Moscow’s disinformation is often shared unwittingly by Canadians who don’t know its origin or purpose. Canada needs to fight it with stronger actions.

Moscow’s disinformation is often shared unwittingly by Canadians who don’t know its origin or purpose. Canada needs to fight it with stronger actions.

  • kbal@fedia.io
    7·
    7 days ago

    I haven’t yet had the chance to see the movie, but based on what many reviewers have said I think there’s a pretty good chance it isn’t the pernicious Russian propaganda it’s been made out to be. The synopsis from wikipedia seems representative of what is said to be its approach:

    The soldiers depicted are often volunteers who say they went to the front for various personal reasons: vague patriotism, avenging fallen friends, protecting loved ones, preventing their children from going to war in the future, or, more commonly, for money. Soldiers are shown drinking heavily, and sometimes note the pointlessness “of it all”. One notes that they return back only dead

    It’s easy to imagine some viewers missing the point and mistaking things the Russian soldiers in the film say for things the film is saying. Of course it’s also easy to imagine that it really does align with Russian government propaganda. I feel like it’s necessary to actually see it to find out which is the case.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      61·
      7 days ago

      mistaking things the Russian soldiers in the film say for things the film is saying.

      It’s a movie that garners sympathy for the Russian soldiers. You hear Russian soldiers say various propaganda talking points.

      Imagine it’s 1942 and a Canadian public funded movie was released showing how hard life was for average Nazis killing Slavs in Ukraine. In the 1942 movie it shows Nazis talking about how Ukrainians forced Germany to invade and the movie doesn’t provide a rebuttal.

      • streetfestivalEnglish
        4·
        7 days ago

        Edit: redacted: I haven’t seen the doc, but I feel like you’re conflating frontline soldiers and political leadership, and are very quick to use the term “propaganda”

        Showing that Russian soldiers are suffering too in Putin’s war does not sound like (encouraging) sympathizing with Putin to me or undermining Ukraine’s resistance. That take seems simplistic to the point of us collectively having to water down every political doc in existence.

        Edit: new: While I didn’t find your points compelling, the TVO documentary is the most/only cited and described example of supposed propaganda in the article. Based on these descriptions, I’d agree it’s propaganda. Not correcting falsehoods in a documentary meets criteria for me

        The narrative promoted in the film subtly suggests the war is Ukraine’s fault. It whitewashes well-documented atrocities committed by Russian troops against innocent Ukrainian civilians. It encourages western audiences to ignore the realities of this illegal invasion of a sovereign state in favour of a sob story that paints the aggressor in a sympathetic light.

        The soldiers trot out justifications for the invasion, accusing Ukraine of fueling a “civil war.” They imply that Ukrainians are Nazis, that Russians are defending Ukrainians, and that Ukrainian soldiers murder injured Russian troops.

        All of these false claims remain unchecked and unchallenged. The reality of Russia’s illegal actions and Russian soldiers’ war crimes go unmentioned.

      • kbal@fedia.io
        12·
        7 days ago

        Things like “it doesn’t provide a rebuttal” are often said, and I don’t find it convincing. There are ways to show the lies for what they are without directly arguing about it. Is the movie effective in doing that? It seems to depend on the viewer.