Well first of all the Twitter channel of the president is a government propaganda channel, not a news channel. I don't disapprove of them doing that, they need to win another election and this is their stage.
> [a word which here evokes the memory of the last dictatorship, which exterminated some ten to thirty thousand of its political opponents, a crime that wasn't successfully prosecuted until Sra. Fernandez and her late husband did so in their presidencies]
That is a totally unnecessary glorifying addition not even present in the original tweets. Has little to do with the subject but hey let's drag it in. Happy to see those fuckers locked up though, no question about that.
> [This is a reference to the President's years-long struggle against preventative injunctions put in place by Argentine courts against her efforts to break up the big Argentine media trusts that are her strongest local political enemies.]
Another addition that tries to justify the pretty questionable action of limiting the powers of the Supreme Court.
I allow anybody to have an opinion but if this is clearly written by a staunch supporter of the government copying and adding to what I already consider propaganda I just want to let people know that it is what it is: propaganda.
I'm far from a "staunch supporter of the government", but I thought that those bits would be pretty hard to understand if you weren't from Argentina.
"Impunity" in English is mostly used in a metaphorical sense in these centuries, for example, and doesn't at all evoke the issue of not "locking up" "those fuckers". Without some kind of note, what I read as Cristina's allusion to her own legal battles would be lost on an English-speaking audience. Do you think I'm imagining the intended allusion, or just that it would be better not to explain it for some reason?
As for the medidas cautelares, I think my summary of what's going on is pretty even-handed. You can certainly argue that presidents shouldn't be trying to take legal acting against their political enemies, especially if they're media companies, or you can argue that breaking up big trusts is a perfectly legitimate thing for the government to do, in general.
I think "propaganda" is a perfectly reasonable description of what Cristina wrote. She's telling her side of the story, not Nicolas Sarkozy's or Anibal Cavaco Silva's. I think it's very informative to know what her side of the story is, and that's why I took the trouble to translate it.
The problem is that she wasn't breaking those big media companies a few years ago when they were pumping the propaganda she wanted, in fact she even let the huge Clarin group absorb Multicanal even though that was against existing anti-monopoly laws.
The wonders of semi-permanent emergency presidential powers...
>Well first of all the Twitter channel of the president is a government propaganda channel, not a news channel.
That's a circular argument. It's only a propaganda channel if the president it's dishonest. And even then, it's only propaganda if she is dishonest in THOSE particular tweets.
>That is a totally unnecessary glorifying addition not even present in the original tweets. Has little to do with the subject but hey let's drag it in. Happy to see those fuckers locked up though, no question about that.
For one, it's not even present on the original tweets, as you say.
I'd hardly call it "propaganda" by the president, that some random person on the internet put it as a "reference note" on his translation.
Not to mention that, Argentinians will read the original Spanish in her account and not the guy's english translation. So they won't even see it.
I don't see where's the "glorifying", either in his addition or the original tweet either. I mean, even if she did used the word "impunity" also as a reference to those people.
>Another addition that tries to justify the pretty questionable action of limiting the powers of the Supreme Court.
Perhaps -- but it also serves to give some context to the reader that doesn't know about this (and who, of course, doesn't vote in Argentina, so any propaganda won't do anything for him).
>I allow anybody to have an opinion but if this is clearly written by a staunch supporter of the government copying and adding to what I already consider propaganda I just want to let people know that it is what it is: propaganda.
Sorry, but I'm more of the impression that you are a staunch non-supporter of this government than the opposite!
I mean you took all this offence to a translation by some random guy (I think he's on HN too -- maybe the one who posted this), and two small additions of reference notes, that weren't even meant for the Argentinian voters (who will, of course, read the original spanish tweets).
Propaganda is too strong a word. You can publicly agree with a government and it's actions without being a "propagandist". If I say "the health reform in the US is a good thing" is that propaganda?
> That's a circular argument. It's only a propaganda channel if the president it's dishonest. And even then, it's only propaganda if she is dishonest in THOSE particular tweets.
I don't think "propaganda" implies dishonesty, just advocacy.
> [a word which here evokes the memory of the last dictatorship, which exterminated some ten to thirty thousand of its political opponents, a crime that wasn't successfully prosecuted until Sra. Fernandez and her late husband did so in their presidencies]
That is a totally unnecessary glorifying addition not even present in the original tweets. Has little to do with the subject but hey let's drag it in. Happy to see those fuckers locked up though, no question about that.
> [This is a reference to the President's years-long struggle against preventative injunctions put in place by Argentine courts against her efforts to break up the big Argentine media trusts that are her strongest local political enemies.]
Another addition that tries to justify the pretty questionable action of limiting the powers of the Supreme Court.
I allow anybody to have an opinion but if this is clearly written by a staunch supporter of the government copying and adding to what I already consider propaganda I just want to let people know that it is what it is: propaganda.