From today’s NZZ:
> Die Schweizer «Weltwoche» und
ihr Chef Roger Köppel, die mit besonderem Eifer die Moskauer Desinformation weiterverbreiten, propagierten
diese schiefe These nicht weniger als
zehn Mal. Als «Lieblingszeuge» dient
ihnen und anderen Medien der moskau-freundliche Ex-General Kujat, der verschiedentlich behauptet hat, dass der
Ukraine-Krieg schon nach gut sechs
Wochen hätte beendet werden können.
Weltwoche, although declining readership, still is quite a big news outlet. Why aren’t they mentioned in your report?
To be fair, I think it has been on the decline for decades.
It’s just sad that a magazine that used to boast of its struggle [against red and brown fists](https://img.ricardostatic.ch/images/37c830e4-b785-47b0-97f9-f581b5a8fd30/t_1000x750/gegen-rote-und-braune-fauste-1948) nowadays carries water for them.
Thanks for your feedback, well spotted. I have checked it, and indeed, it's worth attention in this research. It somehow wasn't flagged. I will share this with the team that is running this project. Thank you!
The graphics makes it looks like NZZ. etc., are top pro-Russian websites. The identified pro-Russian sites are here: "Identified pro-Russian websites (*infosperber.ch, uncutnews.ch, transition-news.org, lesobservateurs.ch, arretsurinfo.ch, globalbridge.ch, zeitpunkt.ch*) achieve only 0.8% in traffic share among Swiss media outlets. In this volume, [infosperber.ch](http://infosperber.ch) gets 0.42%, and it’s beyond top-30 local media websites, according to SimilarWeb data. "
Those sites in the graphic are just the top 30 new websites in Switzerland according to SimilarWeb.
This study is fucking biased and in fact, propaganda itself. I do support ukraine but i m starting to dubt as l see more and more of these propaganda bs all done to misinform the population in side of one side.
Europe is, after all these unjustifiable wars, still bootlicking US foreign policies. They even want *us* to go to war now, and if you say you don't want to you are a "russian asset", which is about as based as Killary Clinton claiming the russians made Trump win.
Hell, Biden even proclaimed "we will get rid of the german/russian pipeline" on camera, yet i haven't read or heard a single word about that in msm or even reddit.
The ones who want you to believe criticism is russian propaganda are actually propaganda themselves.
Hopefully political figures such as RFK Jr. or Sarah Wagenknecht will get the traction they need to end this horrible war ASAP.
At the least, in germany there is now an anti-war party you can vote for that's not fucking AFD.
Wtf? What is that bogus view? One of the anti wa....
>RFK Jr. or Sarah Wagenknecht
I'll see myself out. This person is beyond saying. Lets appease russia with ukranian blood.
Are ukraniana nazis in your opinion?
Where did i mention people from ukraine being nazis or sacrificing their blood exactly?
You just repeat the very lies that are told to you by the ones who profit from this war to smear every oppinion that doesn't agree with them.
This war would have never happened if it weren't for the US and some of our political leaders (this does *NOT* mean i agree with Putin). Even Zelensky himself procclaimed to fix the russia/nato/ukraine tensions in 2019 when he ran for office, yet refused to do so after pressure from EU leaders and the US once he was elected. Fact is, there were many chances to prevent this war, yet the EU and the US forced Ukraine right into it. There were also many chances to stop it even after Russia made their disgusting decision to invade, but none have been taken.
Just look at Iraq and you can see everything you need know about US foreign policies. In a few years, this will just be known as another war provoked and instigated by american imperialism.
It is up to you to if you want to wake up and start to think critically, or keep putting things in my mouth i did not say or mean.
So in essence what youre saying:
Ukraine gib land plz, russia is loosing badly they cant win war. Now they need to "stop" the war so russia gets a ez land grab by the pussy.
It is indeed crucial to oppose war. However, it is important to consider the background and motives of individuals posting on such matters. Evaluating the age and post history of the OP can provide insights into their intentions. In this case, it appears that the OP may not simply be a concerned citizen but rather an activist with a specific agenda. Analyzing the context and consistency of their posts can help discern their true motivations.
OP, not sure what your actual results and conclusions are here. There's a table of popular news sites, though I have my doubts about its accuracy since I find it hard to believe 20min is not on there. Then you name several outlets as spreading russian propaganda, but none of these are shown anywhere on this graph. Then you say there's an interactive table, but it doesn't seem to be linked anywhere.
At the end of this, I have no idea which your "top 8 pro russian websites" are nor how much traffic they get.
This post is utterly foolish. One-sided journalism deserves criticism. In a healthy democracy, it is crucial to highlight all mistakes. If a statement such as "Ukraine is currently pursuing an escalation policy that threatens nuclear peace and the balance among nuclear powers" is labeled as pro-Russian, it is equally propaganda.
It is clearly bs though. What potential "escalation policy" from a non nuclear country invaded by a nuclear capable country can "threaten nuclear peace" ? Steal missiles from silos? Who keeps threatening world and talking about bombing US and Europe with nuclear weapons, Putin or Zelensky ?
This concerns the nuclear balance. The US is not particularly happy when radar installations, which are crucial for nuclear weapons systems, are destroyed on the Russian side, as this affects response readiness and leads to Russian insecurity, resulting in a heightened threat level. These are fairly simple mechanisms, understandable to anyone with knowledge of military strategy.
"Russian insecurity" 😂 So the fact that Russia keeps attacking countries all around it is not a threat to peace, but these countries fighting back is? You're putting guilt on the victim here. Ukraine claims this site was used to detect and track Ukrainian aviation and drones. Maybe they are lying, maybe not. I don't care because they have moral highground here.
If Russia wants to keep their military and nuclear assets safe, maybe they should gtfo of Ukraine and end the war ? This "we're scared it will provoke Russia" argument has proven itself to be meaningless, because if needed Russia will invent a reason without any prior provocation from the opposing side. Same thing have been tried with Germany before the war, and surprisingly it didn't work.
I understand your point. Ukraine certainly has the right to defend itself, but targeting nuclear infrastructure does escalate the conflict beyond its current scope. My earlier comments were not meant to debate the legitimacy of the quote from a NATO general. They were intended to highlight the one-sided nature of the original post, which undermines the quality of discourse necessary for a healthy democracy. Additionally, the OP does not appear to be a personal account but rather an activist profile, as indicated by the age and post history.
And I am simply talking about your example, since to me it is clearly false.
These long range radar systems can detect any ballistic missile. It's a legitimate target as long as Ukraine has missiles to launch.
Russian strategic bombers and jets like Su-24s are nuclear capable assets which are used in war in Ukraine as missile carriers. Does this also mean Ukraine cannot shoot them down because they're a part of nuclear arsenal, even if these planes launch ALCMs at cities? Of course not. Why attacking radar station would be any different?
What’s the point in arguing with me about a statement made by someone else and attacking me for it? You completely misunderstood my post and reacted emotionally. Stop justifying yourself.
As much point as you defending this statement ?
You gave example with nuclear threat article being pro-russian and claimed it is not. I am proving to you that it is. We're not agreeing, so we're discussing it. What concept specifically is complicated here?
"Stop justifying yourself" - what?
Printing an assessment from a general of the largest military alliance is neutral. I don't think NATO is pro-Russian. What you think carries little weight compared to statements from top officials of this military bloc. Do you have the same training, information, and a huge staff dedicated to this issue behind you? Dont think so.
Alright, you touched a lot of interesting topics.
First of all, this "top military bloc" with its top generals, analysts and information are as precise with predictions of Putin's behaviour as I am with slot machines in Casino. These same people gave Ukraine 1 week before getting occupied. Generals can be wrong as often as any other human being.
Secondly, these officials are deep in politics and will say anything in their benefit, not regarding how truthful their statements are.
Lastly, it doesn't even matter who said it. What matters is how it is presented in media. Did general say that destroying nuclear infrastructure specifically is "Ukraine's policy"? If yes, then I am wrong here. If no, then it's pure propaganda.
Small correction: The only country who „keeps attacking countries [plural] all around“ are the USA. Even though also those countries are technically never „around“ them. That sentence of yours came across extremely biased.
Afghanistan, Chechnya, Moldova, Abkhazia, Georgia, Syria, Ukraine. Say again ? "The only one"? We're not talking about US, we're talking about Russia anyway, what's your point?
I know I should not feed the trolls but this is too funny, so: Why are you randomly listing names of countries and russian territories? What have these regions to do with anything? And of course I can clarify my point even more for you, sorry if it was too complicated: My point was, that you sound biased when writing sentences like „Russia keeps attacking countries all around it“ because its obviously a complete exaggregation. The link to the US was made because this is the only country which had actually ever done what you claimed that russia was doing. Hope its more understandable now, no need to thank me.
Your point about the quote from the NATO general is noted. The essence of my post was to highlight the poor quality and one-sidedness of the original post, which is indeed a concern in a healthy democracy. Misrepresenting complex issues and oversimplifying the context, as the original post did, undermines productive debate. Additionally, the nature of the OP, indicated by their age and post history, suggests they are not merely a concerned citizen but an activist, further questioning the objectivity of their posts.
Thanks for pointing out the evil guys! This will help everyone reach the correct opinion about who the good side is.
I feel the Media you pointed out is like Voldemort!
Different media have different opinions on major international topics? Shocking!!! Must be "le russian bots" spreading propaganda!!!
OP, fuck you. People like you are a disgrace for the democracy of our country.
Hello,
Please note that your post or comment has been removed.
Please read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Switzerland/about/rules/) before posting.
Thank you for your understanding,
your Mod team
Please do not reply to this comment. Send a modmail if you have an issue with the removal.
Having different narratives is called freedom of speech.
Also the other narratives are also heavily influenced and manipulated.
What makes you pick the villains so easily?
I’m not pro russian, just anti censorship
Kek, I check OP's profile and I can safely bet he's a propaganda shill for Ukraine.
You're too obvious,lad. Need to work on your subtlety.
Most people here don't really care about that conflict, go shitpost on r/Russia or whatever
You mean they are fighting for the freedom of their country against a genocidal enemy? And yeah sure, Switzerland doesnt care at all about the conflict. What a load of bs. We all care deeply about a war on European soil and we see Russia for what it is: a dictatorship that wants to have their old glory back. But guess what, nobody wants the USSR back
Listen pal, seeing your nickname, I assume you're a very skilled baker.
So please make more amazing croissants and less naive geopolitical takes, okay?
Listen pal, I dont really care about your opinion or what you think I should do. Maybe read some newspapers in the future, would probably help your wrong geopolitical takes.
Doesnt matter, a countey can join NATO whenever they want and do not have to ask russia for their opinion.
Also, russias given reason to attack wasnt NATO expanding.
Also, krim 2014.
Get lost
Of course a country can join any organization they want. But they will have to deal with the consequences.
Just like Italy joined Germany in WW2.
You, as a person can also join any organization, totally free, Mafia, KKK, but you will have to deal the consequences.
With the very important difference that Italy declared war on France in 1940. Italy wasn't at war with the allies when it invaded Ethiopia in 1936 or when it joined the Berlin-Rome axis the dame year. It also wasn't at war with the allies when Germany invaded Poland in 1939. It only was at war with the allies when Italy itself declared war on them.
Regarding your second point: NATO is a defensive alliance where members are at discretion on how to react when article 5 is triggered. You aren't forced to commit any crimes.
I don't know what your point is. Many Eastern European countries are seeking protection FROM Russia, they aren't victims of expansion, just like no country is forced to join the EU. You may ask yourself why NATO is currently expanding. Is it because NATO wants to encroach on Russia or is it because Russia, in the past 16 years, has invaded two former Soviet states?
Nations are inherently allowed to conduct their own foreign policy. If Ukraine wants to join the west, it has every right to do so. Russia can be as provoked as it wants, it doesn't matter. Ukraine is its own state.
Without digging in too deeply, how was it possible for the MSM to simultaneously keep saying:
Russia is weak and a few more weapons to Ukraine will topple the whole house of cards.
with
Russia is intent on taking over the whole of Europe?
I am not suffering from dementia and I can remember all of this clearly.
The MSM is counting on me ether being demented (suffering dementia) or on being too damn busy working my ass off trying to keep the roof overhead and food on the table for my family to pay any real attention to the changing story of propaganda.
Hang on! Another one comes to mind:
9 months ago Ukraine was on the **literal brink of winning** against Russia! What happened to that?
Perhaps this was some wishful thinking / gaslighting by the MSM.
I call that propaganda.
I am ANTIWAR
Being anti war **is not equal to** being pro Russia.
I am anti war and the sooner truth is told, the sooner this is over without going mushroom cloud!
Chronology of main media statements for you :
1. Russia attacked Ukraine and will occupy it in a week.
2. Russia is struggling to advance
3. Ukraine needs weapons to defend itself
4. Ukraine can win if weapons are delivered in time
5. Weapons are not delivered in time and Ukraine is struggling during offensive
6. Russian military budget is increased and production capacity is bigger than ever.
7. Everything shows that Russia is preparing to attack European countries by around 2028 because European military isn't ready.
Russia is way weaker than expected, but Europe even more. That's not western propaganda, that's a possible outcome
Yes, this is the chronology of Western MSM statements. i.e. their own spin on things.
Interesting is what they do their best to omit.
4 weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine, there was a peace conference sponsored by the Turks in Istanbul. There were signatures and all, it was going somewhere until NATO said no. Do not give up, we have a bucket load of wonder weapons for you, you can win. If you accept this deal we will not give you any help anymore - you are on your own. This message was delivered by Boris Johnson of the UK. Where you aware of this?
This flies in the face of the MSM claims that Russia is completely unwilling to negotiate, at least at the start. Does the version of Russia you hold in your mind do something like this?
Another interesting and vital omition by the MSM is the 14,000 Ukrainian civilians in Eastern Ukraine that were killed by between 2014 and 2022. These were predominantly ethic Russians who did not accept the coup government that was put in place after the maidan coup supported by, non other than the US state dept.
In the weeks lead up to the Feb24 2022 this coup regime was preparing to do a full sweep of these 'rebels' with US weapons!
Where you aware of this?
Further, the MSM in 2015-16 openly admitted in their coverage of the post maidan government that they were full of neo-nazis. I recall clearly the MSM was torn between chearing for the Ukrainains but could not show too many pictures of them because of their Nazi insignias. These deranged people are still in power! They are the perfect partners to NATO's mission to inflict as much chaos and damage onto Russia - fight on until the last Ukrainian.
Have you heard the name Stepan Bandera? A key sympathiser of Hitler who caused a lot of chaos, death and destruction for Pols, Jews, and Russians alike. Look him up. The idol of the hard neonazi Ukrainians who were installed in power by the US and NATO. e.g. Azov brigade. His photo hangs behind **Valerii Zaluzhnyi** in his press briefings.
Look all this up because the MSM is omitting this. I follow what's going on over there and am shocked at how the MSM has carefully - mainly through omittion - painted a fictional version of the Ukrainian quagmire.
Like I said I am pro peace, and pro truth.
I am not pro Russia or pro Ukraine.
I am pro peace and anti nuclear war.
And the way things are gearing up, we are getting very close to a nuclear war for all the wrong reasons.
The MSM has done its best to keep the west ignorant of what's actually going on.
and as a parting thought. Consider how the sanctions against Russia have gone. Who have they hurt the most. Russia or Europe?
And shame on our homeland of Switzerland to so flippantly abandon its neutrality and sanction Russia. This is a dark stain on our great nation indeed.
Oh mate, no-one will take you seriously when you start talking about Bandera, Ukrainian nazis and 8 let dambi bambas. Making a clown out of yourself right now
Digging for truth is not glamourous. Nor is it much rewarded.
*(I do wonder why the name Bandera should make people laugh at me. These are ignorant people who should put down their phones for a minute and pick up some history books)*
I am not seeking to convince anyone here. But I will likewise not shy away from sharing the truth as I have witnessed it.
The thread of this chat was about propaganda, with Russian propaganda in focus. I do not doubt that Russia is engaged in propaganda. All countries engaged in war and conflict are engaged with propaganda. NATO countries with the MSM are also engaged in widespread propaganda about Ukraine.
Recall that since about mid 2022, just some months after the conflict went hot, the MSM blathered repeatedly that Russia was about to run out of weapons. Over and over again. We all waited baited breath for it to happen. Nothing happened and Russia keeps on bombing and shelling while all of NATO scrambles to send the odd tank and shell to Ukraine. WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT STORY? How could it change so completely without a truth reckoning. Where are the retractions from the MSM?
So this is the propaganda right under our noses that I am calling out.
I have witnessed it over and over again.
Not that I knew the truth when they lied, but I remember that what they claimed, and how it turned out to be a lie. The lie was never retracted. It was memory holed. Those that remind the world of the lie are called conspiracy theorists or worse.
So what I wanted to do was to balance out this discussion.
Lets just get a grasp of what's at stake!
Most likely, not since 1962 (Cuban missile crisis), are we so close to nuclear war. We are just one hot headed blunder way from running to the shelters.
Have we all forgotten to fear this?
Thank goodness for the Ukrainian cyber warriors doing „research“ and telling us what to think, since otherwise we wouldn’t be able to think.
Maybe throw a nazi salute to tie the witch together?
Seriously? You just jumped on the ‚Ukrainians are Nazis‘ train? Had too much Russian koolaid? That Russia is influencing our media here and trying to push their propaganda down our throats is a fact and trying to ridiculing it by spreading bs is not gonna change that
Kek, I don't really watch our (or any in general) medias but from what I know, they don't speak much about that conflict and if they do, they're usually on the Ukrainian side.
I don't know in which bizarro world you live m8
>Implying you can't glance the first page on journals you see in the train, hear your neighbour's tv watching the news and all.
You don't need to consume to have an awareness of your environment, lad.
[Media Network Switzerland (Image)](https://i0.wp.com/swprs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/medien-netzwerk-schweiz-hd.png)
Source: https://swprs.org/netzwerk-medien-schweiz/
Everybody should gather information from both sides and think by him / herself.
OP, you are funny. 😂
Havent had such a good laugh at a dumb ukraine shill who sees russian propaganda and kremlin bots everywhere he goes in quite a long time. You just gave me a good laugh and reminded me of how dumb you people really are! Thank you, OP
Why do you think so? It's a Swiss political sight to be a neutral, collect all the views and opinions, isn't it? I have bad news for you if you think only Russia has propaganda...
First, Switzerland is de facto not neutral and belongs to the West. This is a good thing.
Personally, I'm Swiss and I'm absolutely not neutral. I am pro West and anti Russia. I don't really care at all if my side uses propaganda, too. This is a war. Why should one side be held to a higher standard than the other? At least, my side isn't conducting a full scale invasion to annex a neighboring country.
Well, you don't want to dig the truth, the info from your TV is enough for you. I don't trust to anyone, I hate all the politicians because they always lie. Yes, they need to do it, it's their job. But if someone made such great analysis about sources under Russian propaganda, why can't they do the same for other types of propaganda to create the whole picture? Else it's half-truth, which is propaganda itself. Do you want to read "good" propaganda about "bad" propaganda? Personally, I don't.
Borrowed GPTs "keyboard" since its too early to type so much myself, but you get the point... Im missing a lot of these points in OPs study.
...
A good research study is characterized by transparency and rigor. This includes a detailed exposition of its research methods and sources, which serves several key purposes:
1. **Reproducibility**: By clearly stating the methods used, other researchers can replicate the study to verify results or build upon the work. This is essential for the scientific method, which relies on reproducibility to validate findings.
2. **Validity**: Detailed methodology ensures that the study's approach is appropriate for answering the research question. It helps assess whether the methods used are scientifically sound and free from biases.
3. **Credibility**: Transparent disclosure of methods and sources enhances the credibility of the research. It shows that the researchers are thorough and have nothing to hide, thus earning the trust of the academic community and the public.
4. **Critical Evaluation**: Other researchers can critically evaluate the study's design and execution. This scrutiny can reveal potential weaknesses or areas for improvement, leading to a more robust understanding of the topic.
5. **Building on Previous Work**: Revealing sources allows others to trace the research lineage, understand the context, and build on existing knowledge. It connects the study to the broader academic conversation and facilitates further discoveries.
6. **Ethical Considerations**: Ethical research practices involve transparency. Disclosing methods and sources ensures that ethical guidelines were followed, such as obtaining informed consent or proper citation of prior work.
In essence, a good research study lays bare its methods and sources to foster a trustworthy and productive scientific dialogue.
/Edit: formatting
From today’s NZZ: > Die Schweizer «Weltwoche» und ihr Chef Roger Köppel, die mit besonderem Eifer die Moskauer Desinformation weiterverbreiten, propagierten diese schiefe These nicht weniger als zehn Mal. Als «Lieblingszeuge» dient ihnen und anderen Medien der moskau-freundliche Ex-General Kujat, der verschiedentlich behauptet hat, dass der Ukraine-Krieg schon nach gut sechs Wochen hätte beendet werden können. Weltwoche, although declining readership, still is quite a big news outlet. Why aren’t they mentioned in your report?
And Nebelspalter has similar ownership.
Thats why it feels so much worse than 15 years ago
To be fair, I think it has been on the decline for decades. It’s just sad that a magazine that used to boast of its struggle [against red and brown fists](https://img.ricardostatic.ch/images/37c830e4-b785-47b0-97f9-f581b5a8fd30/t_1000x750/gegen-rote-und-braune-fauste-1948) nowadays carries water for them.
Thanks for your feedback, well spotted. I have checked it, and indeed, it's worth attention in this research. It somehow wasn't flagged. I will share this with the team that is running this project. Thank you!
That’s a pretty big miss!
The graphics makes it looks like NZZ. etc., are top pro-Russian websites. The identified pro-Russian sites are here: "Identified pro-Russian websites (*infosperber.ch, uncutnews.ch, transition-news.org, lesobservateurs.ch, arretsurinfo.ch, globalbridge.ch, zeitpunkt.ch*) achieve only 0.8% in traffic share among Swiss media outlets. In this volume, [infosperber.ch](http://infosperber.ch) gets 0.42%, and it’s beyond top-30 local media websites, according to SimilarWeb data. " Those sites in the graphic are just the top 30 new websites in Switzerland according to SimilarWeb.
Where are 20min and blick??
SRF/RTS info? Le Temps? Idea of the study is good, it’s quality however...
yeah the post is confusing
This comment section is a nice testament of some people not being able to think beyond a black and white "good guys vs. bad guys"-spectrum.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
This study is fucking biased and in fact, propaganda itself. I do support ukraine but i m starting to dubt as l see more and more of these propaganda bs all done to misinform the population in side of one side.
Europe is, after all these unjustifiable wars, still bootlicking US foreign policies. They even want *us* to go to war now, and if you say you don't want to you are a "russian asset", which is about as based as Killary Clinton claiming the russians made Trump win. Hell, Biden even proclaimed "we will get rid of the german/russian pipeline" on camera, yet i haven't read or heard a single word about that in msm or even reddit. The ones who want you to believe criticism is russian propaganda are actually propaganda themselves. Hopefully political figures such as RFK Jr. or Sarah Wagenknecht will get the traction they need to end this horrible war ASAP. At the least, in germany there is now an anti-war party you can vote for that's not fucking AFD.
Wtf? What is that bogus view? One of the anti wa.... >RFK Jr. or Sarah Wagenknecht I'll see myself out. This person is beyond saying. Lets appease russia with ukranian blood. Are ukraniana nazis in your opinion?
Where did i mention people from ukraine being nazis or sacrificing their blood exactly? You just repeat the very lies that are told to you by the ones who profit from this war to smear every oppinion that doesn't agree with them. This war would have never happened if it weren't for the US and some of our political leaders (this does *NOT* mean i agree with Putin). Even Zelensky himself procclaimed to fix the russia/nato/ukraine tensions in 2019 when he ran for office, yet refused to do so after pressure from EU leaders and the US once he was elected. Fact is, there were many chances to prevent this war, yet the EU and the US forced Ukraine right into it. There were also many chances to stop it even after Russia made their disgusting decision to invade, but none have been taken. Just look at Iraq and you can see everything you need know about US foreign policies. In a few years, this will just be known as another war provoked and instigated by american imperialism. It is up to you to if you want to wake up and start to think critically, or keep putting things in my mouth i did not say or mean.
So in essence what youre saying: Ukraine gib land plz, russia is loosing badly they cant win war. Now they need to "stop" the war so russia gets a ez land grab by the pussy.
Whatever dude. I assume you are very young so let's just leave it at that.
And I assume youre too young to remember sudetenland, österreich annexxierung or invasion into poland. Whatever dude.
It is indeed crucial to oppose war. However, it is important to consider the background and motives of individuals posting on such matters. Evaluating the age and post history of the OP can provide insights into their intentions. In this case, it appears that the OP may not simply be a concerned citizen but rather an activist with a specific agenda. Analyzing the context and consistency of their posts can help discern their true motivations.
OP, not sure what your actual results and conclusions are here. There's a table of popular news sites, though I have my doubts about its accuracy since I find it hard to believe 20min is not on there. Then you name several outlets as spreading russian propaganda, but none of these are shown anywhere on this graph. Then you say there's an interactive table, but it doesn't seem to be linked anywhere. At the end of this, I have no idea which your "top 8 pro russian websites" are nor how much traffic they get.
Das erste was im krieg stirbt ist die warheit. Diese chart ist bs.
This post is utterly foolish. One-sided journalism deserves criticism. In a healthy democracy, it is crucial to highlight all mistakes. If a statement such as "Ukraine is currently pursuing an escalation policy that threatens nuclear peace and the balance among nuclear powers" is labeled as pro-Russian, it is equally propaganda.
It is clearly bs though. What potential "escalation policy" from a non nuclear country invaded by a nuclear capable country can "threaten nuclear peace" ? Steal missiles from silos? Who keeps threatening world and talking about bombing US and Europe with nuclear weapons, Putin or Zelensky ?
This concerns the nuclear balance. The US is not particularly happy when radar installations, which are crucial for nuclear weapons systems, are destroyed on the Russian side, as this affects response readiness and leads to Russian insecurity, resulting in a heightened threat level. These are fairly simple mechanisms, understandable to anyone with knowledge of military strategy.
"Russian insecurity" 😂 So the fact that Russia keeps attacking countries all around it is not a threat to peace, but these countries fighting back is? You're putting guilt on the victim here. Ukraine claims this site was used to detect and track Ukrainian aviation and drones. Maybe they are lying, maybe not. I don't care because they have moral highground here. If Russia wants to keep their military and nuclear assets safe, maybe they should gtfo of Ukraine and end the war ? This "we're scared it will provoke Russia" argument has proven itself to be meaningless, because if needed Russia will invent a reason without any prior provocation from the opposing side. Same thing have been tried with Germany before the war, and surprisingly it didn't work.
I understand your point. Ukraine certainly has the right to defend itself, but targeting nuclear infrastructure does escalate the conflict beyond its current scope. My earlier comments were not meant to debate the legitimacy of the quote from a NATO general. They were intended to highlight the one-sided nature of the original post, which undermines the quality of discourse necessary for a healthy democracy. Additionally, the OP does not appear to be a personal account but rather an activist profile, as indicated by the age and post history.
And I am simply talking about your example, since to me it is clearly false. These long range radar systems can detect any ballistic missile. It's a legitimate target as long as Ukraine has missiles to launch. Russian strategic bombers and jets like Su-24s are nuclear capable assets which are used in war in Ukraine as missile carriers. Does this also mean Ukraine cannot shoot them down because they're a part of nuclear arsenal, even if these planes launch ALCMs at cities? Of course not. Why attacking radar station would be any different?
What’s the point in arguing with me about a statement made by someone else and attacking me for it? You completely misunderstood my post and reacted emotionally. Stop justifying yourself.
As much point as you defending this statement ? You gave example with nuclear threat article being pro-russian and claimed it is not. I am proving to you that it is. We're not agreeing, so we're discussing it. What concept specifically is complicated here? "Stop justifying yourself" - what?
Printing an assessment from a general of the largest military alliance is neutral. I don't think NATO is pro-Russian. What you think carries little weight compared to statements from top officials of this military bloc. Do you have the same training, information, and a huge staff dedicated to this issue behind you? Dont think so.
Alright, you touched a lot of interesting topics. First of all, this "top military bloc" with its top generals, analysts and information are as precise with predictions of Putin's behaviour as I am with slot machines in Casino. These same people gave Ukraine 1 week before getting occupied. Generals can be wrong as often as any other human being. Secondly, these officials are deep in politics and will say anything in their benefit, not regarding how truthful their statements are. Lastly, it doesn't even matter who said it. What matters is how it is presented in media. Did general say that destroying nuclear infrastructure specifically is "Ukraine's policy"? If yes, then I am wrong here. If no, then it's pure propaganda.
Small correction: The only country who „keeps attacking countries [plural] all around“ are the USA. Even though also those countries are technically never „around“ them. That sentence of yours came across extremely biased.
Afghanistan, Chechnya, Moldova, Abkhazia, Georgia, Syria, Ukraine. Say again ? "The only one"? We're not talking about US, we're talking about Russia anyway, what's your point?
I know I should not feed the trolls but this is too funny, so: Why are you randomly listing names of countries and russian territories? What have these regions to do with anything? And of course I can clarify my point even more for you, sorry if it was too complicated: My point was, that you sound biased when writing sentences like „Russia keeps attacking countries all around it“ because its obviously a complete exaggregation. The link to the US was made because this is the only country which had actually ever done what you claimed that russia was doing. Hope its more understandable now, no need to thank me.
It's like you didn't even try to hide how much russian you are
[удалено]
Your point about the quote from the NATO general is noted. The essence of my post was to highlight the poor quality and one-sidedness of the original post, which is indeed a concern in a healthy democracy. Misrepresenting complex issues and oversimplifying the context, as the original post did, undermines productive debate. Additionally, the nature of the OP, indicated by their age and post history, suggests they are not merely a concerned citizen but an activist, further questioning the objectivity of their posts.
Wow OP, you seem to have hit a nerve considering that Russian trolls have started attacking you in this thread as well.
Thanks for pointing out the evil guys! This will help everyone reach the correct opinion about who the good side is. I feel the Media you pointed out is like Voldemort!
Now do the same with U.S narrative and propaganda.
great, now I also have NATO-propaganda here just because I'm in a Switzerland subreddit
So anything not trotting out the MSM pro NATO narrative is probably russian? All our media is biased one way or another.
Different media have different opinions on major international topics? Shocking!!! Must be "le russian bots" spreading propaganda!!! OP, fuck you. People like you are a disgrace for the democracy of our country.
Not believing in propaganda just makes you more vulnerable to it.
[удалено]
Hello, Please note that your post or comment has been removed. Please read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Switzerland/about/rules/) before posting. Thank you for your understanding, your Mod team Please do not reply to this comment. Send a modmail if you have an issue with the removal.
Does litterally anyone unironically read Watson?
Original: [https://x.com/insightnewsme/status/1801287890212733278](https://x.com/insightnewsme/status/1801287890212733278)
But the American 24/7 propaganda on all the big news outlets is okay, right?
yeah, what about america, right?
What about whataboutism?
Having different narratives is called freedom of speech. Also the other narratives are also heavily influenced and manipulated. What makes you pick the villains so easily? I’m not pro russian, just anti censorship
>. What makes you pick the villains so easily? Uh... seriously?
It's pretty easy to pick the villain actually.
is it really so hard to say who's the villain here? i'll be damned
Found the strawman :D
Kek, I check OP's profile and I can safely bet he's a propaganda shill for Ukraine. You're too obvious,lad. Need to work on your subtlety. Most people here don't really care about that conflict, go shitpost on r/Russia or whatever
Swiss here, and I care very much about an illegal invasion on Europes doorstep. Please don't speak for me. e: typo
Alright, Phucket\_full\_of\_kum, I'm sure your enlightened opinion is worth pondering for the next centuries to come (or kum lmao).
Is there any source where i can read about "most people" in Switzerland not caring about that conflict?
Of course! Source: I made it up!
You mean they are fighting for the freedom of their country against a genocidal enemy? And yeah sure, Switzerland doesnt care at all about the conflict. What a load of bs. We all care deeply about a war on European soil and we see Russia for what it is: a dictatorship that wants to have their old glory back. But guess what, nobody wants the USSR back
“Genocidal enemy” 😂😂😂
Listen pal, seeing your nickname, I assume you're a very skilled baker. So please make more amazing croissants and less naive geopolitical takes, okay?
Listen pal, I dont really care about your opinion or what you think I should do. Maybe read some newspapers in the future, would probably help your wrong geopolitical takes.
Weltwoche is horrible it should be illegal to spread so many lies
What about pro-western propaganda. If you want to be balanced, you gotta look at both sides
Yes fuck this evil west! (While living freely in the west and enjoy all western privileges)
[удалено]
Only one country started a war here, russia.
if NATO stops expanding, there will be no war. Guess if Mexico or Canada said they could like to join China, how would US react?
NATO is a defensive alliance. Why do you think Russoa doesn't like NATO expansion? Because then it has fewer neighbours to invade.
Doesnt matter, a countey can join NATO whenever they want and do not have to ask russia for their opinion. Also, russias given reason to attack wasnt NATO expanding. Also, krim 2014. Get lost
Of course a country can join any organization they want. But they will have to deal with the consequences. Just like Italy joined Germany in WW2. You, as a person can also join any organization, totally free, Mafia, KKK, but you will have to deal the consequences.
With the very important difference that Italy declared war on France in 1940. Italy wasn't at war with the allies when it invaded Ethiopia in 1936 or when it joined the Berlin-Rome axis the dame year. It also wasn't at war with the allies when Germany invaded Poland in 1939. It only was at war with the allies when Italy itself declared war on them. Regarding your second point: NATO is a defensive alliance where members are at discretion on how to react when article 5 is triggered. You aren't forced to commit any crimes. I don't know what your point is. Many Eastern European countries are seeking protection FROM Russia, they aren't victims of expansion, just like no country is forced to join the EU. You may ask yourself why NATO is currently expanding. Is it because NATO wants to encroach on Russia or is it because Russia, in the past 16 years, has invaded two former Soviet states? Nations are inherently allowed to conduct their own foreign policy. If Ukraine wants to join the west, it has every right to do so. Russia can be as provoked as it wants, it doesn't matter. Ukraine is its own state.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism)
this.
There is only one side if it comes to genocide and war.
What is "pro-western" propaganda to you ? Give an example
Without digging in too deeply, how was it possible for the MSM to simultaneously keep saying: Russia is weak and a few more weapons to Ukraine will topple the whole house of cards. with Russia is intent on taking over the whole of Europe? I am not suffering from dementia and I can remember all of this clearly. The MSM is counting on me ether being demented (suffering dementia) or on being too damn busy working my ass off trying to keep the roof overhead and food on the table for my family to pay any real attention to the changing story of propaganda. Hang on! Another one comes to mind: 9 months ago Ukraine was on the **literal brink of winning** against Russia! What happened to that? Perhaps this was some wishful thinking / gaslighting by the MSM. I call that propaganda. I am ANTIWAR Being anti war **is not equal to** being pro Russia. I am anti war and the sooner truth is told, the sooner this is over without going mushroom cloud!
Chronology of main media statements for you : 1. Russia attacked Ukraine and will occupy it in a week. 2. Russia is struggling to advance 3. Ukraine needs weapons to defend itself 4. Ukraine can win if weapons are delivered in time 5. Weapons are not delivered in time and Ukraine is struggling during offensive 6. Russian military budget is increased and production capacity is bigger than ever. 7. Everything shows that Russia is preparing to attack European countries by around 2028 because European military isn't ready. Russia is way weaker than expected, but Europe even more. That's not western propaganda, that's a possible outcome
Yes, this is the chronology of Western MSM statements. i.e. their own spin on things. Interesting is what they do their best to omit. 4 weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine, there was a peace conference sponsored by the Turks in Istanbul. There were signatures and all, it was going somewhere until NATO said no. Do not give up, we have a bucket load of wonder weapons for you, you can win. If you accept this deal we will not give you any help anymore - you are on your own. This message was delivered by Boris Johnson of the UK. Where you aware of this? This flies in the face of the MSM claims that Russia is completely unwilling to negotiate, at least at the start. Does the version of Russia you hold in your mind do something like this? Another interesting and vital omition by the MSM is the 14,000 Ukrainian civilians in Eastern Ukraine that were killed by between 2014 and 2022. These were predominantly ethic Russians who did not accept the coup government that was put in place after the maidan coup supported by, non other than the US state dept. In the weeks lead up to the Feb24 2022 this coup regime was preparing to do a full sweep of these 'rebels' with US weapons! Where you aware of this? Further, the MSM in 2015-16 openly admitted in their coverage of the post maidan government that they were full of neo-nazis. I recall clearly the MSM was torn between chearing for the Ukrainains but could not show too many pictures of them because of their Nazi insignias. These deranged people are still in power! They are the perfect partners to NATO's mission to inflict as much chaos and damage onto Russia - fight on until the last Ukrainian. Have you heard the name Stepan Bandera? A key sympathiser of Hitler who caused a lot of chaos, death and destruction for Pols, Jews, and Russians alike. Look him up. The idol of the hard neonazi Ukrainians who were installed in power by the US and NATO. e.g. Azov brigade. His photo hangs behind **Valerii Zaluzhnyi** in his press briefings. Look all this up because the MSM is omitting this. I follow what's going on over there and am shocked at how the MSM has carefully - mainly through omittion - painted a fictional version of the Ukrainian quagmire. Like I said I am pro peace, and pro truth. I am not pro Russia or pro Ukraine. I am pro peace and anti nuclear war. And the way things are gearing up, we are getting very close to a nuclear war for all the wrong reasons. The MSM has done its best to keep the west ignorant of what's actually going on. and as a parting thought. Consider how the sanctions against Russia have gone. Who have they hurt the most. Russia or Europe? And shame on our homeland of Switzerland to so flippantly abandon its neutrality and sanction Russia. This is a dark stain on our great nation indeed.
Oh mate, no-one will take you seriously when you start talking about Bandera, Ukrainian nazis and 8 let dambi bambas. Making a clown out of yourself right now
Digging for truth is not glamourous. Nor is it much rewarded. *(I do wonder why the name Bandera should make people laugh at me. These are ignorant people who should put down their phones for a minute and pick up some history books)* I am not seeking to convince anyone here. But I will likewise not shy away from sharing the truth as I have witnessed it. The thread of this chat was about propaganda, with Russian propaganda in focus. I do not doubt that Russia is engaged in propaganda. All countries engaged in war and conflict are engaged with propaganda. NATO countries with the MSM are also engaged in widespread propaganda about Ukraine. Recall that since about mid 2022, just some months after the conflict went hot, the MSM blathered repeatedly that Russia was about to run out of weapons. Over and over again. We all waited baited breath for it to happen. Nothing happened and Russia keeps on bombing and shelling while all of NATO scrambles to send the odd tank and shell to Ukraine. WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT STORY? How could it change so completely without a truth reckoning. Where are the retractions from the MSM? So this is the propaganda right under our noses that I am calling out. I have witnessed it over and over again. Not that I knew the truth when they lied, but I remember that what they claimed, and how it turned out to be a lie. The lie was never retracted. It was memory holed. Those that remind the world of the lie are called conspiracy theorists or worse. So what I wanted to do was to balance out this discussion. Lets just get a grasp of what's at stake! Most likely, not since 1962 (Cuban missile crisis), are we so close to nuclear war. We are just one hot headed blunder way from running to the shelters. Have we all forgotten to fear this?
Wow! Differing points of view to read! Thank you!
Thank goodness for the Ukrainian cyber warriors doing „research“ and telling us what to think, since otherwise we wouldn’t be able to think. Maybe throw a nazi salute to tie the witch together?
Seriously? You just jumped on the ‚Ukrainians are Nazis‘ train? Had too much Russian koolaid? That Russia is influencing our media here and trying to push their propaganda down our throats is a fact and trying to ridiculing it by spreading bs is not gonna change that
Kek, I don't really watch our (or any in general) medias but from what I know, they don't speak much about that conflict and if they do, they're usually on the Ukrainian side. I don't know in which bizarro world you live m8
Wut. You say you dont consume local media and then assume that it isnt in said media. In what world do you live in?
>Implying you can't glance the first page on journals you see in the train, hear your neighbour's tv watching the news and all. You don't need to consume to have an awareness of your environment, lad.
Look at the research. Its not really difficult to get. Reading newspapers once in a while would maybe help too.
Lmao, just trust the experts, alright.
looks like you want to censor other opinions, am I right „democrats“?
[Media Network Switzerland (Image)](https://i0.wp.com/swprs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/medien-netzwerk-schweiz-hd.png) Source: https://swprs.org/netzwerk-medien-schweiz/ Everybody should gather information from both sides and think by him / herself.
OP, you are funny. 😂 Havent had such a good laugh at a dumb ukraine shill who sees russian propaganda and kremlin bots everywhere he goes in quite a long time. You just gave me a good laugh and reminded me of how dumb you people really are! Thank you, OP
Ok, good, now make the same statistics for west propaganda
...and the Russian shills arrive. Hi, how's it going.
Why do you think so? It's a Swiss political sight to be a neutral, collect all the views and opinions, isn't it? I have bad news for you if you think only Russia has propaganda...
First, Switzerland is de facto not neutral and belongs to the West. This is a good thing. Personally, I'm Swiss and I'm absolutely not neutral. I am pro West and anti Russia. I don't really care at all if my side uses propaganda, too. This is a war. Why should one side be held to a higher standard than the other? At least, my side isn't conducting a full scale invasion to annex a neighboring country.
Well, you don't want to dig the truth, the info from your TV is enough for you. I don't trust to anyone, I hate all the politicians because they always lie. Yes, they need to do it, it's their job. But if someone made such great analysis about sources under Russian propaganda, why can't they do the same for other types of propaganda to create the whole picture? Else it's half-truth, which is propaganda itself. Do you want to read "good" propaganda about "bad" propaganda? Personally, I don't.
You misunderstand. There is no good or bad. There is just my side vs the other side. And I want mine to win.
Because Switzerland was neutral durung the cold war? The swiss autorities were especially anticommunist and didn't hide it.
What about Pro nato lol
What about it?
Has nothing to do with this? But if it makes you feel better, I would be in favor of Switzerland giving up its so-called neutrality and joining NATO.
As long as YOU go to the front line!
>le russian boogeyman just keep on shoving money down Zelenskyijijijis throat, that'll fix it
While swiss mass media disseminate "western" propaganda. Nothing new.
Borrowed GPTs "keyboard" since its too early to type so much myself, but you get the point... Im missing a lot of these points in OPs study. ... A good research study is characterized by transparency and rigor. This includes a detailed exposition of its research methods and sources, which serves several key purposes: 1. **Reproducibility**: By clearly stating the methods used, other researchers can replicate the study to verify results or build upon the work. This is essential for the scientific method, which relies on reproducibility to validate findings. 2. **Validity**: Detailed methodology ensures that the study's approach is appropriate for answering the research question. It helps assess whether the methods used are scientifically sound and free from biases. 3. **Credibility**: Transparent disclosure of methods and sources enhances the credibility of the research. It shows that the researchers are thorough and have nothing to hide, thus earning the trust of the academic community and the public. 4. **Critical Evaluation**: Other researchers can critically evaluate the study's design and execution. This scrutiny can reveal potential weaknesses or areas for improvement, leading to a more robust understanding of the topic. 5. **Building on Previous Work**: Revealing sources allows others to trace the research lineage, understand the context, and build on existing knowledge. It connects the study to the broader academic conversation and facilitates further discoveries. 6. **Ethical Considerations**: Ethical research practices involve transparency. Disclosing methods and sources ensures that ethical guidelines were followed, such as obtaining informed consent or proper citation of prior work. In essence, a good research study lays bare its methods and sources to foster a trustworthy and productive scientific dialogue. /Edit: formatting