3 ms·

But there are not many nations that operate in a "honest about everything" way. I mean wikileaks highlighted a whole lot of stuff about the U.S. that was very

by Volpe 14y ago

But there are not many nations that operate in a "honest about everything" way. I mean wikileaks highlighted a whole lot of stuff about the U.S. that was very far from 'honest about everything'. Are we holding China to a higher bar than the U.S? Or do we have blinders on when viewing the U.S's actions?

seanmcdirmid 14y ago
Its one thing to get your hand caught in the cookie jar, and another thing to claim the sky is hot pink when its really blue (or that the air is clean in Beijing when its obviously not). Certain parts of the US government lie, yes, but they get caught (and a handslap), don't do it all the time, and don't come off as insane.
- Volpe 14y ago
  I don't know, I'd much prefer the lies to be obvious "Beijing isn't polluted" than "No, that Apache isn't gunning down civilians". (Hmm, I realise, that is possibly inciting a whole other discussion). That aside, I still reckon, that article was biased for no reason, other than to continue the 'us against them' mentality that gets no where. And a non-biased fact/data based media outlet would be a great addition to the the world/national (which ever level) media.
  - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
    But the article wasn't biased, it was talking about a company who broke the law of the country they were operating in, it wasn't talking about so much the "evil" Chinese government as much as it was talking about the "evil" American company breaking American laws that just happen to export restrictions to China. It could have been export restrictions to France and they would still be breaking the law. Chinese get sensitive about any article that mentions China, whether they make value judgements about the Chinese or not. I've seen even the most fact-based empirically-evidenced articles posted from the most reputable unbiased international news agencies get shot down by wu mao dang commentors as being unfair.
    - Volpe 14y ago
      There are whole paragraphs from that article that basically says Chinese lie, cheat, and steal to get technology. But without any evidence, E.G: "The prototype J-20 Chinese stealth fighter unveiled last year, for example, appears to be based on technology recovered from a US F-117 stealth fighter..." Appears? It also appears to be a self-developed piece of technology? Why the negative bias? (For no reason). It's worrying that people can't even spot the bias when it's sitting right in front of them. wu mao are essentially a product of the CCP's propaganda machine. So of course they shoot down any and everything that isn't pro CCP. > most reputable unbiased international news agencies I'm curious which agencies these are? From my own reading, I've found every agency is biased, and the only way to get a useful picture is to understand where their bias lies and read multiple sources.
      - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
        So you are worried about that one sentence? Does it even cast China in a bad light? It seems smart of them to learn from whatever wreckage they recovered in Serbia. Yes, I don't see much bias there, definitely not the opinion shaping kind of bias that would affect reader thinking. Maybe there are some insecurities that Chinese readers would be sensitive to that would completely escape westerner notice. I should have said "most" unbiased, of course bias is impossible to completely avoid. An article with facts as numbers, which is just reporting observations and not making value judgement, is as unbiased as you can get!
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

by Volpe 14y ago

seanmcdirmid 14y ago

Its one thing to get your hand caught in the cookie jar, and another thing to claim the sky is hot pink when its really blue (or that the air is clean in Beijing when its obviously not). Certain parts of the US government lie, yes, but they get caught (and a handslap), don't do it all the time, and don't come off as insane.

Volpe 14y ago
I don't know, I'd much prefer the lies to be obvious "Beijing isn't polluted" than "No, that Apache isn't gunning down civilians". (Hmm, I realise, that is possibly inciting a whole other discussion). That aside, I still reckon, that article was biased for no reason, other than to continue the 'us against them' mentality that gets no where. And a non-biased fact/data based media outlet would be a great addition to the the world/national (which ever level) media.
- seanmcdirmid 14y ago
  But the article wasn't biased, it was talking about a company who broke the law of the country they were operating in, it wasn't talking about so much the "evil" Chinese government as much as it was talking about the "evil" American company breaking American laws that just happen to export restrictions to China. It could have been export restrictions to France and they would still be breaking the law. Chinese get sensitive about any article that mentions China, whether they make value judgements about the Chinese or not. I've seen even the most fact-based empirically-evidenced articles posted from the most reputable unbiased international news agencies get shot down by wu mao dang commentors as being unfair.
  - Volpe 14y ago
    There are whole paragraphs from that article that basically says Chinese lie, cheat, and steal to get technology. But without any evidence, E.G: "The prototype J-20 Chinese stealth fighter unveiled last year, for example, appears to be based on technology recovered from a US F-117 stealth fighter..." Appears? It also appears to be a self-developed piece of technology? Why the negative bias? (For no reason). It's worrying that people can't even spot the bias when it's sitting right in front of them. wu mao are essentially a product of the CCP's propaganda machine. So of course they shoot down any and everything that isn't pro CCP. > most reputable unbiased international news agencies I'm curious which agencies these are? From my own reading, I've found every agency is biased, and the only way to get a useful picture is to understand where their bias lies and read multiple sources.
    - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
      So you are worried about that one sentence? Does it even cast China in a bad light? It seems smart of them to learn from whatever wreckage they recovered in Serbia. Yes, I don't see much bias there, definitely not the opinion shaping kind of bias that would affect reader thinking. Maybe there are some insecurities that Chinese readers would be sensitive to that would completely escape westerner notice. I should have said "most" unbiased, of course bias is impossible to completely avoid. An article with facts as numbers, which is just reporting observations and not making value judgement, is as unbiased as you can get!
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]