Exactly. It's one of the reasons I didn't really believe Putin would invade as I thought the media were just drumming up hysterical headlines
# The fact that they were indeed drumming up hysterical headlines didn’t alter the fact Putin invaded.
# The possibility that American rhetoric, publicly and diplomatically, could be said to have exacerbated the situation, doesn’t mean Putin wouldn’t have invaded anyway.
# The fact that Western media frequently pads and sensationalises stories doesn’t mean it is
always wrong.
# The fact that RT is a propaganda machine doesn’t mean that its anti-Western reports are
always counter-factual.
# The effect of a crisis immediately polarises news. Most countries are not very self-critical in the first place. Some degree of foreign reporting can be a signpost for further investigation (this is so even for comparatively open and neutral countries.
# The fact that your enemy will see your faults before you do is not a reason always to discount
everything he says (RT was more factual, even if offensively so, before the Ukraine crisis).
These are basic rules of debate. Only my opinion.
But another rule of debate is that most people are unskilled in formal logic.
Hence Schopenhauer little tract,
The Art of Always Being Right.
