The Russian-language Wikipedia contains "false information on the subject of a special military operation" of Russia's armed forces in Ukraine, regulator says.
That sounds good in theory, but what is the standard of checking the proofs? None of the parties are exactly impartial. Also since Russia uses lying as a primary political tool, how can we trust anything they say?
That sounds good in theory, but what is the standard of checking the proofs?
The same way as it is done on the judges: keep silence, and let all parties say their agruments, without pressure, interruptions, muting etc. And then, try to evaluate them, find lies or untold things etc.
Actually, there was an attempt to make such an open discussion in UN Security Council, but it was banned by GB.
Also since Russia uses lying as a primary political tool, how can we trust anything they say?
Exactly the same I can tell about West? I’m Belarusian, and I’m an eyewitness of August 2020 events in my country, and I know how the events were highlighted in western media. If there is no open discussions, ane everybody just attributes to oppenents as “liars”, that actually means, that parties are not interested in listening to others, and find some kind of truth.
If there is no open discussions, ane everybody just attributes to oppenents as “liars”, that actually means, that parties are not interested in listening to others, and find some kind of truth.
Yes, but this assumes that all parties are discussing in good faith. That there’s at least an official respect for truth. I find it very difficult to find such a sentiment from Kreml’s attitudes and behaviour.
The proofs should be checked from the propaganda of the both involved parties: Russian and the West.
That’s actually China’s position, afaik.
That sounds good in theory, but what is the standard of checking the proofs? None of the parties are exactly impartial. Also since Russia uses lying as a primary political tool, how can we trust anything they say?
The same way as it is done on the judges: keep silence, and let all parties say their agruments, without pressure, interruptions, muting etc. And then, try to evaluate them, find lies or untold things etc.
Actually, there was an attempt to make such an open discussion in UN Security Council, but it was banned by GB.
Exactly the same I can tell about West? I’m Belarusian, and I’m an eyewitness of August 2020 events in my country, and I know how the events were highlighted in western media. If there is no open discussions, ane everybody just attributes to oppenents as “liars”, that actually means, that parties are not interested in listening to others, and find some kind of truth.
Yes, but this assumes that all parties are discussing in good faith. That there’s at least an official respect for truth. I find it very difficult to find such a sentiment from Kreml’s attitudes and behaviour.