> I think the problem is that you expect them to report on this like it was an easy story to report WTH are you talking about!? Reporting Xinjiang issue is ex

> I think the problem is that you expect them to report on this like it was an easy story to report WTH are you talking about!? Reporting Xinjiang issue is exceedingly difficult. And western media is extremely lazy about it! How can you exactly read my statement as polar opposite... That's why first-hand information is critical. It's extremely hard to get the information. And it's also extremely difficult to categorize and making a coherent analysis on them as well. So that's why laziness is the worst kind of mistake in reporting. > It's the exact opposite thing to do if you're trying to dispel allegations of such a thing. The interference, on its own, proves nothing, but lends credence to the things that have been learned about through other channels. Well, if western media has been more objective since 1949, I bet there will be much less interference. Heck, even during cultural revolution, I'd bet there is more comprehensive and balanced reporting on China. > I don't think what you describe is actually legal in China. First of all, journalists need to declare themselves by getting a special visa, and its unlikely they could fly under the radar if they worked for a major outlet. Secondly, if they do try that approach the government is going to swarm them with minders and plainclothes police to prevent what you're suggesting. Since when Western treat China laws as enforceable. Till today, it is reported as China bans FB etc company. But in fact it's FB etc chose to not follow the laws in China, so they essentially shut themselves out... If you decide to follow Chinese law, why not report within the lines of the state law then. Like daniel dumbrill did? Of course you'll not get much non-compliant reporting. Then why not try something else... > Huh? I'm sure there are at least a few other countries that would like a word. Which one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberia? The laughing stock of "voting democracy"? > It does get mentioned, or at least it did when it was relevant. I mean, this alliance was even mentioned in an action movie from the 80s I watched as a teenager (Red Dawn, about a Soviet Invasion of the US. Some teenage insurgents ask a down piloted who was helping the US fight the Soviets, the answer was only China, not even Europe). Sure 80s, you are old enough to see this. Ask people born in the 80s, and see what they told you. I find you being incredibly insensitive to the vastness of US, and even more so to China... You seem to the kind of people who should start travelling around the country and the world and see how everything is working nowadays... > But the MSM does have first hand information. For instance, like that gathered from foreign correspondents and foreign bureaus. You have seen the reporting from MSM, and the results obtained by those correspondents. I seen little first-hand information. > Or are fabricated Of course. What do you expect from any information. Heck, even the code I wrote myself requires myself to write tests on them. > And what of things you're not allowed to see? What do you want to say? I am saying the western media are lazy and had little first hand information. You posted me a bunch of summary without concrete information. And TBH, I have told many people that the western society loses its sense of perspective. And start to not only favor the one-dimentional view point indoctrined in the past centenry, they are now incapable of thinking in different angle altogether. The example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man#:~:text=The%20End%20of%20History%20and%20the%20Last%20Man%20(1992)%20is,reached%20%22not%20just%20 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Las...... The End of History and the Last Man What a laughable idea from a renowned intellectual.