Path: utzoo!utgpu!CUVMA!SWL-L Date: Thu, 22 Feb 90 15:40:12 EST Reply-To: Brian Sturgill Sender: Short Wave Listener's List Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was From: Brian Sturgill Subject: Re: SOVIET, U.S. BROADCASTERS AGREE TO RADIO PROGRAM SWAP X-To: swl-l@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: UofToronto LAN redistribution Message-ID: <90Feb23.030503est.58643@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca> Newsgroups: bitnet.swl-l Distribution: ut Approved: devnull@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu > From: roskos@IDA.ORG (Eric Roskos) .. > Date: 22 Feb 90 15:52:45 GMT > > fyl@ssc.UUCP (Phil Hughes) writes: > > >Actually, it would be better if both propaganda networks (VOA and RM) > >would broadcast something a little more real -- in other words news > >instead of propaganda. They should both pick up the BBC, CBC, Radio New > >Zealand and a few of the less-partial services. > > I'm still curious which VOA programs other than the editorial at the end > of the broadcast people consider to be propagandistic, and in what sense? > -- > Eric Roskos (roskos@IDA.ORG or Roskos@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL) > > To see the propaganda on VOA, listen to any news cast and take notes about what was talked about. Then tune over to the BBC and do the same. Ask yourself while reviewing the notes about the selection of material and the tone and presentation of (East-West) controversial stories. I think the problem is that you compare RM and VOA in your mind and see an obvious difference in the level of propaganda and say VOA is propoganda-free rather than the more likely statement that RM is propaganda-full. Also, a certain part is that it is hard for us Americans to spot the propaganda, in that it is OUR propaganda, something that is a built-in part of our cultural prejudices. The BBC (et. al.) do a better job of keeping their cultural prejudices out of the newscasts. Brian --------- Brian Sturgill cs.utah.edu