Didn't read the rest of the comment because they said they didn't read the article and felt the need to comment on the article.

1) whataboutism 2) citation needed 3) Even if both sides utilize propaganda, historically the scale of agitprop coming from authoritarian countries has been much greater. This is still newsworthy.

You can't even read most Western propaganda in China because the government goes to great lengths to censor narratives counter to offical views.

> historically the scale of agitprop coming from authoritarian countries has been much greater

Is this actually the case or is it just that we're not seeing the stuff the west does?

> You can't even read most Western propaganda in China because the government goes to great lengths to censor narratives counter to offical views.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/15/all-lies-how... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_bombing_memo#Previo...

Depends how narrowly you define agitprop. If you consider everything that comes out of the American media/news conglomerates as propaganda, then it's orders of magnitude greater than the efforts of China or Russia.

The difference is that American media isn't owned by the government. Chinese media can't tell the government to "fuck off" if they don't want to report something. In the US they can.

and Hollywood. And Facebook. And X

Whataboutism: a smear word used to imply that hypocrisy is irrelevant. It isn't.

On HN, it’s basically an excuse to say that China can’t do what the US is already doing.

1) Do not hide behind "whataboutism"

2) CIA

3) Citation needed

That's what I was thinking to, except I was thinking of just plain old domestic "news" outlets, who could be judged on the very same attributes (and others, if one was able to be serious) mentioned in the article. At least in theory.

> didnt read the article but even if the clickbait was true...

If you didn't read the article then calling it clickbait is extremely disingenuous.