> i am not an american, nor russian. i come from a third world country far from this drama. to me, "russian propaganda" is the same as "american propaganda" which demonizes the other and calls their version as the "ultimate truth".
Yeah, third world countries far away have their own perspective, and it's usually at least as weird as the other two. Well, in many it's of course just a copy of he Russian propaganda; don't know about yours.
> don't americans/west see their media/actions as what it is, propaganda aganinst russia?
No. Because it isn't. Because we have free speech, with media of different persuasions all allowed to spread their own versions of the truth.
To people from dictatorships -- like Russia, or many places in the third world -- this seems impossible, because they're not used to it. So when they -- you, apparently -- see that most media in the West on the whole agree on the basic facts, the "obvious" conclusion to them (you) becomes that "This must be just their side's propaganda!". Please try, in Occam's spirit, to consider the simpler explanation: The reason they all seem to more or less agree is that they've all done their own research, and what they're reporting is the truth they've found. You hear the same from them all, because the truth is the same for everyone.
> blocking RT across america/EU is seen as protecting free speech but god forbid if russia reciprocates with banning american companies? then its an action against free speech, again?
Yes, because what the West is blocking is a state-owned and -controlled Russian propaganda channel, and what Russia is blocking are free independent media. (Well, except for the VoA perhaps.)
Yeah, third world countries far away have their own perspective, and it's usually at least as weird as the other two. Well, in many it's of course just a copy of he Russian propaganda; don't know about yours.
> don't americans/west see their media/actions as what it is, propaganda aganinst russia?
No. Because it isn't. Because we have free speech, with media of different persuasions all allowed to spread their own versions of the truth.
To people from dictatorships -- like Russia, or many places in the third world -- this seems impossible, because they're not used to it. So when they -- you, apparently -- see that most media in the West on the whole agree on the basic facts, the "obvious" conclusion to them (you) becomes that "This must be just their side's propaganda!". Please try, in Occam's spirit, to consider the simpler explanation: The reason they all seem to more or less agree is that they've all done their own research, and what they're reporting is the truth they've found. You hear the same from them all, because the truth is the same for everyone.
> blocking RT across america/EU is seen as protecting free speech but god forbid if russia reciprocates with banning american companies? then its an action against free speech, again?
Yes, because what the West is blocking is a state-owned and -controlled Russian propaganda channel, and what Russia is blocking are free independent media. (Well, except for the VoA perhaps.)