Articles like this are usually very cutting in their criticism but devoid of actionable suggestions. Kudos to Matt Yglesias for cutting right to the chase at th

Articles like this are usually very cutting in their criticism but devoid of actionable suggestions. Kudos to Matt Yglesias for cutting right to the chase at the end: >So what should we do? A boring but earnest place to start would be with some good old-fashioned congressional hearings. >I think ultimately, members of Congress should make the point that the downside of television news coming under the control of Chinese censors for the American people is extremely large, while the upside of U.S.-based conglomerates gaining access to the lucrative Chinese box office is modest. So even if the censorship risk is low, the cost-benefit isn’t there, and unless the companies can offer very clear guarantees, we should look at passing laws that would break up these conglomerates. He also pre-empts the potential issues with this: >To get there, legislators are going to need to try to actually address the issue and not just use it to lob tomatoes at each other or call various people hypocrites. I think this is understated. The average citizen does care about corporations groveling to Chinese censors, but cares way more about what it means for culture wars (as can already be seen in this very thread). So there's a prisoner's dilemma between the Left and the Right on top of the preexisting one between these corporations and the sincere bipartisan consensus that wants to counter the "Chinese chilling effect".