3 ms·

> This is not neutral at all. I think you've got it backwards - the point is to be fastidiously neutral. Some people think it's reunification, some people thi

> This is not neutral at all. I think you've got it backwards - the point is to be fastidiously neutral. Some people think it's reunification, some people think it isn't. So instead of taking one side and saying what they think, they just tell you what the relevant person said. They aren't quoting a whole sentence, as it comes from a speech and they want to make it understandable without having to read the whole thing. It's supposed to be simple reporting, not opinion. Especially if you look at the venue - it's a news agency. This is all totally normal, completely above-board, best-practice journalism. I have no idea why people push back against it. Are you possibly confusing quotation marks with scare quotes? That's not what these are. They aren't making a point using the quotation marks. They're trying to not make a point. Just to convey the facts.

mytailorisrich 5y ago
But they are taking side! Of course some people are against reunification but trying to push the narrative that this is not a matter of reunification really is propaganda and not fact. What I quoted is not neutral journalism. Neutral journalism on this issue is extremely rare. It has become a widespread trick to push a narrative under the cover of being neutral or irrelevant facts. Clever use of quotation marks under the pretext that not everyone agrees, systematic use of 'democratic Taiwan' are 2 examples of subtle and clever bias when it comes to reporting of cross-straight relations. Another one is today's reporting on the BBC for the 10th October (national day of ROC), which was not even subtle. But it's hard for the public who does not know about an issue and trust what they are told. And of course there is one so blind as those who will not see.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > But they are taking side! I don't even know which side you think they're taking! So it can't be that strong a stance can it.

mytailorisrich 5y ago

But they are taking side! Of course some people are against reunification but trying to push the narrative that this is not a matter of reunification really is propaganda and not fact. What I quoted is not neutral journalism. Neutral journalism on this issue is extremely rare. It has become a widespread trick to push a narrative under the cover of being neutral or irrelevant facts. Clever use of quotation marks under the pretext that not everyone agrees, systematic use of 'democratic Taiwan' are 2 examples of subtle and clever bias when it comes to reporting of cross-straight relations. Another one is today's reporting on the BBC for the 10th October (national day of ROC), which was not even subtle. But it's hard for the public who does not know about an issue and trust what they are told. And of course there is one so blind as those who will not see.

chrisseaton 5y ago
> But they are taking side! I don't even know which side you think they're taking! So it can't be that strong a stance can it.