Anyway, going to the spartan, "facts only" seeming homepage of bloomberg was really a revelation to me. This is what news used to be like. Just a bunch of bland boring headlines. It made me realize, that angst I'd been feeling, reminded me of reading National Enquirer headlines, in line, at the grocery store as a child. "Two headed dog gives birth", "Grandma from Michigan abducted by aliens, tells all!".
This is what the world has come to. We've lost the bastion of professional journalism. We need someone to vet this stuff for us. Strange new world indeed. I believe there is real danger here, to us and our civilization. See for example any quote from Goebbels
Edit; Or Göring:
> But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.
I don't read it this way at all.
There are still fantastic journos all over the place. Now, you can find fantastic journalists at BuzzFeed -- they just aren't the ones writing the listicles. You can find fantastic journalists at WaPo and NYT, but they are a strict subset of all article writers at their institution. You can find entire media outlets which are largely fantastic journalists, such as ProPublica.
We've only lost the idea that all news/media writers on the internet are "journalists".
> We need someone to vet this stuff for us.
The world is more complicated than it used to be.
We need more media literacy of readers. In the past, there were media gatekeepers who were very educated and (debatably) ethical. But with the democratization of media, there are no fences or gates anymore so people simply bypass the gatekeepers.
The institutions of our world are changing. Not only the specific names of institutions and the new generation of people manning them, but altering what it means to be an institution. The "populist" movements worldwide (including the current Trump+Bannon / Bernie / Brexit / anti-EU, and the Arab Spring + similar revolutions against the entrenched powered interests) are eroding the long-established institutions. Media consumers feel the sand shifting between their feet and are afraid of all media and institutions right now. Some of these populist movements are using this fear of change and fear of media to their advantage.
And then again, a fantastic journalist is not the only thing you need. You also need to have editors to keep journalists honest and ethical, even in a time when news outlets have to compete with "free" by thinning their editor ranks and outsourcing "journalism" to non-staff citizens.
Very interesting times ahead.
Let's be real though. This is a result of Russia being completely isolated from most major internet services due to the overwhelming amount of malicious traffic originating from there, not any inherent superiority of Russian tech companies.
Can you please clarify something for me: Are you saying people in Russia can't use Facebook or Google because those companies block them ?
Not really, although I'd imagine some companies in defense space or those operating with consumer data might take stringent measures.
Russian annual Internet ad spending is just north of $2 billion (136 bln rubles, src https://www.vedomosti.ru/technology/articles/2017/03/21/6820..., US digital ad spending, for context, is $77.4 billion) and requires a business and banking entity setup to accept payments from other businesses. They recently started requiring anyone with a business entity to also host their data in Russia, and booted LinkedIn out for not renting data center space locally.
Credit cards payments are not widespread, so accepting consumer payments involves going through local transmitters (Qiwi, WebMoney, Yandex.Money) whose total volume is also low. English is not widely spoken, and at the language level Russian is unsuitable for drop-in translations due to flexions and conjugations being expressed by suffixes and occasional stem changes.
So overall it's a small ad market with complex payment setup requiring a significant investment just to get started. Most Western companies have Russia "on the list" when they talk about international growth, but it's an afterthought.
Now that LinkedIn is banned in RF (is it still?) there's a chance for moikrug or other local startups to come up.
In Moscow I have seen and met (including Yandex) dozens of startup guys copycatting successful US ones. I was always curious why they were more successful than the Berlin ones or other west and east European ones. My conclusion has been the cyrillic alphabet. Of course a country of ~150millions with CIS expansions.
I would assume China, Korea, Japan, and some south Asian countries with a different alphabet and a large population offer the same opportunity to to startups.
Curious case is India - and I don't remember they having winner tech giants except outsourcing ones.
Yandex - founded in 2000.
Google - founded in 1998.
Predates for sure.
I'm originally from a very small, insignificant country that also uses Cyrillic but people adapted to the early days of the internet just fine.
English was relatively widely taught and at least understood on some very basic level, and people adapted the Latin alphabet to type out words, there's even a "phonetic" standard for using the Latin alphabet to write Cyrillic.
Most of my friends from that era never even used the (poorly) localized early Windows/DOS, it was all the US version of everything.
So Facebook for example is still the thing, and very well localized, although there are (for whatever ungodly reason) "local" versions of sites like YouTube (although YouTube is also super popular).
Russia has never been a "Western"-minded country, outside of some "elite" circles in St. Petersburg/Moscow. They see themselves as distinct culturally from mainland Europe - they're their own thing.
Throughout history, they've always been a separate power with their own interests - always. In many ways like the UK, except the UK is at least part of "Western Civilization". Russia is neither.
Actually during my years in Germany, UK and Russia and in most west and east European countries I have seen the same attitude in similar ways. In UK beyond London you'll see the majority referring to Europe as "Europe" and us. Similarly in Turkey, "Europe" is externalized.
Russian dynasty after Peter 1., Communist elites, and the last 500 years of Russian history revolves mostly rooting some ideas/technology from "Europe" and exercising this power in Europe and East and South. So I would consider Russia as "western". Especially after I have seen the bigger world of Indians, South asians, South americans, Africans - those cultures are diverse and unique alternatives to the "West" but I would say Russia is not.
Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but I wonder how much of that "feverish political climates that have descended on many Western publics" is due to Russian agitprop and other "active measures".