5 ms·

"Alison Killing conducted this reporting with a grant and further assistance from the Open Technology Fund." From wikipedia: "As of November 2019, the Open Tec

"Alison Killing conducted this reporting with a grant and further assistance from the Open Technology Fund." From wikipedia: "As of November 2019, the Open Technology Fund became an independent nonprofit corporation and a grantee of the U.S. Agency for Global Media.[7] Until its formation as an independent entity, it had operated as a program of Radio Free Asia." Radio Free Asia ... founded by the CIA and a today well oiled propaganda arm for whatever is on the US government's foreign policy agenda.

yters 6y ago
Even for sake of argument it is propaganda, why does that mean it is false?
- throwaway4good 6y ago
  It means it is not independent journalism.
  - yters 6y ago
    is any journalism independent? and why does independence matter if the reporting is true?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jjcon 6y ago
Coming from an account created six hours ago it is kinda ironic you are suggesting they are a state actor with no refutation of the premises.
- throwaway4good 6y ago
  It is public information.
- free_rms 6y ago
  There are tons and tons of Chinese immigrants in our industry. It's not a stretch at all to assume that some read hacker news and are nationalistic. Assume good faith.
  - me_me_me 6y ago
    Assume good faith? On the internet? Assume good faith in 'random comment' from 'random person' on the internet. Would you sir be interested in buying an invisible unicorn from me? I will sell it for only $100.
ardy42 6y ago
> Radio Free Asia ... founded by the CIA and a today well oiled propaganda arm for whatever is on the US government's foreign policy agenda. Eh, not so much: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Asia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Asia > RFA is the only station outside China that broadcasts in the Uygur-language.[32] It has been recognized for played a vital role in exposing Xinjiang re-education camps.[33][34][35] The New York Times regards RFA as one of the few reliable sources of information about Xinjiang. My understanding is that RFA, RFE, VOA, etc. are basically meant to promote the idea free independent press in areas where only heavy-handed propaganda is available, and the propaganda value is in undermining blatant propaganda.
- free_rms 6y ago
  And the Comintern was merely meant to promote workers rights? It's definitionally a propaganda arm of the government. If you think that we're the good guys, then they're the good guys, but they're still propaganda.
  - ardy42 6y ago
    > It's definitionally a propaganda arm of the government. If you think that we're the good guys, then they're the good guys, but they're still propaganda. If it's propaganda, it's propaganda for western-style journalism and liberal values. The question shouldn't be "is it state sponsored or not;" it should be "is its reporting reliable or not." On that question, RFA's reporting on this topic has gotten the endorsement of the news pages of at least one top-tier American paper. I'd put it in a similar space as the BBC or AFP.
    - free_rms 6y ago
      It's propaganda for liberal values as long as they serve the interests of the US. Allies get a pass, and liberal enemies of our allies will be criticized. Bin Laden was a good guy when he was fighting the Soviets.
    - mike_h 6y ago
      I wouldn’t consider NYT approval a great validation metric. Their reporting on Xinjiang in particular really made it sound to me like someone has an axe to grind and they know they’re preaching to a choir over here. There was one massive “Xinjiang expose” they published a couple years ago that hung on allegations by a few individuals who the reporters claimed were putting their lives at risk by talking, but who the reporters nonetheless identified by name and face.
jowday 6y ago
It's obvious that the US is trying to emphasize what's going on in Xinjiang for political benefit. That said, it's pretty clear it is happening. Its important to draw attention to how powerful institutions influence media narratives, but that doesn't mean that we should disregard anything these institutions push. Rather, the narratives they propagate should be given increased scrutiny. IMO, There's enough evidence from both biased and unbiased sources that there's a cultural, if not literal, genocide happening in Xinjiang. If you want anecdata, I'm friends with a Han Chinese - who is overall pretty supportive of the CCP, mind - who was born and raised in Xinjiang. When they return to visit their family, they have relatively few restrictions compared to foreign journalists or tourists. They've told me that mass relocations - and deaths in the camps - are clearly happening, based on what they hear from local Uyghurs and from things they just see around their hometown.

yters 6y ago

Even for sake of argument it is propaganda, why does that mean it is false?

throwaway4good 6y ago
It means it is not independent journalism.
- yters 6y ago
  is any journalism independent? and why does independence matter if the reporting is true?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

jjcon 6y ago

Coming from an account created six hours ago it is kinda ironic you are suggesting they are a state actor with no refutation of the premises.

throwaway4good 6y ago
It is public information.
free_rms 6y ago
There are tons and tons of Chinese immigrants in our industry. It's not a stretch at all to assume that some read hacker news and are nationalistic. Assume good faith.
- me_me_me 6y ago
  Assume good faith? On the internet? Assume good faith in 'random comment' from 'random person' on the internet. Would you sir be interested in buying an invisible unicorn from me? I will sell it for only $100.

ardy42 6y ago

> Radio Free Asia ... founded by the CIA and a today well oiled propaganda arm for whatever is on the US government's foreign policy agenda. Eh, not so much: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Asia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Asia > RFA is the only station outside China that broadcasts in the Uygur-language.[32] It has been recognized for played a vital role in exposing Xinjiang re-education camps.[33][34][35] The New York Times regards RFA as one of the few reliable sources of information about Xinjiang. My understanding is that RFA, RFE, VOA, etc. are basically meant to promote the idea free independent press in areas where only heavy-handed propaganda is available, and the propaganda value is in undermining blatant propaganda.

free_rms 6y ago
And the Comintern was merely meant to promote workers rights? It's definitionally a propaganda arm of the government. If you think that we're the good guys, then they're the good guys, but they're still propaganda.
- ardy42 6y ago
  > It's definitionally a propaganda arm of the government. If you think that we're the good guys, then they're the good guys, but they're still propaganda. If it's propaganda, it's propaganda for western-style journalism and liberal values. The question shouldn't be "is it state sponsored or not;" it should be "is its reporting reliable or not." On that question, RFA's reporting on this topic has gotten the endorsement of the news pages of at least one top-tier American paper. I'd put it in a similar space as the BBC or AFP.
  - free_rms 6y ago
    It's propaganda for liberal values as long as they serve the interests of the US. Allies get a pass, and liberal enemies of our allies will be criticized. Bin Laden was a good guy when he was fighting the Soviets.
  - mike_h 6y ago
    I wouldn’t consider NYT approval a great validation metric. Their reporting on Xinjiang in particular really made it sound to me like someone has an axe to grind and they know they’re preaching to a choir over here. There was one massive “Xinjiang expose” they published a couple years ago that hung on allegations by a few individuals who the reporters claimed were putting their lives at risk by talking, but who the reporters nonetheless identified by name and face.

jowday 6y ago

It's obvious that the US is trying to emphasize what's going on in Xinjiang for political benefit. That said, it's pretty clear it is happening. Its important to draw attention to how powerful institutions influence media narratives, but that doesn't mean that we should disregard anything these institutions push. Rather, the narratives they propagate should be given increased scrutiny. IMO, There's enough evidence from both biased and unbiased sources that there's a cultural, if not literal, genocide happening in Xinjiang. If you want anecdata, I'm friends with a Han Chinese - who is overall pretty supportive of the CCP, mind - who was born and raised in Xinjiang. When they return to visit their family, they have relatively few restrictions compared to foreign journalists or tourists. They've told me that mass relocations - and deaths in the camps - are clearly happening, based on what they hear from local Uyghurs and from things they just see around their hometown.