"Volodya, you look at this report, the British media are attacking us again." Katia took a copy of the Times that she had somehow gotten and said to Manturov, who had just returned home.

Manturov glanced at the title and said, "Isn't this normal?" ”

With the deterioration of relations between the Eastern and Western camps and the increase in ideological conflicts between the East and the West, the media of the Soviet Union, Britain and the United States and other Western countries have begun to launch a public opinion offensive to criticize each other's ideology and political system and incite the people's antipathy towards the other camp.

With the covert encouragement of the government and Western conglomerates, the media in the United States and other Western countries began to "expose" the "inside story" of the Soviet "dictatorship," focusing on "excavating" some shortcomings within the Soviet Union, blaming all these shortcomings on the "dictatorship of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," and pointing out that "the Communist Party of the Soviet Union is the main culprit that caused the backwardness, poverty, and misery of the people in the Soviet Union." ”

Manturov has seen a lot of these tricks in the Western media, after all, in the era before him, the Western media and the "spokespersons" secretly arranged in China used similar methods to smear some regimes that are not quite in the right direction with the United States, so as to inspire their own people's confidence in the bourgeois democratic system, and to yearn for democracy and Western life in the other camp.

Over the past few decades, the methods used by the media in Western countries to smear other countries have hardly changed, and they generally find out the social contradictions in other countries, magnify them, and then blame the "poisonous vegetables" of the government for these problems and contradictions.

But is this actually the case? Of course not! Isn't the country still facing all kinds of social problems? Don't the people of some "poisonous vegetable" countries also live a rather prosperous life?

However, many Western media will only selectively ignore some important facts, blindly conceal the advantages of others, magnify their shortcomings, and at the same time magnify their own points and conceal their own shortcomings.

Under the rendering of these selective reports or "processed news", the people of many Western countries began to have a bad feeling towards the Soviet Union and other Eastern Bloc countries, and the "poisonous people" who read these reports also began to rebel against their own governments from their hearts and began to yearn for the life of the country.

Compared to the pre-travel world, the Soviet Union now faces a situation that seems more manageable than that faced by the two great powers. After all, the vast majority of the media in the Soviet Union were controlled by the government, and the vast majority of the people did not have access to newspapers such as the New York Times and the Washington Post, nor could they receive radio programs from Western countries, and were not influenced by foreign media at all.

But in any case, the smear of the Soviet Union by the Western media has affected foreigners' perception of the Soviet Union, a large socialist country, and in the eyes of many people in Western countries, the Soviet Union is an axis of evil, and the people of the Soviet Union are living in hunger and cold, oppressed by a "poisonous and tyrannical" ruling group.

The content of some of the "Black Soviet" reports is generally correct, and it is true that the lives of most people in the Soviet Union cannot be compared with the middle class in some Western countries, and the Soviet people do not have much freedom of speech, but these media often only talk about the bad side of the Soviet Union, but never say anything about the Soviet Union.

Katia's report is of this nature, on the one hand, comparing the per capita GDP of the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom, pointing out the "fact" that the per capita GDP of the United Kingdom is higher than that of the Soviet Union. On the other hand, it does not mention the achievements of the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1946, negates the achievements of the Soviet government over the years, and blames the "poisonous rule" of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union for the "poor standard of living" and "economic backwardness" of the Soviet Union.

This kind of news report seems quite reasonable, the per capita GDP of the Soviet Union is indeed lower than that of the United Kingdom and the United States, but does this mean that the planned economy of the Soviet Union is worse than the free market economy of the United Kingdom and the United States?

By 1946, the economy of the Soviet Union had improved a lot compared with the period of Tsarist Russia, and it had been growing rapidly at an astonishing rate, and the quality of life of the Soviet people had also improved a lot.

Before the October Revolution, the vast proletariat in Russia was still living in poverty and hunger, but after the founding of the Soviet Union, after years of development, the proletariat in the Soviet Union has basically shaken off poverty, enjoyed adequate food and clothing, and had a more decent shelter.

On the other hand, in the United States and Britain, although the quality of life of the middle class is better than that of the Soviet Union, the life of the proletariat has not improved much, and the living conditions of workers in some areas are even worse than those of Soviet workers.

As for GDP per capita, it is even less worth comparing. Before the founding of the Soviet Union, Russia was only a low-level industrialized agricultural country, and both industrial output and GDP were greatly discarded by Britain and the United States.

After the establishment of the Soviet Union, after years of development, it has transformed from an agricultural country to an industrial country, and the industrial output value and GDP have been greatly improved, even twice that of Britain (of course, the Soviet Union in this plane), if the planned economy is really as bad as they say, shouldn't the Soviet Union have been reduced to a third world country? But no.

"Katyusha, didn't you think that we could do the same?" After reading this report, Manturov, who has always been calm, did not get angry, on the contrary, he also thought of ways to deal with Western countries.

"Haven't we always done that? Now the people of the whole Soviet Union think that the workers of Western countries live in hunger and cold, and they all think that the life of the Soviet people is the happiest in the world, but is this really the case?

What is the difference between the propaganda policy of our propaganda department and the media in these Western countries? Katia didn't really mind letting the Soviet media misrepresent the West, but he didn't see the difference between what Manturov meant and what the Soviets were doing.

"There is still a difference, these media in Western countries will add some data before reporting, or add some real cases, as the basis for their reporting, but the Soviet propaganda agencies rarely come up with evidence as support while making excessive propaganda, just one-sidedly saying that the Soviet Union is good and the West is bad, but they don't say where we are good and where are the Western countries.

Such a propaganda policy can still work in the case of a closed country, but as soon as someone knows the real situation in a foreign country, they will become suspicious of our propaganda and no longer trust our propaganda agencies, I hope you understand what I mean......"