• OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Its a very weakly sourced state sponsored media article reporting on their state enemy. You have to be willfully credulous to believe their claims without further proof.

    • Freeman@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I saw a piece about the shadow police in germany lately. I am sure that the chinese foreign police exists.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have no doubt, every nation has secret police. I simply doubt they are doing what the article suggests theyre doing. It seems to me the article is interested in explaining why there aren’t many uyghur Muslims joining their narrative and why a lot of them are supportive of China and feel their culture is respected.

    • Durotar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t mean that reports are false just because two states are enemies (which is an exaggeration).

          • ☭ Blursty ☭@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It really is. Try it, next time you read a China Bad article, just decide that it’s bullshit first, then check into it and you’ll be proven right.

          • socsa@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            A black and white world where objective measures of press freedoms are apparently inversely proportional to trustworthiness of said journalists.

            Random blog with a Soviet flag? Impossible to be propaganda, because only capitalism can do a propaganda.

            Some of the world’s oldest free media with a long history of investigating the British government? Literally nothing but propaganda.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              A black and white world where objective measures of press freedoms are apparently inversely proportional to trustworthiness of said journalists.

              Oh my god, are you seriously claiming you can objectively measure press freedoms while saying socialists live in a black and white world? Just want to give you a chance to walk back your statement

              • socsa@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                I am quite curious to know your methodology for measuring press freedom so we can compare and perhaps find something which can be considered locally objective.

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You’re retreating into “locally” objective. In this topic you’re not going to get agreement on what constitutes press freedom, so it is pointless. My point is that the claim of objective press freedom existing is ridiculous. You walked it back, but to a position that still seems ridiculous to me.

                  For example, I dont believe there is such thing as a free press. Any org that can produce a press machine is going to influence that press, whether that is a government or private interests. Editorial freedom isn’t possible, editorial control just ranges from the subtle to the overt.

                  • socsa@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You are the only one making assumptions here. I want to find some common ground.

                    So let’s pull this thread. I agree that bias is inevitable, but do you believe this negates the value of even trying to protect press freedom? And if so, do you extend this to all forms of truth seeking?

        • Durotar@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That statement is illogical. You must have huge problems with the simplest logic to argue that. You can’t bent logic by twisting what I said. Stop clowning.