Yesterday HN had 14 posts in 2 hours about Russia attacking Poland
https://files.catbox.moe/w4aax3.png
Today there are 0 posts that it was not intentional and very likely caused by Ukrainian air defence
https://nitter.net/BBCBreaking/status/1592842861535526913
https://nitter.net/cnnbrk/status/1592831547228524544
HN is manipulated at its finest
18 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 54.6 ms ] threadand there's others. Your counts are in error. Re-evaluate the data and see if you change your mind?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33622330
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33622217
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33619587
So, zero posts is not correct
[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33614533
I’ve already explained that one story is much more important than the other. One can cause an escalation in the war, the other will be viewed as a mistake.
But on the other hand the story which would calm the potentially panicking population is not important? This is public announcement 101 and there should be huge interest in knowing that the world is not heading into a war (for now).
I personally think that the people in the previous thread are too embarrassed to post any more after they speculated and were proven wrong.
I read a wide variety of news sites, ranging from The Guardian to Russia Today to China Daily [and several more in between] and it's striking, not how bias is shown in what's reported. But also in what's not reported or is glossed over. A couple of examples:
1: The alleged discovery of US biolabs in Ukraine was pretty much ignored by the western media but got lots of coverage on RT and was also mentioned on CD.
2: When Ukraine bombed the Crimean bridge, Russia Today led with the fact 3 civilians were killed and 2 were missing presumed dead. The fact that civiliams were killed was not mentioned at all on the BBC etc.
Conversely, when Russia started the bombardment of Ukraine's infrastructure, RT led with how the bombardments had taken out 'weapons storage' and 'communications' and didn't mention any civilian casualties. While the BBC etc. led with the numbers of civilians killed.
3: RT has been claiming that there have been videos posted on social media of Ukrainian militia flying fascist banners and giving nazi salutes. Again this has not been mentioned at all in the western press --presumably as it gives some credence to Russia's justification that it invaded Ukraine to counter Fascism and undermines the western narrative that 'Russia = Wholly Evil. Ukraine = Wholly Good'
I said at the top, I consume news from a wide range of sources, of all political hues. Interestingly, since the Ukraine conflict started, I've been finding that most of the time Russia Today is unreachable from my browser, or through VPN connected via anywhere in western Europe or the US. Yet, strangley enough I have no problem connecting to the site though VPN via Asian countries.
Odd that, isn't it? It's almost like censorship. Except, as we all know, only nasty oppressive countries like Iran, China, Russia etc. try to block their people's access to foreign news sources. It must be just coincidence.
All societies engage in censorship in one form or other.
Is either version the absolute truth? Is either version a total lie? I'd say, as with most such tales, the truth is found somewhere in the middle.
You've even done it yourself. You said Ukraine has a "democratically elected government" which replaced a "highly corrupt, dubiously elected leader". But the previous government was democratically elected too. And was overthrown by a revolution [popular or otherwise]. >All societies engage in censorship in one form or other.
Of course. But only the west seems to maintain this pretense that "we" don't and "they" do.
EDIT: Oddly enough, I just closed this edit window to see a submission from the Guardian:
"China circles El Salvador’s economy as country edges toward crypto plunge" [0]
with 'circling' giving a nice predatory image of a shark waiting to move in for the kill on a hapless victim. I wonder how that headline would have been worded if the US or EU was in talks to buy up El Salvador's debt instead of China?
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/15/china-el-...
The fact is that Russia has not been stably non expansionist for centuries. Russia’s actions in Belarus, Georgia, Ukraine, etc. show that whenever a government gains power that they don’t or where people rise up against a government they do like they react with military intervention. And in Ukraine in particular their actions are not supported by the people being affected. They are the morally reprehensible party. In the same way American overthrow of popularly elected governments in the past have been morally reprehensible.
You're 'clearly' seeing only one side of the story. I'm not saying that what's being reported on the Russian side isn't full of lies, half-truths and propaganda. But I'm cynical [or realist] enough not to take what we're being fed by our side at face value either.
As the man said "The first casualty of war is truth"
Morally speaking there is only one view. Ukraine posed no threat to Russia and it was invaded. There is no other way to look at it. Russian forces have killed, raped, and tortured hundreds times more civilians than Ukrainian soldiers. There is no moral equivalence between the sides of this conflict. Russia has invaded or militarily intervened numerous times against its neighbors since for the 400 years. It is Europe’s last overtly colonial empire and it deserves nothing less than condemnation and ire.
There were no meaningful demonstrations in support of Russian occupation on territories conquered post February 2022.
I mentioned the current government of Ukraine being democratically elected to point out the absurdity of the Russian claim of it being fascist. Ukraine hasn’t been a fascist ever, as far as I know. So bringing up that Ukraine had a democratically elected government prior to 2014 isn’t relevant to this point.
Western media has correctly and widely covered the correction, so this is not evidence of (or against) western media bias.
After the original news broke out the “correction” on the source of the missile was the most important piece of information since the war began.
Western media has fallen on its face yet again and then cooly got up and kept walking as if nothing happened. Except many people saw it with their own eyes.
It often happens, that if a Lie be believ’d only for an Hour, it has done its Work, and there is no farther occasion for it. Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect. - https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/07/13/truth/
All you observed was the routine dynamics of the forum. Sensational media stories get posted all the time to HN, and get upvoted all the time. Most are off topic and get flagged by users and/or downweighted by mods.
As far as I know there was only one moderator intervention of any kind, and it went the opposite way to what you thought you perceived: we downweighted https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33613278 when it was on the front page, because it wasn't in English (about that see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). We would probably have downweighted it even if it had been in English, since a rushed story about a sensational event on a sensational topic makes for bad HN threads—there simply isn't enough reliable information. We try to wait for more information to emerge in such cases, as would anyone who had reflected a little on media reporting.
As far as I can tell from a quick scan of the data, that was the only submission mentioning Russia, Poland, or missiles that made HN's front page yesterday.
If you consider how easy it is to convince yourself that you're perceiving "manipulation" and to post accusations about it, and then compare that to how much harder it is to write an accurate and informative response, you might notice how your post is itself an example of the thing you're complaining about.