, as a human that is not me, thought of or read something that I haven’t.

        This sentence:

        So your idea is rules for foreign entities, not our own?

        is something you concocted in your head somehow.

        I just pointed out that your idea is illegal, that’s all.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          14·
          2 months ago

          I’d point out that you’re asking of me solutions you’re unable or unwilling to deliver, but that’s whataboutery, and off limits, so I myself should just “shut up.”

            • Maeve@kbin.earth
              12·
              2 months ago

              And I gave you ideas. You gave* me nothing of value. You wasted my time, because you’re more invested in “winning” the argument, rather than working out viable solutions. Silencing RT doesn’t give any pushback on anything our own propagandists feed us.

              • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
                31·
                2 months ago

                All I did was point out your idea was illegal, knowing an idea would not work is not “nothing of value”. Perhaps I should have clarified, are there any legal ideas that might move us forward in a positive direction? Knowing that it is illegal to violate:

                Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press

                The key is working out viable solutions. We can’t just magic up unviable ones and get upset when someone points out they’re not viable.

                • Maeve@kbin.earth
                  12·
                  2 months ago

                  I’m not upset, and I’m not upset at pushback on it own propaganda machine, either.

                  • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    41·
                    2 months ago

                    That’s fair. I’m just pointing out it’s a really difficult situation for us to address in any way. If anyone has any ideas on productive steps forward beyond just not doing it in the future, I remain interested.