101–110 of 142 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It seemed that the mass shooter and the nightclub patrons could no longer recognize each other's concerns."
This is just so apples-to-oranges it's not even appropriate. China has a legitimate claim to Hong Kong, Hong Kong (arguably) has a right to self-determination. They're a newspaper. Present both sides, let me make a decision. Don't tell me what to think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thats is the essence of the false equivalency: the idea that if two people disagree with equal passion they must be equally correct. Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green, its to stick their heads out the damn window and see for themselves.
> Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green What wrong claim have they made? China has a legitimate claim to the territory, Hong Kong has a legitimate right to self-determination (in my opinion). Claiming they're wrong or otherwise conveying false information because they haven't picked a side is just wholly wrong. If you want pr…
So… a few thoughts. I live in HK (having semi-recently moved here from the Bay Area, right before this all flared up). First, there's a ton of misinformation out there. Few sources have entirely accurate information, but the best English-language resource I've found on the subject is the local paper South China Morning Post (scmp.com). They have pretty accurate and unbiased live reporting of the protests as it flares…
A few thoughts on my end: 1) Traditionally the Chinese government largely left the affairs of HK to HKers (in reality just the few families), so there is no reason to step in and be the bad guy right now. 2) This protest/riot is far more complicated than it seems, considering the meeting with the US diplomat as well as the involvement of the boss of next digital. Geopolitics plays a hand here. 3) Protesters should ta…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It seemed that the mass shooter and the nightclub patrons could no longer recognize each other's concerns."
This is just so apples-to-oranges it's not even appropriate. China has a legitimate claim to Hong Kong, Hong Kong (arguably) has a right to self-determination. They're a newspaper. Present both sides, let me make a decision. Don't tell me what to think.
The New York Times is a newspaper built on free speech.
There really aren't to sides to be report about.
> China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, wants to make Hong Kong more like a mainland city, using economic incentives to buy happiness and propaganda to win loyalty. The protesters, who represent a wide swath of Hong Kong, want a government that looks out for their interests, not just Beijing’s, to help resolve problems like astronomical housing prices and low wages. > The two sides no longer seem to recognize each other’s…
NYT is a propaganda tool, like most mainstream media outlets. Expecting them to have "courage" is a non-sequitur.
What are the chances of the unrest spreading into China? One hears of sporadic unrest through China, I take the economy hasn’t yet faltered so people aren’t too disgruntled. I take it this qualifies as “Interesting Times”
> What are the chances of the unrest spreading into China? There are hundreds of small riots happening all around China nearly every month. I don't think this will make a difference, unless it happens in numbers comparable to number you see in HK. Paradoxically, Xi's rule saw less riots than during Hu's term, when "something serious" was going on almost monthly.
Each time the national government has stepped in and supported the protestors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just so apples-to-oranges it's not even appropriate. China has a legitimate claim to Hong Kong, Hong Kong (arguably) has a right to self-determination. They're a newspaper. Present both sides, let me make a decision. Don't tell me what to think.
The PRC is a totalitarian dictatorship that suppresses free speech. The New York Times is a newspaper built on free speech. There really aren't to sides to be report about.
"China is bad. Hong Kong should be free."
Removing nuance is fun.
> China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, wants to make Hong Kong more like a mainland city, using economic incentives to buy happiness and propaganda to win loyalty. The protesters, who represent a wide swath of Hong Kong, want a government that looks out for their interests, not just Beijing’s, to help resolve problems like astronomical housing prices and low wages. > The two sides no longer seem to recognize each other’s…
It seems clear to me that there are indeed exactly "two sides." It is also clear that their relationship is now more contentious, and less symbiotic. What exactly is your disagreement with those propositions?
> China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, wants to make Hong Kong more like a mainland city, using economic incentives to buy happiness and propaganda to win loyalty. The protesters, who represent a wide swath of Hong Kong, want a government that looks out for their interests, not just Beijing’s, to help resolve problems like astronomical housing prices and low wages. > The two sides no longer seem to recognize each other’s…
I don't understand your objection. Are you claiming there's a hidden third side to the dispute? Or that the controversy is fabricated and there is, in fact, only one side? It seems clear to me that there are indeed exactly "two sides." It is also clear that their relationship is now more contentious, and less symbiotic. What exactly is your disagreement with those propositions?