Talk:Propaganda in Russia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ms1220a.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

COMMENT

• RFD discussion's here [1]. –Davey2010^Talk 13:11, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Sources

There are quite a few good recent publications about this: [2] by Economist, [3] by Guardian, [4] by BBC, etc.[5], [6]. But this is huge subject described in many books... Even The Protocols of the Elders of Zion belongs here according to sources. My very best wishes (talk) 14:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Article cleanup

I revised the article lead and body to focus on "Russian propaganda is a term that describes ...". I believe this resolves some of the sourcing issues that were noted via tags, and also removes the coat-racking problem with adding Russian 1910s propaganda, Soviet propaganda, etc. The article looks cleaner now and could be developed from there.

Please let me know of any feedback. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

You have changed the scope of the page, so it does not cover propaganda in Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union any more. Speaking about the scope, I think that's fine. If anyone wants to create an additional "umbrella"/review page that overs all these subjects, they can certainly do that. However, speaking about your content changes, I think you have removed all info on the subject that was actually sourced. My very best wishes (talk) 20:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I've restored the latest "clean" version of the article.

• The recent edit re-added material which has previously been tagged "unreliable sources" and "citation needed". If restoring material, please provide RS citations for material that has been challenged.

• Subsequent edits have also added coat-rack content on Soviet propaganda. This is not needed, as this is covered in its own article, and the emphasis of this article is on the contemporary Russian propaganda. I'll add "See also" to the article to direct interested readers to Soviet propaganda.

• The discussion on Putinism also looked like WP:COATRACK as the connection between Putinism and Russian propaganda was unclear from the article text. I'll add Putinism to "See also" for the interested readers.

For these reasons I restored the prior version. Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:40, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

To beef up the article, I added a section "State-sponsored global PR effort", copied in part from Presidency of Vladimir Putin and RT (TV network). This is reliably cited material that adds to the discussion. Please let me know of any comments. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:53, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Withdrawn: Requested move 18 June 2016

Russian propaganda → Russian state propaganda – Common name in English language literature; pls see Google book results. Also more specific as to what is being discussed: state-sponsored or state-directed propaganda K.e.coffman (talk) 23:58, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose: In this particular instance Russia is being used as a metonym which is widely understood. Also you haven't provided any comparitive data your Google book result only brings up 117 books using the phrase "Russian state propoganda", whereas if you do a similar Google book search for "Russian propoganda" (see here) you get 23,900 results clearly showing the current title is the WP:COMMONNAME. Ebonelm (talk) 02:05, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose Not a common name in English language literature. Besides, this may cause unnecessary disputes if something was simply "state", "state-sponsored", "state-directed" or merely a production by an individual propagandist. My very best wishes (talk) 12:48, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - The WP:COMMONNAME would actually be "Russian propaganda", not "Russian state propaganda". Meatsgains (talk) 21:13, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I've withdrawn the request. Thanks for the inputs! K.e.coffman (talk) 07:50, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I think "state propaganda" would be neat for at least one reason most people don't thing about: word "propaganda" can be extended to things like training - or motivational coaching.

• And, in this sense, "vodka-matryoshka-balalaika-samovar-tetris" can be a propaganda too - but it just won't be state-funded propaganda, it will be a basic tourist ad. Uchyotka (talk) 02:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

3v1, ok... Uchyotka (talk) 02:55, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Propaganda and censorship

The subject has been removed, here comes a source: http://hir.harvard.edu/propaganda-censorship-adapting-modern-age/ Xx236 (talk) 10:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Modern Russian propaganda

The page is about recent R. propaganda. It doesn't cover imperial Russian propaganda and Soviet one. Either the name should be more precize or the whole Russian history should be presented.Xx236 (talk) 08:38, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

The page doesn't cover anti-Western propaganda, mostly anti-EU (Brexit) and anti-USA (presidential campaign).Xx236 (talk) 12:36, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I think this article was especially interesting. It seems they succeeded in election/promotion of US president they wanted. My very best wishes (talk) 05:11, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

the russians are even using wikipedia for propaganda

The russians are even using wiki.ru for their propaganda effort. The euromaidan revolution is presented as an unconstitutional coup, and russian military intervention in crimea is presented as "help to a new sovereign state of crimea". LOL even the enlish wiki is biased, it presents the dpr/lpr as "self proclaimed states", instead of "russian occupied territories". I guess when u are a leading oil exporter, u can by yourself a little bit of wikipedia. I mean who cares about Ukraine anyway, let the russians have it if they want it so badly, right? 212.90.182.118 (talk) 07:48, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

This article is biased and it almost entirely revolves around RT, title is misleading

This article is very biased. It just lists things that some people and some western media said about Russian propaganda. How can that be a good source about this subject, especially considering that these people and media outlets have a motive to present pro-western and anti-Russian views. The article basically doesn't have any facts, it just lists some opinions. The title "Propaganda in Russia" is misleading - the article is actually about Russian propaganda in the West (mainly RT), title "Propaganda in Russia" implies propaganda which is not only coming from Russia but propaganda which is propagated only in Russia. I suggest that the title should be something like: Russian propaganda instead. Article only focuses on Russian propaganda that is seen in the West (RT). Final thought - if Wikipedia is going to have an article about RT and Russian propaganda, then why doesn't Wikipedia have an article about American propaganda and CNN, or German propaganda and Deutsche Welle or Chinese propaganda and Global Times...I am not against an article about Russian propaganda and RT but I am against singling out only Russian propaganda from the sea of propaganda which is coming from all countries. Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral and not-biased and it is supposed to list facts, not just opinions, so this article should be massively rewritten and supplemented by someone who doesn't have a pro-western/anti-Russian or pro-Russian/anti-western beliefs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aetther (talk • contribs) 01:01, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Request for Comment - Introduction to Whataboutism

There is an ongoing Request for Comment about the introduction to the article Whataboutism.

You may comment if you wish, at Talk:Whataboutism#RfC:_Introduction_to_the_subject. Sagecandor (talk) 22:00, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

"Propaganda in the Russian Federation" vs. "Propaganda of the Russian Federation"

This page seems to have recently been moved from Propaganda of the Russian Federation to Propaganda in the Russian Federation by Staszek Lem, possibly partially because I added Propaganda in the Soviet Union as a hatnote as "Russian propaganda" redirects here.

I was just wondering whether the former might be a better title? This article seems to be primarily talking about propaganda of the Russian Federation externally ("global PR effort"), rather than the internal propaganda of Russia. --Bangalamania (talk) 16:39, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

I moved it for consistency with other articles in Category:Propaganda by country . Staszek Lem (talk) 01:55, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Ah ok; that does seem to make sense, actually. Thank you! --Bangalamania (talk) 12:28, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Americentrism

This article is extremely americentric. People dont even try to hide their agenda......--Someone97816 (talk) 01:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Clearer name?

In the name of the principle of least surprise and WP:PRECISION, I think this article should be renamed to "State propaganda in the Russian Federation". The first time I read this article's title, I thought it was about propaganda in general by any group within Russia, or Russian laws on any kind of propaganda. What do you think? Veverve (talk) 19:53, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 18 March 2022

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved as proposed. Consensus is clear. BD2412 T 23:42, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Propaganda in the Russian Federation → Propaganda in Russia – It's just Russia. Eurohunter (talk) 17:29, 18 March 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Colin M (talk) 21:53, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Super Ψ Dro 19:53, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – Do we really want to expand the scope of this article to include Imperial Russian and Soviet Russian propaganda? My guess is that this was not the intent of the proposer. The present title is actually a form of WP:NATURAL disambiguation, narrowing the scope of the article to propaganda in the current Russian state. Therefore, I must oppose this proposal. RGloucester — ☎ 01:34, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. I agree with RGloucester; the scope should be limited to the Russian Federation. An article attempting to describe all propaganda in historical Russian states would be too unwieldy. --PetterLøkd (talk) 19:25, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support. The current title is inconsistent with how similar articles are titled: Foreign relations of Russia, Politics of Russia, Climate of Russia. Per WP:TITLES: "Consistency – The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles." Cuñado ☼ - Talk 18:44, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom, and Cuñado. It should be consistent with similar articles. Desertambition (talk) 21:32, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONSISTENT, for consistency with other similar articles and with the main country article located at Russia. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:43, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support. We usually say "Russia" when naming articles on modern phenomena. Wikisaurus (talk) 21:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support to keep it consistent with similar articles related to Russia. Calidum 02:32, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Domestic versus international propaganda

The article Propaganda in the United States splits its coverage of US propaganda in two categories: domestic and international. I think a similar approach would work well here. Philomathes2357 (talk) 07:21, 10 November 2023 (UTC)