541–548 of 548 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they “simply wouldn’t hire them in the first place” then they aren’t hiring the correct number of employees to maximize profit.
No, they instead choose to contact work out. Companies acquire labor to maximize profit, and regulations simply cause them to alter how they choose to obtain labor.
"Dozens of social media accounts were tweeting angry things, including many death threats, at both Roy and Marriott. This seems especially odd considering Twitter itself is officially banned in China, and thus can be accessed only by residents breaking the law or by bot accounts." Not sure why they assume that "dozens of social media accounts" of pro-China supporters is not possible. They're making some weird assumpt…
> They're making some weird assumption that only people within China could possibly support the Chinese government on the issue. That's not how I read it. I read it saying it's odd that a platform banned as bad by a government is so readily used by those who support the government. I won't even address the end of your post in detail because it's unrelated to governments punishing businesses for liked tweets.
That's like implying that people who support Chinese control of Tibet must also be government shills, or pro-government, or communist party members.
Supporting the issue of China/Chinese in Tibet != supporting the government or all government policies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And all of this is different from NL or most other European countries how? Hint: it isn't, we just have sensible protections against wrongful termination.
"sensible" is meaningless. Everyone gets to make up their own def. Parent is correct, the US is a free country, which means beyond some _very_ simple rules we don't try to think for employers, we let the consumers do that. That's the point of a functioning market. I prominently tell companies why they don't get my business, and Marriott will hear from me next year when I call, waste their time gleefully explaining ho…
Yes, some guy whose entire job is to field customer complaints will listen to you and then hang up the phone and not report your complaint to anyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd put it akin to some fake news sites. Could you provide any actual evidence of any "fake news" that they've broadcast? Or in 2018 is simply an association with another group proof enough?
Saying that China Uncensored is "journalism" or a news site is terribly misleading. They're a propaganda channel first and foremost and their only goal is to further the Falun Gong's personal platform. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Tang_Dynasty_Television This is their parent company and due to their onesidedness I wouldn't trust anything that comes from their mouth. As well as I wouldn't trust anything coming fr…
At least, they're one of very few sources that report on China negatively from a strategic, big picture perspective. To listen to you, one might think everything they say is a lie, speaking of fake news. I guess that's why you dodged my question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Saying that China Uncensored is "journalism" or a news site is terribly misleading. They're a propaganda channel first and foremost and their only goal is to further the Falun Gong's personal platform. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Tang_Dynasty_Television This is their parent company and due to their onesidedness I wouldn't trust anything that comes from their mouth. As well as I wouldn't trust anything coming fr…
You don't know what their only goal is. At least, they're one of very few sources that report on China negatively from a strategic, big picture perspective. To listen to you, one might think everything they say is a lie, speaking of fake news. I guess that's why you dodged my question.
"The station was founded in 2001 by Falun Gong practitioners as a Chinese-language broadcaster"[1]
They produce Shen Yun, which has a strong Falun Gong backing and definitely has an agenda, what with the final act being a giant tsunami that comes in and kills all those in the mainland[2]
They are partnered with the Epoch Times which is considered one of the biggest mouthpieces of the Falun Gong[3]
The Epoch Times, New Tang Media, and China Uncensored are all clearly biased in one direction. I really don't know how you can say they aren't, but they don't even try to hide the fact sometimes. You have to realize that when you listen to them as you have to see their biases.
>At least, they're one of very few sources that report on China negatively from a strategic, big picture perspective.
Are you really sure about that? China uncensored doesn't go into high journalism and most of the time just dips their foot into news articles with clickbaity headlines and overly sarcastic monologues. I would much prefer something done by the FT, Economist, or NYT.
As to why I consider them fake news. I really don't trust news at face value from China Uncensored the same way I don't trust articles from places like Breitbart. They have a way of over-exaggerating the news and twisting it into an anti-China stance. I always go find extra sources and never dwell on their one single source.
[1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB108190438992282143
[2]https://www.denverpost.com/2008/01/09/chinese-new-year-embra...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't know what their only goal is. At least, they're one of very few sources that report on China negatively from a strategic, big picture perspective. To listen to you, one might think everything they say is a lie, speaking of fake news. I guess that's why you dodged my question.
You're right, I probably don't know what their only goal is. However, you can easily extrapolate from their parent company's goals and backgrounds and take your answer from there. "The station was founded in 2001 by Falun Gong practitioners as a Chinese-language broadcaster"[1] They produce Shen Yun, which has a strong Falun Gong backing and definitely has an agenda, what with the final act being a giant tsunami that…
Yes, you can, but if your goal is reaching correct conclusions, that's not a great strategy (although it's an extremely popular one nowadays, even on HN).
> The Epoch Times, New Tang Media, and China Uncensored are all clearly biased in one direction. I really don't know how you can say they aren't
Neither can I, but I'm not sure why we're discussing this because I have said no such thing. What I did say is that I disagree with your broad classification of them as "fake news", and I offered you the opportunity to cite some specific examples of things they've said that aren't true, which you've now passed on twice. To me that is interesting, because I am increasingly curious about how the human mind works. Is it interesting to you?
> Are you really sure about that? China uncensored doesn't go into high journalism and most of the time just dips their foot into news articles with clickbaity headlines and overly sarcastic monologues. I would much prefer something done by the FT, Economist, or NYT.
No, not overly sure. I've never encountered anything very negative on China elsewhere, but then I haven't really been looking for it. If you could point me to any particular China-critical articles from any of those publications I'd certainly read them.
> As to why I consider them fake news. I really don't trust news at face value from China Uncensored the same way I don't trust articles from places like Breitbart. They have a way of over-exaggerating the news and twisting it into an anti-China stance. I always go find extra sources and never dwell on their one single source.
In that sense I would agree that they're "fake news" (with quotes); I reserve the term fake news without quotes for actual lies rather than bias, or bias while claiming impartiality, like mainstream news in most Western nations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you were in China would you really find it insulting that Tibet is considered by some to be its own country? It was invaded, and I can’t really see any other way to characterise what happened.
As an American, I wouldn’t be offended if a Chinese person suggested that all non Native Americans should leave America. I wouldn’t think that would be reasonable, although I would acknowledge that we could do much more to help rectify the situation that still exists today. I would likewise be not offended (but might feel slightly uncomfortable) if someone told me that California, my home state, should be returned to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, I probably don't know what their only goal is. However, you can easily extrapolate from their parent company's goals and backgrounds and take your answer from there. "The station was founded in 2001 by Falun Gong practitioners as a Chinese-language broadcaster"[1] They produce Shen Yun, which has a strong Falun Gong backing and definitely has an agenda, what with the final act being a giant tsunami that…
> However, you can easily extrapolate from their parent company's goals and backgrounds and take your answer from there. Yes, you can , but if your goal is reaching correct conclusions, that's not a great strategy (although it's an extremely popular one nowadays, even on HN). > The Epoch Times, New Tang Media, and China Uncensored are all clearly biased in one direction. I really don't know how you can say they aren'…
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/world/asia/china-africa-b...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN9wFtiJtBM
China Uncensored's video barely scratches the surface except for some things that China does in Africa. The other is an actual journalism piece which goes indepth on what people in Africa think of the situation while also going forlaying into China's involvement with Africa.
https://www.economist.com/news/china/21737283-it-has-problem...
This article too goes into actual journalism with an indepth review on China's relations with race and how they see race as well.
https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21737558-clear-think...
From the economist and another "China-critical" piece. I'm going to be honest though, most articles regarding China from the economist or Financial Times are going to be "China-critical", just varying degrees on what you consider critical to be. Most aren't going to be overly pessimistic about any small thing China does (as China Uncensored does for everything) and most are going to err on the side of mild concern.
China Uncensored likes to over-exaggerate a lot of things. Problems come from their clickbaity headlines and lack of acting like an actual news provider.