Replies

To be fair Soviet propaganda regarding the West was quite factually correct. It was biased in conclusions based on these facts though

That’s very intuitive. I had a mind opening experience in that area. It was at the Canadian National Exposition in 1972. The USSR had an exhibit that looked like a book store. The prices were really low and the books were written in English. I bought three or four.

One of the books was titled “British Foreign Policy in WWII.” The book had facts undoubtedly cherry-picked (but that’s what writing is about) and the facts were, well, factual.

But the spin they put on the facts was merciless. You’d think Russia won the war single-handedly despite having to put up with allies.

Of course, Russia did take the brunt of civilian loss in the war and I understand why if reverberates with them as it does. But the interpretation of facts by the Soviets was completely self serving. I don’t remember if they mentioned the non-aggression pact with Hitler before he invaded them, but I doubt they did.

The bookstore, of course, was purely a Soviet propaganda outlet that made a few bucks on the side. They would probably have given the stuff away if asked.

“” “” One of the books was titled “British Foreign Policy in WWII.” The book had facts undoubtedly cherry-picked (but that’s what writing is about) and the facts were, well, factual.

But the spin they put on the facts was merciless. “” “”

That’s Pravda journalism. Their main commandment was never to lie. But the devil is in the spin. In fact US media has picked on it quite masterfully nowadays.
As countrary to the Brits you mentioned. BBC propaganda is around factual lies. They are operating via creating myths.