4 ms·

Every single day, sometimes multiple times a day, there are posts on HN pushing one anti-China narrative or another. Every single day there is a barrage of ant

Every single day, sometimes multiple times a day, there are posts on HN pushing one anti-China narrative or another. Every single day there is a barrage of anti-China armchair experts all too happy to wax poetic about the evils of communism, the CPC and authoritarianism. I have to say, it's becoming more and more of an /r/Worldnews-esque, politically polarised echo-chamber in here and it's a huge turn-off. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way and I can only imagine the great expert commenters this board is losing because of this.

JohnJamesRambo 8y ago
Or maybe China is just really horrible about human rights and there are a lot of articles about it because that is good journalism? This is a NY Times article about an important subject published today, why should this not be on HN?
- est 8y ago
  The thing is 110% users on HN already knew china was the bad guy The rest are shitpost clickbaiting and comment circlejerking
- tepidandroid 8y ago
  I'm not the authority on what should or should not be posted on HN. What I can say is that I preferred the version of HN where the eclectic and mind-opening topics would get voted to the top and thought provoking debate from domain experts would be left in the comments. Increasingly it's posts directly from main-stream media pushing the main-stream media narrative, and the comments serve little to no value other than providing a place to declare one's political ideologies. If I wanted to read main-stream media I would be reading it.
- colordrops 8y ago
  The US is arguably a worse abuser of human rights, internationally if not domestically, and yet every story about the US doesn't devolve into a big discussion about US's human rights abuses. Imagine if every article about the US talked about our hundreds of military bases, the millions dead in the middle east due to US war, the current war in Yemen, and all the dictatorships the US has installed over the years.
  - JohnJamesRambo 8y ago
    I knew whataboutism would be the first thing I see here. :). You’ve been trained well.
    - colordrops 8y ago
      The label "whataboutism" is the creation of a think tank - you've been trained well.
    - dang 8y ago
      Please don't post unsubstantive comments here, and especially not uncivil ones. This was both. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - refurb 8y ago
    Did you just argue the US is a worse abuser of human rights than China?
    - flukus 8y ago
      I'm not sure who's worse but the case can definitely be made. There's the direct killings from questionable wars like Iraq and Guantanamo Bay but usually the US will prop up some dictator (again like Iraq) to do their dirty work for them.
    - colordrops 8y ago
      Yes. Read my comment again. I include both domestic and foreign abuse. People seem to irrationally only pay attention to domestic abuse when discussing human rights violations.
      - refurb 8y ago
        I'm not sure the US can compete with this.[1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution#Death_toll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution#Death_toll
franzwong 8y ago
I saw many anti-America news on HN as well. I would say if you care, you notice it everywhere, if you don't care, you simply ignore that. (I am also a Chinese)
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  People tend to find the bias they are looking for through a big serving of...selection bias.
djanogo 8y ago
Based on your previous comments you seem to be pro china and seem to carry long list of bad things about US, which is fine. But you will find very little support for any country which doesn't tolerate free speech. It's surprising that you don't want to see world news on HN, but your HN comments about US human rights issues are straight straight out of mainstream liberal news network.
- tepidandroid 8y ago
  Incorrect. I am neither pro nor anti-China. I am neither pro nor anti-US. I simply felt that a counter-narrative was necessary to break up the incessant pounding China has taken in the past few months and weeks. And every time someone tries to even out the discussion, it's met with the stonewall of "well that's whataboutism". Perhaps a little whataboutism is warranted at times for the sake of perspective. However, I do disagree that free speech should be the end-all-be-all, ultimate supreme virtue to strive towards. That's such a naive and childish notion and I don't understand why it has become such a meme. Yes it's up there, yes it should be implemented in due time and is suitable for economically and politically stable nations but how can any rational person advocate it for all nations in all states of development? I'm sure the vast majority of citizens in those states where freedom of speech is most advocated for would prefer censorship over living in a destabilised nation mired in endless conflict and divisive free speech.
  - hueving 8y ago
    >I'm sure the vast majority of citizens in those states where freedom of speech is most advocated for would prefer censorship over living in a destabilised nation mired in endless conflict and divisive free speech. The US seemed to be just fine with free speech as a tenant. If you want a great example of a nation that has eliminated conflict by suppressing all of that pesky free speech, look no further than North Korea. You've presented a silly false dichotomy between free speech and a stable nation when it's government censorship and oppression that eventually leads to a breaking point and genocides/revolutions. There are hundreds of other countries around the world. People call you out for whataboutism for complaining about the US on articles about China because the article is not about the US. Why don't you say "what about Somalia" or "what about Russia"? Is it because that would seem like an distraction from the topic under discussion? This article is not comparing China to the US, Somalia, Russia, etc.
dang 8y ago
The people whose feelings are on the opposite side say exactly the opposite about HN: that it's a hotbed of pro-China shills and whatnot. This, unfortunately for us, is how perceptions work when feelings are strong. There's actually a name for it, and associated research; it's called the Hostile Media Effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22hostile%20media%20effect%22&sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix&page=0 https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22hostile%20media%20effect%22...
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  So true! Anti China thinks HN is too pro China, pro China thinks HN is too anti China... Anti/pro Americanism is mostly the same. Worse even...
  - dang 8y ago
    Thanks for posting this; I sometimes wonder if I'm the only person who sees it. More likely, most people see it but are just not the ones who feel motivated to comment—for the same reason as the original phenomenon. This polarization has always showed up here but in the last year or so it seems to be upticking around nationalistic questions. We may be in for rougher waters.
- tepidandroid 8y ago
  Thanks for the links. I suppose the appropriate action would have been to not perpetuate/exacerbate the cycle of negative selective recall and perception. Although it did make for some good faith debating, I'll refrain from doing so in the future... for as long as I can, at least :)
  - dang 8y ago
    Thanks; you've already stood out by not immediately accusing the mods of being pro- or anti-$topic. Appreciated!

JohnJamesRambo 8y ago

Or maybe China is just really horrible about human rights and there are a lot of articles about it because that is good journalism? This is a NY Times article about an important subject published today, why should this not be on HN?

est 8y ago
The thing is 110% users on HN already knew china was the bad guy The rest are shitpost clickbaiting and comment circlejerking
tepidandroid 8y ago
I'm not the authority on what should or should not be posted on HN. What I can say is that I preferred the version of HN where the eclectic and mind-opening topics would get voted to the top and thought provoking debate from domain experts would be left in the comments. Increasingly it's posts directly from main-stream media pushing the main-stream media narrative, and the comments serve little to no value other than providing a place to declare one's political ideologies. If I wanted to read main-stream media I would be reading it.
colordrops 8y ago
The US is arguably a worse abuser of human rights, internationally if not domestically, and yet every story about the US doesn't devolve into a big discussion about US's human rights abuses. Imagine if every article about the US talked about our hundreds of military bases, the millions dead in the middle east due to US war, the current war in Yemen, and all the dictatorships the US has installed over the years.
- JohnJamesRambo 8y ago
  I knew whataboutism would be the first thing I see here. :). You’ve been trained well.
  - colordrops 8y ago
    The label "whataboutism" is the creation of a think tank - you've been trained well.
  - dang 8y ago
    Please don't post unsubstantive comments here, and especially not uncivil ones. This was both. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- refurb 8y ago
  Did you just argue the US is a worse abuser of human rights than China?
  - flukus 8y ago
    I'm not sure who's worse but the case can definitely be made. There's the direct killings from questionable wars like Iraq and Guantanamo Bay but usually the US will prop up some dictator (again like Iraq) to do their dirty work for them.
  - colordrops 8y ago
    Yes. Read my comment again. I include both domestic and foreign abuse. People seem to irrationally only pay attention to domestic abuse when discussing human rights violations.
    - refurb 8y ago
      I'm not sure the US can compete with this.[1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution#Death_toll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution#Death_toll

franzwong 8y ago

I saw many anti-America news on HN as well. I would say if you care, you notice it everywhere, if you don't care, you simply ignore that. (I am also a Chinese)

seanmcdirmid 8y ago
People tend to find the bias they are looking for through a big serving of...selection bias.

djanogo 8y ago

Based on your previous comments you seem to be pro china and seem to carry long list of bad things about US, which is fine. But you will find very little support for any country which doesn't tolerate free speech. It's surprising that you don't want to see world news on HN, but your HN comments about US human rights issues are straight straight out of mainstream liberal news network.

tepidandroid 8y ago
Incorrect. I am neither pro nor anti-China. I am neither pro nor anti-US. I simply felt that a counter-narrative was necessary to break up the incessant pounding China has taken in the past few months and weeks. And every time someone tries to even out the discussion, it's met with the stonewall of "well that's whataboutism". Perhaps a little whataboutism is warranted at times for the sake of perspective. However, I do disagree that free speech should be the end-all-be-all, ultimate supreme virtue to strive towards. That's such a naive and childish notion and I don't understand why it has become such a meme. Yes it's up there, yes it should be implemented in due time and is suitable for economically and politically stable nations but how can any rational person advocate it for all nations in all states of development? I'm sure the vast majority of citizens in those states where freedom of speech is most advocated for would prefer censorship over living in a destabilised nation mired in endless conflict and divisive free speech.
- hueving 8y ago
  >I'm sure the vast majority of citizens in those states where freedom of speech is most advocated for would prefer censorship over living in a destabilised nation mired in endless conflict and divisive free speech. The US seemed to be just fine with free speech as a tenant. If you want a great example of a nation that has eliminated conflict by suppressing all of that pesky free speech, look no further than North Korea. You've presented a silly false dichotomy between free speech and a stable nation when it's government censorship and oppression that eventually leads to a breaking point and genocides/revolutions. There are hundreds of other countries around the world. People call you out for whataboutism for complaining about the US on articles about China because the article is not about the US. Why don't you say "what about Somalia" or "what about Russia"? Is it because that would seem like an distraction from the topic under discussion? This article is not comparing China to the US, Somalia, Russia, etc.

dang 8y ago

The people whose feelings are on the opposite side say exactly the opposite about HN: that it's a hotbed of pro-China shills and whatnot. This, unfortunately for us, is how perceptions work when feelings are strong. There's actually a name for it, and associated research; it's called the Hostile Media Effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22hostile%20media%20effect%22&sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix&page=0 https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22hostile%20media%20effect%22...

seanmcdirmid 8y ago
So true! Anti China thinks HN is too pro China, pro China thinks HN is too anti China... Anti/pro Americanism is mostly the same. Worse even...
- dang 8y ago
  Thanks for posting this; I sometimes wonder if I'm the only person who sees it. More likely, most people see it but are just not the ones who feel motivated to comment—for the same reason as the original phenomenon. This polarization has always showed up here but in the last year or so it seems to be upticking around nationalistic questions. We may be in for rougher waters.
tepidandroid 8y ago
Thanks for the links. I suppose the appropriate action would have been to not perpetuate/exacerbate the cycle of negative selective recall and perception. Although it did make for some good faith debating, I'll refrain from doing so in the future... for as long as I can, at least :)
- dang 8y ago
  Thanks; you've already stood out by not immediately accusing the mods of being pro- or anti-$topic. Appreciated!