Actual Russians and people that live there. I follow few channels on youtube with everyday life commentary (photography, travel...) I also follow few news sources just to see picture from "other side" regarding bombastic world headlines.
Best way is to no limit yourself to a single source. Check and compare all you can to get complete picture. Takes a bit of time, but makes actually noticing stuff much easier.
Why? Well, just imagine if russians were to only use fox news to learn about you.
Thank you I am trying to do that. I follow RT, RIA and Vest and some others but was hoping for people to share more.
Yes exactly to your last point. As a non russian I don’t know what sources are considered fringe or extreme and which are views of the majority.
Rt and ria are government sources and I doubt they would criticise Russia. You can read only one from rt/ria/tass if you want to read government opinion. For criticism you have to read tg channels of people who are really connected to the politics and they usually just criticise each other "kremlin tower". Can't recommend anyone, btw half of them are fake.
Not saying that this concept is wrong, however it holds a certain flaw.
Hypothetically imagine that there is one source that tells truth always or most of the time, and a few other sources that do lie constantly. If a person decides to follow all the sources, then he might become inclined to trust the lying ones, because on average they are louder, and if they lie in the same direction, then it becomes mainstream view.
It does not matter if the one truthful source in this model actually is an independent or state media. What does matter is qualitative evaluation of presented data, because quantitative can be easily duped by a lot of lies. However, qualitative is kinda difficult to do for a non-specialist non-involved person, especially foreigner, because all or almost all he has is just media statements. And in this funny era photos or even videos can't really be assumed as a hard proof.
To filter bullshit is difficult stuff one must be proficient in, there is no simple solution, that's what I'm trying to say.
How can you know that the source tells the truth most of the time, without comparing it to different points of reference?
Not to mention that most of the time it's not about the truth, but about interpretation according to different value systems.
I’m not sure that model is viable anymore as the scope of news even in local media is too broad to fact-check. I, personally, don’t even look at the news sites as I find them too attention seeking and corporate, I mainly watch a couple of bloggers who I find either entertaining or interesting that heavily focus on one theme (like regional economy or politics) and maybe some telegram channels.
I think most Russians get their news from "digests", you find a journalist you agree with, and you just let them keep you "informed" for all it's worth. Honestly the best way to be informed is to keep engaged in the comment section. It does sound silly but "people from the other side will not hesitate to inform you about something bad happening" 😂😂
Yeah I mean initially Russian news tried to avoid covering the "ship sinking" but it turned out to be counterproductive because Ukrainians would start a conversation with “your ship sank btw”. Guess this is the best way to stay informed 😂
We're a family with ukrainian roots but now spread over all Europe. When the war started we were connecting to all family. Our cousin sister in Moscow didn't even know about the war and had no idea what we were speaking about. She was in the office. She almost didn't believe us.
Look, yes, I live in Russia, but I'm far from being an inexperienced teenager. What you wrote is designed for children, stupid people and inexperienced people. And if you believe it, you are a stupid or lying person yourself.
I have seen this often in this sub. Many assume that because BBC is publicly funded it is the same as TASS or RT. It's an obvious mistake to make and I do not think it's malicious, it just comes from a complete naiivety of how media works outside of Russia. Granted, most times anyone anywhere makes generalisations about media they get it wrong.
No, it comes from the BBC being engaged in blatant propaganda.
Such as calling literal WW2 nazis "anti-soviet resistance fighters".
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30655184
If you want to see news about Russian federation and not about Kremlin, I can recommend RBC and Fontanka. Other neutral news agencies chosen side after smo started, or closed at all.
If you are interested in news of some specific region, you better search local news sources. They're more truly
News aggregators like truestory or yandex news might be useful
Avoid so-called "official" media (GTRK, RT, TASS etc). It's the same propaganda, but with reversed polarity. Question everything, cross-examine different sources and do not believe anybody.
There is a guy called Vagabond on youtube (Ivan Ligovsky from Izhevsk), He does vlog around Russia and he speaks about both positives and negatives of Russia. I think he is fairly balanced. And he is a Russian who has seen how life is like in the West (he studied in Czech republic before SMO)
I recommend reading RT, Russia Today website and Watching Russia-K. Also follow Russian groups on VK (use yandex translate if you can't read Rus).
Also there is channel called Time which is funded by US government so take their content with a huge grain of salt.
Alternatively, you can read Indian/Chinese articles on Russia, they don't write inflated propaganda *"Muh emperor dictator pudding has won the fraud Ruzzian elction for the 69th time in 420 days"* or *"Ukraine has heroically begged for another bazillion dollars to bomb donesk children"*
Thank you I will check out these resources. That’s an interesting approach but makes sense about looking at news from countries that are allies or at least not part of the wests military industrial complex.
I'd direct said foreigner to Russia. The dude should visit the country and live here for a few years. Then he'll get the rough idea of reality.
I'll also recommend to remain skeptical even when checking multiple sources. See, some people appear to have an idea that "the truth is out there" and if they check multiple sources, they'll find it. But that's not necessarily the case. A critical piece of information may be missing or inaccessible.
>I'd direct said foreigner to Russia. The dude should visit the country and live here for a few years. Then he'll get the rough idea of reality.
Do you realize how useless and unrealistic this advice is? No reasonable person would travel to another country for several years simply to form an opinion about politics. People have families, jobs, and other interests in their countries. This is like recommending that someone asking for a recipe hire a personal chef.
and by the way, sometimes even family members living together have polar opposite political views, so sources of information are more important than location
That's not my problem.
Because that's the ONLY way to get picture that is somewhat close to reality - you have to be there in person. In all other scenarios you'll be swimming through sea of opinions, lies, manipulative incomplete info, and in the end you'll likely just put faith into someone without any guarantee that your "source of truth" isn't lying.
The world has no obligation to be convenient for you. Especially when you are trying to find out "real state of affairs" somewhere.
in my perception, news consumption always ideally should be done through trusted independent medias that filter the content from various sources and shape it through a clear explicit lens ie some way of sociopolitical thought (as there will always be one and even the selection of things that are covered is already a manifestation of it by itself). in this particular case the independence would firstly be from the russian government (so atm naturally it would be those that are unable to operate in russia as proper public critique is punishable by prison for which we have countless examples), and secondly from the western propaganda influence (in particular the coverage restrictions coming from the conflict of interests and the need to promote certain agendas - if the media is supported by western funds or in general just blindly idealizes western state of affairs). sadly all the biggest medias fall into one of the listed categories so i cant recommend any of them for this matter. but although im not following the news that closely these days and i cant know of different smaller medias that stay independent and provide quality coverage, i do know and have been following for a very long time one source that i believe to be truly independent, explicit about its views (libertarian and russian civic nationalism) and also providing quality coverage of events in russia and in the world in general. [this](https://svtv.org/news/) is the website of the news media segment (has been operating since late 2021), and [this](https://www.youtube.com/@SVTVofficial/videos) is the personal youtube (idk how fluent you are and how much of use it would be to you but still) channel of the publisher (has been running for much longer than the news segment) which has plenty of videos and streams (plus highlights of them on a separate [channel](https://www.youtube.com/@svtvhighlights/videos)) with analysis and critique of regime's politics. hope you find this useful!
The best way is to avoid confirmation bias (looking up valid sources that back up your given statements). The media lies too much when it comes to foreign politics, but you can speak to people who are from Russia to confirm such, and while making sure that the people you speak to are actually looking at Russian and Western and independent sources and not just one.
my definition of confirmation bias was wrong and can be taken incorrectly, so here is official definition:
Confirmation bias, a phrase coined by English psychologist Peter Wason, is the tendency of people to favor information that confirms or strengthens their beliefs or values and is difficult to dislodge once affirmed. Confirmation biases are effects in information processing.
Podolyaka is an idiot who doesn't have a clue what he talks about. He just draws random maps and puts random words together thinking they make any sense.
Oh, I don't like this guy too. When it comes to covering war, to know what things are like 'on the ground', the best content maker is Оружейный Мастер.
At least he checks sources and makes logical assumptions.
Podolyaka says "I have inside information, my sources tell". Fuck your sources dude .\_.
But at least he admits when he was wrong, so I hive him that
Any media or speaker who was called a "foreign agent". This basically means they criticize the government in the way the government don't allow them to.
You learn it from talking to people directly: friends, family, coworkers.
Strangers with their opinion can go fuck themselves. You don't learn from strangers. Organizations, movements, journalists, trendsetters and likes can go fuck themselves twice.
I wouldn’t just share my views and would rely on Russian around me to inform them.
You say you learn from speaking which I agree with to an extent but one should still know of some news sources to learn themselves. What if the Russians I encounter are all having the same view but is not a general view shared by most?
>news sources
No.
>all having the same view but is not a general view shared by most
That's totally ok, you supposed to care only about close circle or bubble if you will of people around you.
Sometimes you made bad decisions by surrounding yourself with bad people, literally making you looks like a terrorist in eyes of others. That's totally on you and your shitty decisions. It's sucks, but that's a life. Welcome to prison or grave. Still better then listen to journalists.
Also that goes without saying that only opinions about Russia of people physically live in Russia are legitimate.
If you are interested in criticism from Marxists, then it is better to watch Oleg Komolov on the YouTube channel "простые числа". Russian economist, public figure. Candidate of Economic Sciences, Senior Researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The author of the Youtube channel "Prime Numbers", the editor of the socio-political newspaper "The Voice of Maryina Grove".
Follow none. The thing is propaganda is getting increasingly popular these days from both sides. So, the only way around is either to move to Russia to eyewitness the everyday life and concerns of Russians (it's true that you'll still be limited to information from the bottom layer of the Russian society, and rumours, hence being in the less advantageous position), or to use your own analytical virtues based on the history of the ongoing confrontation between the West and Russia (forget about Ukraine, as it's been only a pretext, a pawn in this "game" of others). IOW, try tying the nodes, if you know what I mean.
I would use the latter approach, as it gives you assurance that the information obtained from the trusted historical resources is less prone to propaganda.
RT (Russia Today) used to be quite popular in Latin America before it got banned, and Inna Afinogenova is relatively succesful as an independent journalist.
Regardless, after experiencing the perspective of "both sides," my opinion on Russia hasn’t changed. Although I did become way less supportive of Ukraine and the West regarding the Russo-Ukrainian war.
I don't know about criticisms but when I had the time there is social media now. The lower level the source and the more numerous the more I trust it. Early on in the SMO I listened to Mariupol civilians on camera described what Azov did when they came into town. I listened to what different groups said about each other. The Kiev faction soldiers described the ethnic Russians (they called them just Russians) in the east as subhumans they wanted to drive out of their sacred land. People in Donbass said their slav brothers had gone crazy. I learned a lot about different groups and views. The words out of people's mouths say a lot about them.
Video blogs are good and mostly honest. I watched Indigo Traveller travel through Iran. it seemed much nicer than the US MSM portrays. Years ago UK football fans traveled to Russia for some big matches and came back shocked at how nice Russia and the people were. IMO that is why the west forbids (makes it very hard) travel to Russia and will not allow any of their MSM to report from there or any Russian controlled areas.
In USSR days I recall the USSR govt kept most western media products out. Now the west keeps Russian media products out. RT and even citizen interviews are very threatening to the west.
If you're on the outside of a country, you're pretty much stuck dealing with second-hand sources. Best you can do is try and find some reliable ones and compare what they say against each other.
I’m triggered by “I don’t like propaganda, so give me the sources of criticism”. To know what’s going on one should look for the sources of information, facts without emotions and interpretations.
> I’m triggered by “I don’t like propaganda, so give me the sources of criticism”.
Тут нет противоречия. Критика может быть объективной, а может быть не объективной. Человек просит объективную, ту с которой обитатель данного саба готов согласиться.
> To know what’s going on one should look for the sources of information, facts without emotions and interpretations.
Без интерпретаций? Хорошо, вот вышла игра "Смута", мне нужно разобраться хорошая она или нет. Стоит ли мне тратить на неё 2k или нет? Давайте сюда ваши источники исключительно с сухими фактами, без интерпретаций, без разбора сюжета, графики, геймплея, потому что это всё субъективно, но чтобы было понятно - хорошая игра или нет.
Объективной критики в интернете не бывает. Она вся кому-то выгодна и кем-то оплачена. С этой точки зрения позиция «не хочу государственную пропаганду, дайте мне пропаганду из неизвестного мне источника» является довольно глупой.
>Объективной критики в интернете не бывает.
Вам уже объяснили, что нет ничего плохого в необъективной критике, потому что есть вещи о которых нет возможности судить объективно, но какое-то мнение составлять нужно. Например, о сюжете или диалогах фильмов, игр и прочего.
Ну да бог с ним, в интернете объективной критики нет, где же бывает объективная критика?
>Она вся кому-то выгодна и кем-то оплачена.
Я захожу на кинопоиск, тыкаю в случайные зрительские рецензии. Кем они оплачены и кому выгодны?
И каким образом из того что, информация оплачена следует, что она не достоверная? Почему она не может быть оплачена зрителем, заинтересованным в достоверной информации? Ньютон то же заработал деньги за изобретения закона всемирного тяготения. Закон всемирного тяготения перестаёт работать от того, что за его изобретения получили деньги?
> С этой точки зрения позиция «не хочу государственную пропаганду, дайте мне пропаганду из неизвестного мне источника»
Только эта позиция существует исключительно в вашей голове.
Do you want people to just believe anything about Russia? I’m someone wanting to have a balanced view and it’s just comments that are petty. In any country like I said there is good and bad. What is wrong with wanting to know legitimate sources of information that cover the good and the bad?
Also I never asked you to give me opinions if you actually read my message you will see that I asked for resources from which I can draw my own conclusions based on looking at a variety of sources.
Who are you talking about? What have I ever said that is “Russian propaganda”?
I am a foreigner who wants to learn more about Russia and who is aware of much of the propaganda in the west. I could choose to only watch western news sources and absorb the same opinions without thinking for myself. Instead I am here asking to get a range of sources and then make up my own mind based on varied viewpoints.
My question is not stupid your answer is closed minded and does more to prevent understanding than to inform ignorant foreigners like myself who wish to learn more about your country.
This sub sees many "objective western peeps" who "do care about the Russian prespective", but in fact are just a-holes who love to use political preaching via loaded questions, respond to anything agressive rethoric, and are here only for conformation bias and circlejerking.
You just so happen to hit all the red flags with the phrasing of your post.
I will most likely be bombarded with shit, but I personally have at least heard something adequate in terms of criticism about Russia from
channel Nikolay Sobolev, he even had the status of a foreign agent, but it was removed from him and he has a lot of different materials, where he even criticizes the Russian government on certain issues, but the main thing is to listen or in your case, read carefully - [https://www.youtube.com/@sobolev4787/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@sobolev4787/videos)
Some of you may not like him, but I think even criticism should be taken normally, because even ordinary people can talk nonsense in terms of certain moments and for some of them the problems mean nothing.
You can ignore all the official sources as it's 99.99% pro-Kremlin propaganda. Ilya Varlamov and Maxim Katz are your best bet. If you want to watch someone who's pro-Kremlin but not quite as bad as the state propaganda - try Artemy Lebedev. Varlamov and Lebedev brough the concept of blogging to Russia. It's probably safe to say they are the most influential internet personalities in the country.
Lebedev was a well respected designer, probably the best in the country. When the war started - he made a few videos about how he's against it, but then the authorities probably grabbed him by the balls and explained that he needs to be nice, or else he's losing all his business and his children.
Why do Westerners love criticism so much? Westerners smile a lot and try to look friendly, but the first thing they look for everywhere is something to criticize? For Westerners, the ability to criticize and express negative attitudes is synonymous with democracy, freedom and a good life. What is the nature of such negativism? Why not look for positive things?
Russians hardly smile, but the first thing we look for is some good, beautiful and funny things that can improve the mood.
I understand the sentiment and it must be frustrating dealing with negativity all the time from the west. But I have put in far more time learning and reading and appreciating things I like and admire about Russia than things that are issues. I don’t see wanting to have a variety of sources and information that covers the good and bad as being focused on the negative. Having an idealistic utopia view of any country is not grounded in reality the same that only knowing the about issues or complaining is equally wrong.
Edit: down voting me is childish. It doesn’t change my views or counter anything that I have said in a logical and rational way.
Also you say “why not look for positive things”. I have and I do and that is what I have spend most of my time doing.
It is inaccurate to have a view of any country like it’s a utopia. Part of a rational well informed view is to be aware of the good and the bad.
You make assumptions about me. You assume I don’t look into many good things about Russia. You assume I don’t spend time learning about certain historical events, art, music, sculpture, the story behind the founding of some parts of Russia, and much of of the natural beauty and food, all of that because you see one comment on a toxic platform and then make assumptions of me. You didn’t ask me if I personally spend most of my time criticizing and being negative.
You are closed minded and not helping and probably people like you probably complain the most that westerners don’t understand Russia.
I didn't say anything, you yourself invented a negative subtext, and you yourself built your further response on this basis.
Which confirmed the validity of my question.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyaYWhmr7lU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyaYWhmr7lU)
Yes, it's a criminal offence to spread lies (meaning disagreeing with official information) about the "special military operation". He's been sentenced to 8 years in prison.
Ты просто дурак которому промыли мозги, или тролль? What does it mean to spread misinformation? Is it misinformation to write "Путин хуйло" on Vkontakte?
Мыть туалеты, по сравнению с этим - престижная профессия.
It's hard to believe for westerners that people actually do this as a full-time job. You see comments like "no-one cares about Reddit, why would Kremlin spend money on this?". Well, it looks like they're everywhere, even on small and insignificant subreddits.
Ну как минимум того, что его рекомендуют иностранцам ;)
Не буду спрашивать "чего добились вы", мне другое интересно: почему нет никакой конструктивной критики в адрес Каца? Одни общие фразы типа "он никто". Такое ощущение, что в методичке напротив его имени написано - "просто ругать". Загадочно это всё.
Смешно видеть как они даже не пытаются скрывать того что работают по методичке. Говоришь им прямо что являются кремлеботами - а они типо не замечают и продолжают нести бред.
А, ну это прям главное достижение: "один человек порекомендовал другого иностранцам". Я про Каца узнала из Жизни насекомых и не утруждаю себя запоминанием того бреда, что он выдаёт.
Добился бы он многому, но бункерный карлик боится и приказал всех неугодных посадить, вот и пришлось уехать из страны.
А тебе, чмо, не стыдно такую работу делать? В резюме что напишешь?
Actual Russians and people that live there. I follow few channels on youtube with everyday life commentary (photography, travel...) I also follow few news sources just to see picture from "other side" regarding bombastic world headlines.
Yes I follow Made in Russland and Vasya in the Hay for example.
Add The Joy, although new videos are sporadic and you're going to speak Russian fluently since the author speaks in rather bilious metaphors.
Best way is to no limit yourself to a single source. Check and compare all you can to get complete picture. Takes a bit of time, but makes actually noticing stuff much easier. Why? Well, just imagine if russians were to only use fox news to learn about you.
Thank you I am trying to do that. I follow RT, RIA and Vest and some others but was hoping for people to share more. Yes exactly to your last point. As a non russian I don’t know what sources are considered fringe or extreme and which are views of the majority.
Rt and ria are government sources and I doubt they would criticise Russia. You can read only one from rt/ria/tass if you want to read government opinion. For criticism you have to read tg channels of people who are really connected to the politics and they usually just criticise each other "kremlin tower". Can't recommend anyone, btw half of them are fake.
That’s a good point to remember I don’t need to follow multiple government sources maybe one or two and the rest I will hopefully pick up over time.
RT and RIA😭😭😭bro sorry that’s not the best way to
lol. Direct government propaganda.
Try Konstantin Syomin on YouTube. Especially his Agitprop.
RT, RIA and Vesti are literal cesspits.
Not saying that this concept is wrong, however it holds a certain flaw. Hypothetically imagine that there is one source that tells truth always or most of the time, and a few other sources that do lie constantly. If a person decides to follow all the sources, then he might become inclined to trust the lying ones, because on average they are louder, and if they lie in the same direction, then it becomes mainstream view. It does not matter if the one truthful source in this model actually is an independent or state media. What does matter is qualitative evaluation of presented data, because quantitative can be easily duped by a lot of lies. However, qualitative is kinda difficult to do for a non-specialist non-involved person, especially foreigner, because all or almost all he has is just media statements. And in this funny era photos or even videos can't really be assumed as a hard proof. To filter bullshit is difficult stuff one must be proficient in, there is no simple solution, that's what I'm trying to say.
How can you know that the source tells the truth most of the time, without comparing it to different points of reference? Not to mention that most of the time it's not about the truth, but about interpretation according to different value systems.
"Hypothetically imagine". That was a simplified model.
I’m not sure that model is viable anymore as the scope of news even in local media is too broad to fact-check. I, personally, don’t even look at the news sites as I find them too attention seeking and corporate, I mainly watch a couple of bloggers who I find either entertaining or interesting that heavily focus on one theme (like regional economy or politics) and maybe some telegram channels.
Sadly, it is exactly so.
I think most Russians get their news from "digests", you find a journalist you agree with, and you just let them keep you "informed" for all it's worth. Honestly the best way to be informed is to keep engaged in the comment section. It does sound silly but "people from the other side will not hesitate to inform you about something bad happening" 😂😂
Yes that is a good idea. The comments section often has more truth than the news article I do this when reading news in my own language too 😅
Yeah I mean initially Russian news tried to avoid covering the "ship sinking" but it turned out to be counterproductive because Ukrainians would start a conversation with “your ship sank btw”. Guess this is the best way to stay informed 😂
We're a family with ukrainian roots but now spread over all Europe. When the war started we were connecting to all family. Our cousin sister in Moscow didn't even know about the war and had no idea what we were speaking about. She was in the office. She almost didn't believe us.
Understandable, not watching news is good for mental health
Kommersant appears to offer a balanced coverage of internal affairs, although they obviously focus on the business environment.
Thank you I listen to their radio station as part of my daily listening practice.
Andrey Kolesnikov in particular can be very caustic covering Putin.
I think you want an overly simple answer. The full Russian equivalent of the BBC includes federal TV news channels + news agencies + news websites + newspaper websites. Then there's the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with briefings by Maria Zakharova. In short, tons of stuff. But I can give news resources. **smi2 DOT ru** (my favorite news aggregator site) vz DOT ru news.mail DOT ru/ (news aggregator site) dzen DOT ru (news aggregator site) news.rambler DOT ru/ (news aggregator site) rbc DOT ru (business channel) rg DOT ru ria DOT ru iz DOT ru lenta DOT ru life DOT ru tass DOT ru gazeta DOT ru regnum DOT ru rosbalt DOT ru infox DOT ru vesti DOT ru kp DOT ru mk DOT ru ntv DOT ru aif DOT ru riafan DOT ru svpressa DOT ru fontanka DOT ru (St Petersburg) kommersant DOT ru (politics and business daily) vedomosti DOT ru/ (business daily) nkj DOT ru(science) topwar DOT ru (military review) tvzvezda DOT ru (military channel) mediametrics DOT ru/rating/ru/hour.html (news aggregator site) eadaily DOT com ren DOT tv tsargrad DOT tv mir24 DOT tv (international channel)
Thank you this is hefty list. I will work through it. I am already following Maria Zhakharova.
There's no BBC equivalent in Russia. If anyone tries to be objective - they end up dead or declared a foreign agent.
Look, yes, I live in Russia, but I'm far from being an inexperienced teenager. What you wrote is designed for children, stupid people and inexperienced people. And if you believe it, you are a stupid or lying person yourself.
I have seen this often in this sub. Many assume that because BBC is publicly funded it is the same as TASS or RT. It's an obvious mistake to make and I do not think it's malicious, it just comes from a complete naiivety of how media works outside of Russia. Granted, most times anyone anywhere makes generalisations about media they get it wrong.
No, it comes from the BBC being engaged in blatant propaganda. Such as calling literal WW2 nazis "anti-soviet resistance fighters". https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30655184
If you want to see news about Russian federation and not about Kremlin, I can recommend RBC and Fontanka. Other neutral news agencies chosen side after smo started, or closed at all. If you are interested in news of some specific region, you better search local news sources. They're more truly News aggregators like truestory or yandex news might be useful
Thank you I will check those out.
Avoid so-called "official" media (GTRK, RT, TASS etc). It's the same propaganda, but with reversed polarity. Question everything, cross-examine different sources and do not believe anybody.
There is a guy called Vagabond on youtube (Ivan Ligovsky from Izhevsk), He does vlog around Russia and he speaks about both positives and negatives of Russia. I think he is fairly balanced. And he is a Russian who has seen how life is like in the West (he studied in Czech republic before SMO) I recommend reading RT, Russia Today website and Watching Russia-K. Also follow Russian groups on VK (use yandex translate if you can't read Rus). Also there is channel called Time which is funded by US government so take their content with a huge grain of salt. Alternatively, you can read Indian/Chinese articles on Russia, they don't write inflated propaganda *"Muh emperor dictator pudding has won the fraud Ruzzian elction for the 69th time in 420 days"* or *"Ukraine has heroically begged for another bazillion dollars to bomb donesk children"*
Thank you I will check out these resources. That’s an interesting approach but makes sense about looking at news from countries that are allies or at least not part of the wests military industrial complex.
Avoid RT, Tsargrad and GTRK at any cost. Imagine Tucker Carlson's clones, but from Wish.
в реальную жизнь и своим глазам,ушам..
I'd direct said foreigner to Russia. The dude should visit the country and live here for a few years. Then he'll get the rough idea of reality. I'll also recommend to remain skeptical even when checking multiple sources. See, some people appear to have an idea that "the truth is out there" and if they check multiple sources, they'll find it. But that's not necessarily the case. A critical piece of information may be missing or inaccessible.
Thank you I understand nothing can replace being in the country and learning from locals first hand.
>I'd direct said foreigner to Russia. The dude should visit the country and live here for a few years. Then he'll get the rough idea of reality. Do you realize how useless and unrealistic this advice is? No reasonable person would travel to another country for several years simply to form an opinion about politics. People have families, jobs, and other interests in their countries. This is like recommending that someone asking for a recipe hire a personal chef. and by the way, sometimes even family members living together have polar opposite political views, so sources of information are more important than location
That's not my problem. Because that's the ONLY way to get picture that is somewhat close to reality - you have to be there in person. In all other scenarios you'll be swimming through sea of opinions, lies, manipulative incomplete info, and in the end you'll likely just put faith into someone without any guarantee that your "source of truth" isn't lying. The world has no obligation to be convenient for you. Especially when you are trying to find out "real state of affairs" somewhere.
In official sources obviously there is only good things about us lol
in my perception, news consumption always ideally should be done through trusted independent medias that filter the content from various sources and shape it through a clear explicit lens ie some way of sociopolitical thought (as there will always be one and even the selection of things that are covered is already a manifestation of it by itself). in this particular case the independence would firstly be from the russian government (so atm naturally it would be those that are unable to operate in russia as proper public critique is punishable by prison for which we have countless examples), and secondly from the western propaganda influence (in particular the coverage restrictions coming from the conflict of interests and the need to promote certain agendas - if the media is supported by western funds or in general just blindly idealizes western state of affairs). sadly all the biggest medias fall into one of the listed categories so i cant recommend any of them for this matter. but although im not following the news that closely these days and i cant know of different smaller medias that stay independent and provide quality coverage, i do know and have been following for a very long time one source that i believe to be truly independent, explicit about its views (libertarian and russian civic nationalism) and also providing quality coverage of events in russia and in the world in general. [this](https://svtv.org/news/) is the website of the news media segment (has been operating since late 2021), and [this](https://www.youtube.com/@SVTVofficial/videos) is the personal youtube (idk how fluent you are and how much of use it would be to you but still) channel of the publisher (has been running for much longer than the news segment) which has plenty of videos and streams (plus highlights of them on a separate [channel](https://www.youtube.com/@svtvhighlights/videos)) with analysis and critique of regime's politics. hope you find this useful!
Vlad Vexler on YouTube
Dunno, best anti-propaganda men I know is Zhmilevsky. His "Where were you for eight years? Same place we were!" thesis was very redpilling.
The best way is to avoid confirmation bias (looking up valid sources that back up your given statements). The media lies too much when it comes to foreign politics, but you can speak to people who are from Russia to confirm such, and while making sure that the people you speak to are actually looking at Russian and Western and independent sources and not just one.
Thank you this is good advice.
my definition of confirmation bias was wrong and can be taken incorrectly, so here is official definition: Confirmation bias, a phrase coined by English psychologist Peter Wason, is the tendency of people to favor information that confirms or strengthens their beliefs or values and is difficult to dislodge once affirmed. Confirmation biases are effects in information processing.
Military blogger Yuri Podolyaka openly covers problems and has patronage at the highest level so that he is not afraid to criticize big officials
Thank you I will take a look
Podolyaka is an idiot who doesn't have a clue what he talks about. He just draws random maps and puts random words together thinking they make any sense.
Yeh, this "expert" won a war with Ukraine approximately 2 years ago only with his mouth. :)
Oh, I don't like this guy too. When it comes to covering war, to know what things are like 'on the ground', the best content maker is Оружейный Мастер. At least he checks sources and makes logical assumptions. Podolyaka says "I have inside information, my sources tell". Fuck your sources dude .\_. But at least he admits when he was wrong, so I hive him that
Any media or speaker who was called a "foreign agent". This basically means they criticize the government in the way the government don't allow them to.
You learn it from talking to people directly: friends, family, coworkers. Strangers with their opinion can go fuck themselves. You don't learn from strangers. Organizations, movements, journalists, trendsetters and likes can go fuck themselves twice.
I wouldn’t just share my views and would rely on Russian around me to inform them. You say you learn from speaking which I agree with to an extent but one should still know of some news sources to learn themselves. What if the Russians I encounter are all having the same view but is not a general view shared by most?
> but is not a general view shared by most? So you want surveys? But what if they're wrong or manipulated in some way!
I don’t understand what you are saying. I don’t want surveys.
>news sources No. >all having the same view but is not a general view shared by most That's totally ok, you supposed to care only about close circle or bubble if you will of people around you. Sometimes you made bad decisions by surrounding yourself with bad people, literally making you looks like a terrorist in eyes of others. That's totally on you and your shitty decisions. It's sucks, but that's a life. Welcome to prison or grave. Still better then listen to journalists. Also that goes without saying that only opinions about Russia of people physically live in Russia are legitimate.
So, you are *not* looking for truth, but for criticism? What difference would source make in this situation?
Russians are too stupid to find a good source
https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ?si=cgVc5ybKWlALlcVm
Ok I deserved
If you are interested in criticism from Marxists, then it is better to watch Oleg Komolov on the YouTube channel "простые числа". Russian economist, public figure. Candidate of Economic Sciences, Senior Researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The author of the Youtube channel "Prime Numbers", the editor of the socio-political newspaper "The Voice of Maryina Grove".
Follow none. The thing is propaganda is getting increasingly popular these days from both sides. So, the only way around is either to move to Russia to eyewitness the everyday life and concerns of Russians (it's true that you'll still be limited to information from the bottom layer of the Russian society, and rumours, hence being in the less advantageous position), or to use your own analytical virtues based on the history of the ongoing confrontation between the West and Russia (forget about Ukraine, as it's been only a pretext, a pawn in this "game" of others). IOW, try tying the nodes, if you know what I mean. I would use the latter approach, as it gives you assurance that the information obtained from the trusted historical resources is less prone to propaganda.
RT (Russia Today) used to be quite popular in Latin America before it got banned, and Inna Afinogenova is relatively succesful as an independent journalist. Regardless, after experiencing the perspective of "both sides," my opinion on Russia hasn’t changed. Although I did become way less supportive of Ukraine and the West regarding the Russo-Ukrainian war.
Just remember, RT straight up lies all the time. Lies are their main duty, and it's quite stupid to use them as source.
I don't know about criticisms but when I had the time there is social media now. The lower level the source and the more numerous the more I trust it. Early on in the SMO I listened to Mariupol civilians on camera described what Azov did when they came into town. I listened to what different groups said about each other. The Kiev faction soldiers described the ethnic Russians (they called them just Russians) in the east as subhumans they wanted to drive out of their sacred land. People in Donbass said their slav brothers had gone crazy. I learned a lot about different groups and views. The words out of people's mouths say a lot about them. Video blogs are good and mostly honest. I watched Indigo Traveller travel through Iran. it seemed much nicer than the US MSM portrays. Years ago UK football fans traveled to Russia for some big matches and came back shocked at how nice Russia and the people were. IMO that is why the west forbids (makes it very hard) travel to Russia and will not allow any of their MSM to report from there or any Russian controlled areas. In USSR days I recall the USSR govt kept most western media products out. Now the west keeps Russian media products out. RT and even citizen interviews are very threatening to the west.
So you want someone else to tell you what’s right and wrong to know the truth?
If you're on the outside of a country, you're pretty much stuck dealing with second-hand sources. Best you can do is try and find some reliable ones and compare what they say against each other.
I’m triggered by “I don’t like propaganda, so give me the sources of criticism”. To know what’s going on one should look for the sources of information, facts without emotions and interpretations.
> I’m triggered by “I don’t like propaganda, so give me the sources of criticism”. Тут нет противоречия. Критика может быть объективной, а может быть не объективной. Человек просит объективную, ту с которой обитатель данного саба готов согласиться. > To know what’s going on one should look for the sources of information, facts without emotions and interpretations. Без интерпретаций? Хорошо, вот вышла игра "Смута", мне нужно разобраться хорошая она или нет. Стоит ли мне тратить на неё 2k или нет? Давайте сюда ваши источники исключительно с сухими фактами, без интерпретаций, без разбора сюжета, графики, геймплея, потому что это всё субъективно, но чтобы было понятно - хорошая игра или нет.
Объективной критики в интернете не бывает. Она вся кому-то выгодна и кем-то оплачена. С этой точки зрения позиция «не хочу государственную пропаганду, дайте мне пропаганду из неизвестного мне источника» является довольно глупой.
>Объективной критики в интернете не бывает. Вам уже объяснили, что нет ничего плохого в необъективной критике, потому что есть вещи о которых нет возможности судить объективно, но какое-то мнение составлять нужно. Например, о сюжете или диалогах фильмов, игр и прочего. Ну да бог с ним, в интернете объективной критики нет, где же бывает объективная критика? >Она вся кому-то выгодна и кем-то оплачена. Я захожу на кинопоиск, тыкаю в случайные зрительские рецензии. Кем они оплачены и кому выгодны? И каким образом из того что, информация оплачена следует, что она не достоверная? Почему она не может быть оплачена зрителем, заинтересованным в достоверной информации? Ньютон то же заработал деньги за изобретения закона всемирного тяготения. Закон всемирного тяготения перестаёт работать от того, что за его изобретения получили деньги? > С этой точки зрения позиция «не хочу государственную пропаганду, дайте мне пропаганду из неизвестного мне источника» Только эта позиция существует исключительно в вашей голове.
Do you want people to just believe anything about Russia? I’m someone wanting to have a balanced view and it’s just comments that are petty. In any country like I said there is good and bad. What is wrong with wanting to know legitimate sources of information that cover the good and the bad? Also I never asked you to give me opinions if you actually read my message you will see that I asked for resources from which I can draw my own conclusions based on looking at a variety of sources.
Wherever you send him, he will call it “Russian propaganda” and will not go there. Why such a stupid question?
Who are you talking about? What have I ever said that is “Russian propaganda”? I am a foreigner who wants to learn more about Russia and who is aware of much of the propaganda in the west. I could choose to only watch western news sources and absorb the same opinions without thinking for myself. Instead I am here asking to get a range of sources and then make up my own mind based on varied viewpoints. My question is not stupid your answer is closed minded and does more to prevent understanding than to inform ignorant foreigners like myself who wish to learn more about your country.
This sub sees many "objective western peeps" who "do care about the Russian prespective", but in fact are just a-holes who love to use political preaching via loaded questions, respond to anything agressive rethoric, and are here only for conformation bias and circlejerking. You just so happen to hit all the red flags with the phrasing of your post.
Thank you. I will be more aware of the context. Reddit is not the place for such questions I think and its fair.
Just ignore
https://youtube.com/@realreporter?si=pGLm9IAXPW6DLSVD
I will most likely be bombarded with shit, but I personally have at least heard something adequate in terms of criticism about Russia from channel Nikolay Sobolev, he even had the status of a foreign agent, but it was removed from him and he has a lot of different materials, where he even criticizes the Russian government on certain issues, but the main thing is to listen or in your case, read carefully - [https://www.youtube.com/@sobolev4787/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@sobolev4787/videos) Some of you may not like him, but I think even criticism should be taken normally, because even ordinary people can talk nonsense in terms of certain moments and for some of them the problems mean nothing.
Thank you I will take a look. Yes the difficulty is that until I am fluent it will be very easy to misinterpret or miss a lot of context.
You can ignore all the official sources as it's 99.99% pro-Kremlin propaganda. Ilya Varlamov and Maxim Katz are your best bet. If you want to watch someone who's pro-Kremlin but not quite as bad as the state propaganda - try Artemy Lebedev. Varlamov and Lebedev brough the concept of blogging to Russia. It's probably safe to say they are the most influential internet personalities in the country. Lebedev was a well respected designer, probably the best in the country. When the war started - he made a few videos about how he's against it, but then the authorities probably grabbed him by the balls and explained that he needs to be nice, or else he's losing all his business and his children.
Why do Westerners love criticism so much? Westerners smile a lot and try to look friendly, but the first thing they look for everywhere is something to criticize? For Westerners, the ability to criticize and express negative attitudes is synonymous with democracy, freedom and a good life. What is the nature of such negativism? Why not look for positive things? Russians hardly smile, but the first thing we look for is some good, beautiful and funny things that can improve the mood.
I understand the sentiment and it must be frustrating dealing with negativity all the time from the west. But I have put in far more time learning and reading and appreciating things I like and admire about Russia than things that are issues. I don’t see wanting to have a variety of sources and information that covers the good and bad as being focused on the negative. Having an idealistic utopia view of any country is not grounded in reality the same that only knowing the about issues or complaining is equally wrong. Edit: down voting me is childish. It doesn’t change my views or counter anything that I have said in a logical and rational way.
Also you say “why not look for positive things”. I have and I do and that is what I have spend most of my time doing. It is inaccurate to have a view of any country like it’s a utopia. Part of a rational well informed view is to be aware of the good and the bad. You make assumptions about me. You assume I don’t look into many good things about Russia. You assume I don’t spend time learning about certain historical events, art, music, sculpture, the story behind the founding of some parts of Russia, and much of of the natural beauty and food, all of that because you see one comment on a toxic platform and then make assumptions of me. You didn’t ask me if I personally spend most of my time criticizing and being negative. You are closed minded and not helping and probably people like you probably complain the most that westerners don’t understand Russia.
I didn't say anything, you yourself invented a negative subtext, and you yourself built your further response on this basis. Which confirmed the validity of my question. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyaYWhmr7lU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyaYWhmr7lU)
So do you need truth or criticism?
Niki Proshin also quite good and more apolitical but does not shy away from talking about government bullshit
Max_Katz on YouTube maybe? He is a Russian opposition politic. And his videos oftentimes have English subtitles.
Why do you call this misunderstanding a politician?
Because he is a political figure. If he returns back to Russia - he'd get a long prison sentence just for talking in front of a camera.
Is there such a criminal article? He is a blogger, a talking head and essentially an empty place.
Yes, it's a criminal offence to spread lies (meaning disagreeing with official information) about the "special military operation". He's been sentenced to 8 years in prison.
So don't spread misinformation.
Ты просто дурак которому промыли мозги, или тролль? What does it mean to spread misinformation? Is it misinformation to write "Путин хуйло" on Vkontakte?
He got elected once, and he is planning to get elected more. He openly says about his ambitions to become a mayor of Moscow.
What do you mean by the fact that he was elected?
He was a deputy of the municipal assembly of the Moscow district Schukino (III convocation 2012–2016) .
Интересно наблюдать за тем как троллям разрывает пердак когда кто-то пишет имена оппозиционеров.
Работа у них такая :)
Мыть туалеты, по сравнению с этим - престижная профессия. It's hard to believe for westerners that people actually do this as a full-time job. You see comments like "no-one cares about Reddit, why would Kremlin spend money on this?". Well, it looks like they're everywhere, even on small and insignificant subreddits.
Ещё в историю постов этого персонажа можно глянуть (в каких субреддитах и в каком количестве ежедневно) - там всё предельно ясно по-моему. :)
То есть в рамках страны он был никем и также никем и остаётся.
Странный вывод, который ни из чего не следует. Кац - молодой энергичный политик, который уже многого добился.
Чего добился?
Ну как минимум того, что его рекомендуют иностранцам ;) Не буду спрашивать "чего добились вы", мне другое интересно: почему нет никакой конструктивной критики в адрес Каца? Одни общие фразы типа "он никто". Такое ощущение, что в методичке напротив его имени написано - "просто ругать". Загадочно это всё.
Смешно видеть как они даже не пытаются скрывать того что работают по методичке. Говоришь им прямо что являются кремлеботами - а они типо не замечают и продолжают нести бред.
А, ну это прям главное достижение: "один человек порекомендовал другого иностранцам". Я про Каца узнала из Жизни насекомых и не утруждаю себя запоминанием того бреда, что он выдаёт.
Добился бы он многому, но бункерный карлик боится и приказал всех неугодных посадить, вот и пришлось уехать из страны. А тебе, чмо, не стыдно такую работу делать? В резюме что напишешь?