RE: Tell Me Once More Progressives That Hillary and the WLB are "The Same"
September 25, 2017 at 9:52 am
(This post was last modified: September 25, 2017 at 9:56 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(September 24, 2017 at 11:26 pm)FFaith Wrote:(September 24, 2017 at 7:13 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I was asking for a reputable source, not a repeat of the claim.
RT America is reputable? I hadn't heard of them, so I looked them up, and here's what the Wiki had to say:
Quote:RT America is a TV channel based in Washington, D.C., and part of the RT network, a global multilingual television news network based in Moscow, Russia. RT is a non-profit organization in part funded by the Russian government. RT America also has studios and bureaus in New York City, Miami, and Los Angeles.[2][3] The channel is the home and the production base of RT's U.S. based programs.
RT America focuses on covering news in the United States from an alternative perspective. Programs are hosted by American journalists. Similarly, most guests are American (and sometimes Canadian) activists, academics, speakers and analysts with alternative perspectives on "mainstream" issues. The channel covers issues that see lesser coverage in the mainstream media, such as using non-GMO ingredients in foods, corporatism, growing wealth inequality, corruption in politics, peace and environmental issues.
... and later in the article:
Quote:On March 5, 2014, RT America anchor Liz Wahl resigned on air, claiming RT was a propaganda machine for Vladimir Putin. She was recorded as saying:
"I cannot be part of a network funded by the Russian government that whitewashes the actions of Putin. I am proud to be an American and believe in disseminating the truth. And that is why, after this newscast, I am resigning."
In a March 2014 Politico article, Wahl expanded on that statement, saying, "For about two and a half years. I’d looked the other way as the network smeared America for the sake of making the Kremlin look better by comparison, while it sugarcoated atrocities by one brutal dictator after another."
That doesn't strike me as reputable, when even its own employees complain about its bias.
And the IPP themselves can be biased, are they not? The editor of the report referenced in the above news show refers to her organization as "the IPPNW as a medical-political peace organization". And they state immediately in the report that their numbers are estimates arising from statistics.
I'm not watching the Youtube you've embedded due to my limited data, but I have downloaded the report and am reading it. I suspect they may be adding deaths from disparate causes into the count, or have other issues with their "statistical estimates". An estimate is only as good as the formula used to arrive at it, and equations to can harbor biases.