In the depths of disinformation: this is how RT propaganda works

RT Second Opinion ad campaign. Photo: 

Featured, More

Article by: Sylvia Sasse
The fact that right-wing populist parties copy their rhetorical strategies from the Russian propaganda broadcaster RT is nothing new. But their purpose in doing so certainly is.

A few days ago when the Swiss SVP (Swiss People’s Party) politician Claudio Zanetti inquired via Twitter at #RT and #Sputnik whether an article about media censorship in Russia published by was accurate, this single tweet exposed the full extent of the comedy currently being staged by the masters of disinformation: a right-wing politician asking journalists paid by an authoritarian state about the truth regarding freedom of the press. What did he want to learn from RT und Sputnik? Whether perhaps it’s true that, as elaborated by infosperber, 360 journalists have died in Russia since 1990? That TV stations have been shut down? That journalists in Russia are organizing a trade union and are not only critical of their own censorship and propaganda but also fear a possible wave of counterpropaganda from Western Europe?

So here is someone who alternatively describes his own country’s public television as “state television financed by compulsory fees,” as a “journeyman’s piece of political propaganda,” or as a “socialist do-gooder’s medium,” asking a foreign state television station about the truth. And in so doing, he announces that nowadays in Switzerland or even all of Europe, you can’t trust your own press when you want to know the truth about Russia; but rather you can trust the state broadcaster of Russia’s authoritarian regime.

The Good of One’s Own and the Evil Other; and Evil of One’s Own and the Good Other

RT provides an excellent opportunity to research the most current media propaganda.

So let’s take Zanetti’s question seriously and take a look at what RT (German version) reports with regard to journalism in Russia. First of all: RT has no reports about the restriction of press freedom, censorship, or the persecution of journalists in Russia. A search with the keywords “freedom of the press” primarily calls up articles on the “Western lying press,” press censorship in Europe and Ukraine, the “ideological blindness” of the NGO Reporters Without Borders, and Breitbart’s “media alternative.” In other respects, however, the readings are actually enlightening. This is because RT – formerly Russia Today, a Russian state television broadcaster founded in 2005 and directed toward audiences outside Russia, which since 2014 maintains a multilingual web portal and multichannel news network on YouTube in Arabic, German, English, French, and Spanish – provides an excellent opportunity to research the most current media propaganda.

How RT works is shown most candidly by a conversation between RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan and the political scientist Dmitry Kulikov. Both agree that the West is committing “treason against its own values” and that the “fascistization in so-called ‘liberal democracies’ is advancing.” According to them, this is revealed among other things by the European parliament’s initiation of a “resolution” on the “fight against Russian propaganda,” which in “form and content” brings back “memories of a plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.” Simonyan further claims that Western freedom of expression is under threat, respectively, that the West has long abandoned freedom of expression. Because, according to Simonyan, as soon as “a real manifestation of freedom of expression appears” – meaning media like RT and Sputnik – “that expresses actual dissenting thought and divergent opinion, they [that is, the EU] start passing such resolutions and try to stifle us.”

The Medium is the Message

RT was established as a counter media to the Western press so that in the same move one could describe the latter as a “lying press.”

RT always describes its disinformation as a “second opinion” or “different perspective,” as a “counter-public sphere” vis-à-vis the “censored” press in Western Europe. Anyone who opposes RT also opposes freedom of expression in itself. However, RT only deploys this strategy for the West; in its reporting on Russia, freedom of expression remains a black hole. Reports on activists fighting for freedom of expression in Russia – such as Ildar Dadin, for example, sentenced to a three-year term in a penal colony for his one-person protests – don’t appear on RT.

In contrast, the Western European press – according to RT – dances to the tune of a “central power” that “determines what is true according to political opportunity.” “A future,” says RT’s editor-in-chief, “that George Orwell had urgently warned us against in his work 1984.”

In an adaptation of McLuhan’s slogan, at RT the medium is itself the message. The message is not contained by the individual reports, which are sometimes more and sometimes less accurate; rather, the message is the existence of RT itself: RT was established as a counter media to the Western press so that in the same move one could describe the latter as a “lying press.”

Even RT’s promotional posters insist that RT is the “second opinion.” But these poster campaigns also provide a typical example of a different strategy: they criticize – sometimes quite rightly – the mendacious justification of the Iraq War by the United States, for example, in order to thereby conclude that RT and Russian policy are the only alternative. It is precisely this practice that presumably ensnares above all many people on the left.

With RT, together with the Russian government one is supposed to be able to hate Clinton, Merkel, the EU, and neo-liberalism and at the same time forget that Putin’s policies are not left-wing but rather nationalistic, xenophobic, homophobic, ultra-religious, corrupt, and authoritarian.

RT also naturally sympathizes entirely in this sense with Breitbart, which it portrays as an opportunity to “‘liberate’ the anti-Trump German media market from outside” and “to create” another “counter-public sphere.” In so doing, RT’s journalist has no qualms about comparing the liberation of the German press from its supposed ideology to the liberation of 1945: “Readers by the thousands vented their anger about what they view as extremely biased reporting. Some even maintained that the German media landscape is so uniform that liberation from its underlying consensus could only come from outside like earlier in 1945.”

Reversals into the Opposite

RT also makes excessive use of the reversal into the opposite, a favorite rhetorical strategy of right-wing populists. We can identify at least three functions of the reversal into the opposite.


First, RT wants to be able portray Russia as the last advocate of Western values and as a liberal country; and to portray Western Europe – particularly the EU – as a Soviet-style dictatorship.

Second, the reversal targets the media itself, whereby propaganda is presented as a counter-public sphere and the independent press is alternatively described as the “lying press,” “so-called free press,” or censored press. This allows RT to depict criticism of RT itself as an organized threat against the last “counter-public sphere.” With all of these reversals, it is no coincidence that RT has appropriated a vocabulary originating with the non-conformist movements of the Soviet period: “counter-public sphere,” “dissident thinkers,” “new perspectives,” etc. are the buzzwords it uses to fuel its governmental resistance against opposition at home and against the West. In the meantime, right-wing populist parties have also claimed this vocabulary for themselves (AfD as dissident thinkers, SVP as the opposition, etc.).

Third, there is a reversal of “real” and “medial,” because the people who in practice are destroying liberal values are the same people who celebrate those values in their propaganda. This split between medial representation and reality pursued by RT was tested over a long period in the Soviet Union, where “realistic” representations of the country in the press always resembled a utopian novel. It is a classic example of propaganda.


Criticism of Russia is thereby read as hatred toward a nation, culture, or ethnicity

The aforementioned discussion between the political scientist and RT journalist reveals yet another typical strategy: displacement. For years, Russian state media have described criticism of their political system as Russophobia. In 2009, for example, the Russian author Viktor Yerofeyev was charged with “Russophobia” by members of the radical right-wing Movement Against Illegal Immigration (DPNI), founded in 2002, who view themselves as scent hounds for tracking Russophobia (the charge was later dropped).

RT Second Opinion ad campaign

Describing criticism of the political system as Russophobia facilitates a subtle displacement: criticism is thereby read as hatred toward a nation, culture, or ethnicity.

RT has fully mastered this ethnicization of the political: it emphasizes to foreign readers that the criticism, which previously was still harmlessly described as Russophobia, is now – in the West – turning into racism: “With universal approval, they [the Western media] are also sliding into a form of racism. Apart from the Russian nation, I know no other nation in the world against which this degree of hatred toward national characteristics is permitted.”

This is also reflected by the fact that organizations in Russia that criticize the regime are defamed as “agents” of the West and opposition is generally portrayed as paid for or controlled by the West.

This is an old secret service strategy, which was also used in the GDR, where it was called PID (political-ideological diversion). As the Lexikon der Staatsicherheit (State Security Lexicon) has it, the term arose in 1956/57 in the GDR “when Ulbricht believed he could detect new enemy methods of ideological ‘softening and disruption’ in the conflict with supporters of inner liberalization.”

Those who criticized the state were categorized as “supporters” of PID. This is how they dispensed with any critical confrontation with their own system.

“Clash within Civilizations”

The displacement of criticism from the field of politics to those of ethnicity and nationality is supposed to blind people to the political instrumentalization of “cultures” and to the cultural dimension of politics. A political instrumentalization of cultures always occurs when, for example, slogans like “clash of civilizations” (Samuel Huntington) are used to conceal the fact that nations, states, or societies do not first become heterogeneous just because of “foreigners.” They have always been heterogeneous, if one considers that differences are evoked above all by political or religious convictions and economic disparities, and not by ethnic membership – which in any case is a highly fluid category.

While the good of one’s own and evil of the Other usually belong to the rhetorical arsenal of nationalist sentiment, Russia has now elbowed its way into this favorite binarism of right-wing populist politics and shifted the coordinates: RT is quasi working on creating for foreign readers a good Other or good Foreigner – a flourishing, cosmopolitan Russia – and, on the other hand, depicting Western societies – especially Germany – as the forecourt of hell.

RT Second Opinion ad campaign

RT is thereby reactivating the medial front line between East and West. And Europe’s right-wing populist parties are appreciatively shifting this front line into the interior of their societies. That is the actual displacement we’re dealing with. Right-wing populists are exploiting what RT represents in order to stage themselves in their own countries as the “opposition” or “alternative.” The result is a “clash within civilizations” that is supposed to transform democratic heterogeneity, which is fundamental for open societies, into a simultaneously internal and external culture war. At the same, using every instrument of propaganda and disinformation, these right-wing populists need to mask the fact that the democratic order and liberal ways of life are threatened not by refugees from dictatorships but by supporters of authoritarian forms of government and totalitarian factions. Regardless of where they come from.

sylviaSylvia Sasse teaches Slavic literary studies at the University of Zurich and is a co-founder and member of the Center for Arts and Cultural Theory (ZKK). She is the editor of novinki and the Geschichte der Gegenwart.

Translated by: Bernard Heise


Source: Also available in Deutsch on

Dear readers! Since you’ ve made it to this point, we have a favor to ask. Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine is ongoing, but major news agencies have gone away, which is why it's extra important to provide news about Ukraine in English. We are a small independent journalist team on a shoestring budget, have no political or state affiliation, and depend on our readers to keep going (using the chanсe - a big thank you to our generous supporters, we couldn't make it without you.)  If you like what you see, please help keep us online with a donation

Tags: , , , , , , ,


  1. Avatar Terry Washington says:

    What RT calls “Russophobia” should more aptly termed “Putinophobia” after the “fish eyed Chekist”!

    1. Avatar Quartermaster says:

      I would call it Truthophobia. RT and Sputnik, and the Putin regime, have serious problems with the truth.

      1. Avatar Brent says:

        Sadly, this disease of “Alternative Truth” is making its way westward. I’m amazed how many useful idiots get their alleged “news” from sources like Facebook and Breitbart and Alex Jones and at the same time criticize the “Main Stream Media”

        1. Avatar WisconsinUSA says:

          that’s where the laundryman gets his” information ” from.he probably checks into those wackos every day.

        2. Avatar туфтуф says:

          Gacebook is THE best info source there is. Pity China forbids it. All intel agencies use fb profusely. But one has to have an excellent analytical mind to extract the truth from it. Thats why its mainly used by pros.

      2. Avatar туфтуф says:

        Rt the best of all mass media..

      3. Avatar Mick Servian says:

        yeah, they actually report it. instead of your sponsors

    2. Avatar туфтуф says:

      When P was a student of the KGB Krasnoznamenniy institute, his phylosophy profgessor named him “Mol'” which means moth. L shld be pronounced as ly, soft L.

  2. Avatar Alex George says:

    It will be interesting to see what spin Kremlin media try to put on the latest fighting around Avdiika in Donbas. The Ukrainian forces are taking ground, yet these are areas which should be under Ukrainian control anyway. according to Minsk II. So the Ukrainians can’t be accused of violating the Minsk accords.

    The Russian/separatists are certainly killing Ukrainians – at least seven soldiers as well as civilians. The only problem is there are reports of over 60 Russian soldiers in the local morgue, plus an unknown number of separatists (Russians never count them).

    1. Avatar туфтуф says:

      Both minsks are dead. Time for guns to do the talking. Ukroland on a slippery slope. Only Poles can save the day. They have a history of won battles against Russia.

    2. Avatar Mick Servian says:

      Does Ukraine have Russian oriented Ukrainians? Yes. Do they mostly inhabit those regions about to breakaway? Yes
      Are they unhappy with Ukraine’s current regime after the coup? Yes
      sorry buddy, civil war it is.

      1. Avatar Alex George says:

        No it isn’t a civil war. For that, there would have to be a significant number of Ukrainians at odds with the others. But that just isn’t the case.

        Occupied Donbass and Crimea are only a small part of eastern Ukraine, and most of the population has no interest in helping the Russian invaders. Even the ones that do join the separatist forces (because it is just about the only way to earn a decent living in the occupied territories) are unreliable. The Russians found that in the fighting around Avdiivka.

        There was no “coup” in Ukraine, only an attempted one by Putin. And he failed, because the Russian army just isn’t good enough.

  3. Avatar zorbatheturk says:

    There are no perspectives. There are no second opinions. All ruSSkiy BS. There are lies (from ruSSia) and there is truth – from reliable non-ruSSian sources. Ban RT.

    1. Avatar туфтуф says:

      Wow! What a little fascist!

      1. Avatar zorbatheturk says:

        Go choke on a bag of dciks.

        1. Avatar туфтуф says:

          I know. Lets have a spellin

  4. Avatar Dirk Smith says:

    Third-world propaganda from a one-dimensional petrostate. Nothing more.

    1. Avatar Mick Servian says:

      yeah mate, sure it is.
      Most of the US is third world, don’t hear you complaining though.
      One dimensional petrostate???hahaha
      Russia has a huge economy making a large variety of specialised
      you’re obviously trying to convince the ignorant?

  5. Avatar туфтуф says:

    A German outlet alleges senator McCain’s close ties with ISIS (not the goddess-lol).

  6. Avatar туфтуф says:

    That RT has certain elements of Russian propaganda might be true. But by banning it for the “second opinion”, western democracies, one of whose main values is the very freedom of speech, would definitely introduce a measure of fascism into their society.

  7. Avatar Terry Washington says:

    Has anybody even noticed that Julian Assange(of WikiLeaks fame) used to be a presenter for RT before hightailing into the Ecuadorian Embassy?

    1. Avatar Mick Servian says:

      no I didn’t.
      please clarify?

      1. Avatar Terry Washington says:

        Check out his Wikipedia bio entry- and isn;t it STRANGE that WikiLeaks has turned up NO dirt on Putin and his cronies???

        1. Avatar Mick Servian says:

          fair enough, I didn’t know that.
          but what’s strange about it? that he aired 12 episodes for cash?
          people write bs about Russia on here everyday for money.
          he is a westerner that just came to realize, like many other ozzies, that the US empire and it’s vassals have not been the good guys for a long time now.
          every year the Anzac celebrations get smaller and that’s a shame. but how can you respect a soldier not protecting his own people close to his borders, but half a world away?
          I wouldn’t have a problem with the empire, if it treated it’s own better. everyday I get taxed more. our gas that we produce is cheaper in japan than in Oz. all of our best fruit and vegies go to big chinese markets, while we eat, god knows what. the O in GMO means organisms.
          don’t tell me fairy-tales about humanitarian interventions. just say we robbed and pillaged from this country because we needed to.
          here let us all divide the spoils.
          another thing, this empire wants to assimilate conquered vassal states and indoctrinate it’s people. for longevity.
          Not even the Ottoman Turks did that to us in the 13th century.
          what? you don’t see the link between the wealth in Canada etc and Libya’s destruction? economically it’s pretty obvious.
          So yeah, this empire run by a bunch of Messalina’s and Caracalla’s is way more dangerous to the world than either Russia or China.
          and I welcome that it has now equal rivals.
          I welcome that Syria, a country with higher education levels than OZ and real, not segregated multiculturalism before radicals invaded is winning it’s country back.
          I don’t buy the Darth Assad bs they sell to the masses. What? he chose to become a sith after getting his medical degree or before it?
          I have personally seen the empire’s media lie and lie the most horrible lies, while my eyes saw different things going on.
          I wonder how I watched movies in the 90’s made in the USA, and actually thought they were ok? I look at them now and see rubbish, everywhere.
          The US has been doing what it’s accusing Russia of for a long time now. and it’s not propaganda they are afraid of. how do you explain the lies when confronted? when you think you’re own people are gullible enough to be threatened by two websites, how?
          now the lies are running rings around the western media.
          Remember the euphoria after Obama was elected? guy with practically no experience. did things get better? “yes we can”
          give u loans u can’t service, and then take your homes and money already invested.
          “Yes we can” shoot you in the back if you’re a black teenager, and get away with it. “Yes we can” brutalize you and deny you real medical aid.
          But no we cannot, rebuild the homes after Katrina(like ten years ago). What a disgrace. that’s third world level, like most of the US.
          “yes we can keep everything the same”
          “Yes we can start war, after war” building bases in far away countries, where they are not welcome.
          they can even build floating bases, something Russia doesn’t seem to need that much, because occupying foreign lands is all they are good for.
          Yeah well, the gravy train has stopped now.
          As for Putin, I don’t give two hoots how much money he has. A country like Russia cannot rise up from the ashes like that with all this corruption.
          and one man cannot control everything, no matter what they say in Hollywood.
          Ordinary Russians see how he has brought the country back up from it’s knees. They helped him.
          It’s not the first time Russia was on it’s knees to a “superior force”,
          but somehow they still got up and won.
          God forbid the empire really hits on economically bad times, they would rip each other apart in the US. Community and solidarity, things taken from the people, methodically. Now used as catchphrases.
          coming to a town near you soon.

          Look at Libya today