5 ms·

Your comment could also be considered a form of propaganda. Another layer of the onion is the truth values (perceived/cultural truth, "actual" truth, etc) of t

Your comment could also be considered a form of propaganda. Another layer of the onion is the truth values (perceived/cultural truth, "actual" truth, etc) of the respective claims, though that often gets overlooked when it comes to propaganda, or geopolitics in general.

tucnak 2y ago
[flagged]
- cyanydeez 2y ago
  "This originates from China "
fnordpiglet 2y ago
If the article was written in China and allowed to be published it was reviewed and aligned to the ideological language and goals of the CCP by government propaganda officials. That’s the way the laws work. It’s not a form of propaganda to recognize the structural fact that any material originating from China is, by intentional construction, propaganda. Whatsboutism doesn’t change that.
- gruez 2y ago
  >If the article was written in China and allowed to be published it was reviewed and aligned to the ideological language and goals of the CCP by government propaganda officials. That’s the way the laws work. If you're trying to imply the fact the article is published implies there's some sort of CCP interference, that makes no sense considering that The Economist is blocked in china. Moreover there's a decidedly anti-CCP article published in the same issue as this article[2], which further strains the claim that The Economist is some sort of pro-CCP publication. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_mainland_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_ma... [2] https://www.economist.com/china/2024/06/13/why-china-takes-young-tibetans-from-their-families https://www.economist.com/china/2024/06/13/why-china-takes-y...
  - fnordpiglet 2y ago
    I didn’t say anything about the magazine. I was referring to where the article was originated. You’ll notice your second article wasn’t published from within China. Specifically : America’s assassination attempt on Huawei is backfiring The company is growing stronger—and less vulnerable An American man cutting the red Huawei flowers off their stems with a scythe. illustration: julia kuo Jun 13th 2024| —> shenzhen <—
    - crazygringo 2y ago
      You seem to be misunderstanding. The location listed on articles refers to where the reporting was primarily done by the reporter(s) involved. The article isn't "published from within China". And it's misleading to say it's "material originating from China". It's material originating from the Economist, a British publication, from a reporter who traveled to (or is based in) Shenzhen to research this story. China has no say whatsoever in the content of this story. The point of putting "Shenzhen" as the location is simply that this wasn't reported by a journalist merely sitting on their couch in London. Good reporting generally requires you to actually go to the places you're reporting on.
      - fnordpiglet 2y ago
        No it’s typically where the reporter is -based- not where the reporting was done.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >I was referring to where the article was originated. You’ll notice your second article wasn’t published from within China. ??? "Chaguan travelled to Tongren to weigh claims that coercive assimilation is now the norm. While in Qinghai he was followed by up to five unmarked cars. Tibetan-speaking officers (one of whom flashed a police badge) filmed and eavesdropped on conversations. " Or are you claiming that going into China and doing anti-CCP reporting is fine as long as the article isn't "published" in China (whatever that means)?
      - 2y ago
- mistermann 2y ago
  > If the article was written in China and allowed to be published it was reviewed and aligned to the ideological language and goals of the CCP by government propaganda officials. It's a great meme, but is it true (warning: be careful subconsciously inferring an inadequate variable type here)? Are you even able to wonder about the truth of such matters after having your mind subjected to unknown amounts and forms of Western propaganda? This is not a rhetorical question by the way: I pose it sincerely and literally, and challenge you to answer it. I greatly enjoy exhibitions of extreme cognitive capabilities, please don't hold back. > That’s the way the laws work. At best you can know what laws exist on the books (I doubt you even know this), it is not possible for you to know how and to what degree they are implemented & enforced. > It’s not a form of propaganda to recognize the structural fact that any material originating from China is, by intentional construction, propaganda. a) You are expressing a personal opinion in the form of a fact. b) Your claim is comprehensive ("any material"), thus necessarily speculative. c) "by intentional construction" - intentions are not (and cannot be in this case) achieved with perfection. > Whatsboutism doesn’t change that. Thinking in simplistic memes like this can cause "reality" to appear other than it actually is. Sir: have you seen the movie The Matrix? If so, what was your take on it?

tucnak 2y ago

[flagged]

cyanydeez 2y ago
"This originates from China "

fnordpiglet 2y ago

If the article was written in China and allowed to be published it was reviewed and aligned to the ideological language and goals of the CCP by government propaganda officials. That’s the way the laws work. It’s not a form of propaganda to recognize the structural fact that any material originating from China is, by intentional construction, propaganda. Whatsboutism doesn’t change that.

gruez 2y ago
>If the article was written in China and allowed to be published it was reviewed and aligned to the ideological language and goals of the CCP by government propaganda officials. That’s the way the laws work. If you're trying to imply the fact the article is published implies there's some sort of CCP interference, that makes no sense considering that The Economist is blocked in china. Moreover there's a decidedly anti-CCP article published in the same issue as this article[2], which further strains the claim that The Economist is some sort of pro-CCP publication. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_mainland_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_ma... [2] https://www.economist.com/china/2024/06/13/why-china-takes-young-tibetans-from-their-families https://www.economist.com/china/2024/06/13/why-china-takes-y...
- fnordpiglet 2y ago
  I didn’t say anything about the magazine. I was referring to where the article was originated. You’ll notice your second article wasn’t published from within China. Specifically : America’s assassination attempt on Huawei is backfiring The company is growing stronger—and less vulnerable An American man cutting the red Huawei flowers off their stems with a scythe. illustration: julia kuo Jun 13th 2024| —> shenzhen <—
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    You seem to be misunderstanding. The location listed on articles refers to where the reporting was primarily done by the reporter(s) involved. The article isn't "published from within China". And it's misleading to say it's "material originating from China". It's material originating from the Economist, a British publication, from a reporter who traveled to (or is based in) Shenzhen to research this story. China has no say whatsoever in the content of this story. The point of putting "Shenzhen" as the location is simply that this wasn't reported by a journalist merely sitting on their couch in London. Good reporting generally requires you to actually go to the places you're reporting on.
    - fnordpiglet 2y ago
      No it’s typically where the reporter is -based- not where the reporting was done.
  - gruez 2y ago
    >I was referring to where the article was originated. You’ll notice your second article wasn’t published from within China. ??? "Chaguan travelled to Tongren to weigh claims that coercive assimilation is now the norm. While in Qinghai he was followed by up to five unmarked cars. Tibetan-speaking officers (one of whom flashed a police badge) filmed and eavesdropped on conversations. " Or are you claiming that going into China and doing anti-CCP reporting is fine as long as the article isn't "published" in China (whatever that means)?
    - 2y ago
mistermann 2y ago
> If the article was written in China and allowed to be published it was reviewed and aligned to the ideological language and goals of the CCP by government propaganda officials. It's a great meme, but is it true (warning: be careful subconsciously inferring an inadequate variable type here)? Are you even able to wonder about the truth of such matters after having your mind subjected to unknown amounts and forms of Western propaganda? This is not a rhetorical question by the way: I pose it sincerely and literally, and challenge you to answer it. I greatly enjoy exhibitions of extreme cognitive capabilities, please don't hold back. > That’s the way the laws work. At best you can know what laws exist on the books (I doubt you even know this), it is not possible for you to know how and to what degree they are implemented & enforced. > It’s not a form of propaganda to recognize the structural fact that any material originating from China is, by intentional construction, propaganda. a) You are expressing a personal opinion in the form of a fact. b) Your claim is comprehensive ("any material"), thus necessarily speculative. c) "by intentional construction" - intentions are not (and cannot be in this case) achieved with perfection. > Whatsboutism doesn’t change that. Thinking in simplistic memes like this can cause "reality" to appear other than it actually is. Sir: have you seen the movie The Matrix? If so, what was your take on it?