I'm so tired of "whataboutism" being used to as some attempt to shut down an argument. It is perfectly valid to point out hypocritical arguments. And it might stun you to know that the West isn't solely composed of the US. Try going to RT from the EU - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L...
Take special note not just of the block, but of the anticircumvention provisions.
The grandparent made the broad generalization not the person you are replying to. They said the "west" is blocking RT. It might stun you to learn that the US is part of the west and isn't blocking RT. I don't want to stun you too much, but the west is not some uniform block of countries.
> It might stun you to learn that the US is part of the west and isn't blocking RT.
Golly gee, you sure got me there on that! Let's rephrase to "parts of the West", what impact does that have on the argument that Western powers engage in media censorship as well?
> I don't want to stun you too much, but the west is not some uniform block of countries.
The original comment was "Totally not like how access to Russian news outlets has been blocked by the West."
This statement is factually incorrect. I don't see where that argument was actually made.
But sure, some western countries have a level of censorship, yes, but that still doesn't approach the level of China.
And just because there is a wiki entry called western bloc, doesn't mean the western countries are uniform. The US is pretty well known for having broad, but not absolute, protections for freedom of speech.
Totally not like how access to Russian news outlets has been blocked by parts of the West.