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

China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

bloombergquint.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 147 posts

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#101

Post by burrows »

djohnston wrote: post #29

In the West privately funded media has increased polarisation over the last 50 years, so having stronger public investments in media could be helpful to stop this pervasive divisiveness. China has the opposite configuration where the state controls all information and you'll be re-educated if you say the wrong thing loud enough. These are both extremes that are undesirable IMO.

> so having stronger public investments in media could be helpful to stop this pervasive divisiveness.

Completely unsubstantiated nonsense claim.

> China has the opposite configuration where the state controls all information and you'll be re-educated if you say the wrong thing loud enough.

Alarmist gobbledygook.

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#102

Post by johnebgd »

djohnston wrote: post #29

In the West privately funded media has increased polarisation over the last 50 years, so having stronger public investments in media could be helpful to stop this pervasive divisiveness. China has the opposite configuration where the state controls all information and you'll be re-educated if you say the wrong thing loud enough. These are both extremes that are undesirable IMO.

The west just needs to reimplement the fairness doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#103

Post by johnebgd »

jollybean wrote: post #99
djohnston wrote: post #29

In the West privately funded media has increased polarisation over the last 50 years, so having stronger public investments in media could be helpful to stop this pervasive divisiveness. China has the opposite configuration where the state controls all information and you'll be re-educated if you say the wrong thing loud enough. These are both extremes that are undesirable IMO.

The current state of Western Media is not very nice, but it is far from 'extreme'.

Tell that to Alex Jones…

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#104

Post by nradov »

dillondoyle wrote: post #84
djohnston wrote: post #29

In the West privately funded media has increased polarisation over the last 50 years, so having stronger public investments in media could be helpful to stop this pervasive divisiveness. China has the opposite configuration where the state controls all information and you'll be re-educated if you say the wrong thing loud enough. These are both extremes that are undesirable IMO.

I wish PBS was better funded and supported, maybe look to BBC as an example to emulate. Though BBC also has non-new programming (drag race!). The problem is trusting government. I don't trust either parties here so I would lean toward a for-profit system with heavier regulation. It looks like the Fairness Doctrine is no more? Anyone have better knowledge here than I do who can give some background? From what I kind o…

The Fairness Doctrine only ever applied to broadcast TV and radio because spectrum was a limited resource. It never applied to cable, satellite, or online services. Those were never really deregulated because they were hardly regulated in the first place.

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#105

Post by ethbr0 »

More-nitors wrote: post #61
th0ma5 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not defending China's idea at all, but with private media in this country having a financial motivation to knowingly lie is pretty reprehensible. They have the right to do it sure, and they should, but if a good portion of a populace lives in a fiction, that isn't great. And to be clear while leftist stuff can be extreme, sure, the current major problem is right wing extremist lies are clearly more detrimental just b…

> with private media in this country having a financial motivation to knowingly lie is pretty reprehensible. That can be balanced-out with other media outlets voicing other side. And... not attacking China's great political unification, having and using politics to censor out a lot of government corruption that ultimately hurts its own people... doesn't look great (no 'political balance-of-power' + no freedom-of-spee…

>> with private media in this country having a financial motivation to knowingly lie is pretty reprehensible.

> That can be balanced-out with other media outlets voicing other side.

It's entirely possible to counter balance something with a lie, neither the original or response being the truth, which doesn't help inform the viewers either.

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#106

Post by 1cvmask »

ralusek wrote: post #78
qqtt wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit naive to assume there isn't quite a bit of centralized control of media in the West. Not only are the media largely owned by a scant few large conglomerates - the government itself also gets routinely involved in controlling the narrative. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/20generals.html

The west increasingly has completely independent news sources via places like YouTube.

These are all corporate sources that openly brag about censoring content. My favorite is when they censored an academic conference on censorship. Straight out of a Monty Python skit.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/media-censorship-conference-ce...

The HN discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26008217

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#107

Post by babelfish »

tweedledee wrote: post #93
refurb wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like China sees Australia as the front line in their battle with the West. The recent nuclear submarine deal makes a lot more sense with that world view.

I have a feeling Australia will also get nukes reasonably soon. First nuke subs, then US bases with US nukes, then nuke subs with nukes. The Chinese pushed the Australians too far, they underestimated their obstinance. Australian attitudes are changing rapidly and in my view it won't take long until a nuclear deterrence becomes the obvious and only solution.

How has China ‘pushed’ Australia at all?

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#108

Post by ipaddr »

ffwszgf wrote: post #79
ralusek wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The west increasingly has completely independent news sources via places like YouTube.

A lot of these channels will have to leave the platform as anti fake news and disinformation laws get tougher

Maybe that's the silver lining.

Anyone who's opinion exists outside of the current groupthink is forced to leave these big platforms. It makes it harder for the average person within this group to express themselves because these platforms make it easy. But many will and new platforms will form outside of big tech. These new platforms will have time and space to rethink how they operate and perhaps they will bring in a new era of consumer control.

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#109

Post by johncena33 »

refurb wrote: post #35
Gustomaximus wrote: post #20

On the flip side China purchased most Chinese language media in Australia some time back. https://www.smh.com.au/national/chinese-language-newspapers-...

Seems like China sees Australia as the front line in their battle with the West. The recent nuclear submarine deal makes a lot more sense with that world view.

As an immigrant in Canada, I always thought Canada is the entry door in the West for China. Canada's biggest city Toronto not only has a huge amount of Chinese population, a vast majority of them are new wealthy immigrants. Urban white Canadians also tend to be pro-China under woke ideology umbrella.

Re: China proposes prohibiting private investment in news service sector

#110

Post by ipaddr »

secondaryacct wrote: post #77
pasabagi wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really opposites, though. Private media is highly centralized, and the people involved are also highly involved in politics (Rupert Murdoch, for instance). In China, high up party members are generally very wealthy, and wealthy people generally are highly involved in the party, so it's the same politically-well-connected elite that would be involved in media in the west in any case - it's just backed up by f…

What do you think of France where the media is highly political, but politics no bi-polarized (13 parties in big elections, 5 large movement/ideologies)? We even learn at school that no writing can be objective since humans write them but what matters is to identify ideological stances and read enough subjective angles to have at least an opinion on where stakeholders stand if not "the truth"?

Sounds like a mature approach where many voices are heard and allowed to be shared and understood. France puts faith in citizens while other countries try to control those choices and voices.
Post reply on HN