Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 304 posts

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#281

Post by helloindia »

babypuncher wrote: post #221
russellbeattie wrote: post #180

This isn't "ironic" or a "creative solution", this is straight up censorship. Wow. China has basically made it known they will go after a company's employees. I'm sure that CBS is very concerned about general access to the Chinese market and don't want their shows banned for purely economic reasons, but the subtle threat of their Chinese employees disappearing because of a cartoon is a real thing . Let's say this was…

I'm going to call BS on CBS' excuse that the Chinese government would actually harm CBS employees in China over the companies production of content that isn't available in China.

China did make Hongkong Bookstore owners disappear(some of them disappeared while visiting China), because they were selling books(banned in mainland china) in Hongkong.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/03/magazine/the-case-of-hong...

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#282

Post by philwelch »

amalcon wrote: post #238
philwelch wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually disagree with you. I think US public opinion is currently swinging very hard in a direction reminiscent of the predominant reasoning behind the Sedition Act and its contemporaries. I like to take a judiciary-centered view; Congress can pass whatever censorious laws they want to, but those laws are toothless without the Court constructing the First Amendment in a way that upholds them. That construction was…

Thank you for your very well researched and reasoned disagreement. It's frankly a breath of fresh air, and I can't really say that you're wrong on any specific point. I think the fundamental issue in the US right now is not an overall shift in public opinion, but rather a polarization. It's a super weird polarization, because none of the significant poles (I think there are at least four) are ideologically consistent…

I don't think it should be illegal for online platforms to filter user-generated content on ideological grounds. But it's still a form of censorship and it's something I generally don't favor.

I think the root issue actually is, in itself, the decline of consistent principles. The foundation of liberalism is, in many ways, the agreement to step back from the specific political disagreements of the day and agree on a common set of ground rules. But now politics is turning into a race to the bottom where both sides feel the ends justify the means and if the basic principles are invoked at all, it's because one side in particular is always on the losing side of them.

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#283

Post by smsm42 »

tepidandroid wrote: post #259
smsm42 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human rights abuses in China are in no way "future". They are very much in present and in the past. Somehow in the West it becomes fashionable to dismiss those just because US has its troubles. But the fact that US government has troublesome part in no way absolves the crimes that Chinese government perpetrated and continues to perpetrate. It's not "either-or" proposition.

I knew my comment would draw exactly this response. My comment was simply stating that the past abuses of one side should not be compared to future, hypothetical abuses of the other (referring to the sentence "just wait till you see what China is going to do"). One may compare the historical abuses of one side to the historical abuses of the other. Is that fair and reasonable?

> referring to the sentence "just wait till you see what China is going to do"

It is hard to believe you didn't understand this phrase, but just in case I'll explain. It means "if China had been the dominating power to the measure the US is, their abuses would be much more massive than whatever abuses US has done or is accused of. And if China will achieve such dominant position, we will have the misfortune of experiencing this abuse". The validity of this statement can be confirmed by looking into past and present abuses by Chinese government, and concluding that if that government becomes as powerful and dominant as US government is now, it's lust for human rights abuses is not likely to diminish.

Thus, we are not comparing present to the future. We are comparing the level of dominance and level of abusiveness at the same level of dominance, while assuming that more dominance would allow the government to be more abusive to more people.

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#284

Post by smsm42 »

tepidandroid wrote: post #280
PavlovsCat wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totalitarianism is a scorpion that cannot but sting. So no, in my books that's just suicidal playing for time I have no patience for and will take no part in.

> Totalitarianism is a scorpion that cannot but sting. I'm 100% onboard with this notion. Our opinions differ only with respect to where we think China is headed, which was the premise of my original comment. Yours is the pessimistic view, mine is the optimistic one. I happen to believe that as China continues to modernize, it will reach a point where its government will no longer feel the need to resort to totalitar…

> it will reach a point where its government will no longer feel the need to resort to totalitarian policies to ensure the stability and prosperity of its society

Do you have an example from history of a totalitarian society voluntarily undergoing such transformation?

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#285

Post by tepidandroid »

smsm42 wrote: post #283
tepidandroid wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew my comment would draw exactly this response. My comment was simply stating that the past abuses of one side should not be compared to future, hypothetical abuses of the other (referring to the sentence "just wait till you see what China is going to do"). One may compare the historical abuses of one side to the historical abuses of the other. Is that fair and reasonable?

> referring to the sentence "just wait till you see what China is going to do" It is hard to believe you didn't understand this phrase, but just in case I'll explain. It means "if China had been the dominating power to the measure the US is, their abuses would be much more massive than whatever abuses US has done or is accused of. And if China will achieve such dominant position, we will have the misfortune of experi…

> It is hard to believe you didn't understand this phrase, but just in case I'll explain. It means "if China had been the dominating power to the measure the US is, their abuses would be much more massive than whatever abuses US has done or is accused of. And if China will achieve such dominant position, we will have the misfortune of experiencing this abuse".

I understood the phrase completely. The OP's original sentence is very unambiguous. My interpretation, or re-phrasing of it is:

> If you think America is bad right now, wait till you see what China is going to do in the future.

It's a very clear comparison of America's present abuses to China's future potential ones. As I have said many times already, that is not a fair comparison. One can compare America's past or present abuses to China's past or present abuses. One cannot make a comparison based on future abuses, unless one is a time traveller or has possession of a crystal ball. I'm actually very surprised that this is such a point of contention.

> The validity of this statement can be confirmed by looking into past and present abuses by Chinese government, and concluding that if that government becomes as powerful and dominant as US government is now, it's lust for human rights abuses is not likely to diminish.

> We are comparing the level of dominance and level of abusiveness at the same level of dominance, while assuming that more dominance would allow the government to be more abusive to more people.

I'm not sure that the OP speaks with the same voice as you do. Regardless, to repeat the point again, you are condemning China for future, hypothetical abuses it will possibly carry out as a possible future world hegemon based on past and present actions.

The assumption is invalid because they are based on the premise that countries are static and do not evolve over time. You're saying because a country has done X and is doing Y, it will continue to do so in the future. History trivially shows this to be untrue. If you follow that train of thought, there will never be enough countries in the world for you to condemn.

Anyways, I feel like this conversation is not very productive and we're not supposed to engage in political battles, so I will end this thread here.

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#286

Post by tepidandroid »

smsm42 wrote: post #284
tepidandroid wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Totalitarianism is a scorpion that cannot but sting. I'm 100% onboard with this notion. Our opinions differ only with respect to where we think China is headed, which was the premise of my original comment. Yours is the pessimistic view, mine is the optimistic one. I happen to believe that as China continues to modernize, it will reach a point where its government will no longer feel the need to resort to totalitar…

> it will reach a point where its government will no longer feel the need to resort to totalitarian policies to ensure the stability and prosperity of its society Do you have an example from history of a totalitarian society voluntarily undergoing such transformation?

There are many, many such examples in history which you are free to spend time reading about. At the moment, I am not particularly inclined to research and type up a report for your personal consumption. I hope you understand.

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#287

Post by JetSpiegel »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #230
ativzzz wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nazi Germany had concentration camps as early as 1933 (Dachau) and nobody did anything either until they started invasions and a war. Most genocides have happened as the world watches and says "oh wow that's terrible we should do something" and then do nothing. This is simply how humans behave on an international scale. There is nothing 'amazing' about it.

A) Nobody really knew about such camps. B) The 'final solution' stuff did not happen until much later ie. i) scale and ii) death C) That was in 1930. There was barely radio. There was no 'globalism' or 'global news'. There was no global awareness. What 'went on in Germany' might have been going on on mars. It's 2019 now, China has no excuse, and we have no excuse.

> C) That was in 1930. There was barely radio. There was no 'globalism' or 'global news'.

Chaplin did The Great Dictator a few years after that. Let's not pretend 1930 was the stone age.

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#288

Post by JetSpiegel »

CharlesColeman wrote: post #166
iandanforth wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There will be no effect. No one took a stand, this will be forgotten immediately.

> There will be no effect. No one took a stand, this will be forgotten immediately. That's a bold assertion, and seems to reflect a (false) underlying assumption that small effects are totally meaningless.

There are no effects. If you only watch the show but don't read NYT, you don't even know there was a controversy because of the censure. That's why censure is effective.

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#289

Post by graeme »

tepidandroid wrote: post #260
graeme wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US hegemony was 1945-present, which is important context for interpreting the grandparent comment and also the list. Much of that list predates 1945. You can also exclude any internal repression when considering the effects of US hegemony, which is experienced only by people outside the US. There's still a LOT to account for. Vietnam and Iraq being the two biggest. But, on the other hand, 70 years, a couple hundred t…

You are right on the point about the list containing internal repression and incidents from before 1945, which should be discounted. I will not pull the list of post-1945 'interventions', but again we are in agreement that it is still a substantial list. On your other point, I respectfully disagree.

I guess I should have put it in the context I was thinking of: which historical hegemon was preferable?

My sense is that being a hegemon seems to involve such harms and interventions, and the US hegemony was especially vast. So I'm viewing things in terms of that scale.

(If a non-hegemon had done that list, they would be public enemy number 1)

Re: CBS censors a ‘Good Fight’ segment whose topic was Chinese censorship

#290

Post by joezydeco »

babypuncher wrote: post #217
joezydeco wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fundamental principle of Hollywood: there's no such thing as bad publicity.

I had never even heard of this show until today, and it sounds like something I would really enjoy. On the flip side I do not want to give CBS any money as a result of this censorship

You'll want to watch the original series The Good Wife first. The Good Fight is a sequel series after the main character finishes her arc.

It was a really great show. It's a typical law firm drama but it was very well written and surprisingly tech-savvy. Some of the topics and cases in the show dealt with things like the NSA, Anonymous, fugitives from justice (like Snowden), the haziness of the Constitution at the border, social media, FBI investigations, Bitcoin and lots more.

https://www.wired.com/2013/09/screen-smarts/

I wouldn't get all upset over a bit of 'censorship', real or imagined. CBS is not the government. It's an entertainment corporation.

Post reply on HN