This just in: oppressive totalitarian regime, having developed the widest-ranging censorship capability in human history, censors another thing
China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
31–38 of 38 posts
Re: China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nonsense. ALL newspapers, TV channels, websites have an agenda. ALL of them. If you think that your pet one hasn't, then you are in an echo chamber without realizing it, time to take a step back and reevaluate the situation. Best thing is to read two equal-but-opposite new sources. I like The Times for my right-wing slant and the New York Times for my left-wing, that way I get a balanced picture. You might prefer the…
Right. The nice thing about the Chinese press (xinhua, chinadaily) is that they are so biased and divorced from reality that no one takes them seriously. Just one step above the North Korean Press. This is quite more honest than the western press, which try to hide their agenda more carefully and present information that we could possibly believe.
I've actually found Xinhua quite reasonable for anything that the Chinese government doesn't care about, e.g., fashion, movies, the odd natural disaster and human interest story, that kind of thing, and even political events in other countries that are sufficiently divorced from China's interests.
[Obviously when it is something the Chinese government cares about Xinhua just repeats the party line verbatim, regardless of how insane it sounds...]
Re: China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the world is a complex place and the truth is often subjective. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, as the old saying goes. There is also the factor that news outlets are commercial enterprises and have a certain vested interest in telling their audience what they want to hear. I used to work for Reuters, and news is a horribly expensive business to be in, the margins are razor thin. Some or…
> Because the world is a complex place and the truth is often subjective. This statement is misleading and ultimately false. Truth is either subjective (as you seem to believe) or objective. I believe the later. Here is an interesting dialog on the subject. It's old but shows a point: # IS TRUTH RELATIVE? Protagoras: Truth is relative. It is only a matter of opinion. Socrates: You mean that truth is mere subjective o…
You are being deliberately obtuse. News reporting is rarely about scientific proofs, it is about the actions and decisions of people and the motives behind them, and the context in which these things happen. These things are subjective and open to interpretation. Economics, politics, etc are not sciences and there is no "absolute truth" to be found therein.
Re: China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meh, The Guardian are heavily left-tilted, and editorialize. It's also exceptionally important to not confuse news from The Guardian, and anything on their Comment is Free platform, which is, by design, full of insane view points. BBC have a legal obligation not to editorialize.
The thing with the BBC is that they just fail to report any stories their agenda doesn't agree with or summarise other news agencies' reports after the event.
Could you give some examples?
Re: China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing with the BBC is that they just fail to report any stories their agenda doesn't agree with or summarise other news agencies' reports after the event.
Could you give some examples?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC
Look at the specific examples section.
Re: China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Altho' The Times is owned by News UK, which is 'a wholly owned subsidiary of News Corp' which is 'an American multinational mass media company'. Tenuous, but you can't deny the relationship. Most papers (especially tabloids) in the UK are owned by News Corp.
> Most papers (especially tabloids) in the UK are owned by News Corp. They only own The Sun and The Times. The other ones are owned by various others.
Ah, you're right - I had incorrectly attributed tabloids like the Mirror and Daily Mail to News Corp.
Re: China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Golden Shield Project has nothing to do with the GFW. The whole Wikipedia article is a misnomer.
Can you explain further for those of us who aren't familiar with either term?
The Golden Shield Project is an internal police network. The "Great Firewall of China" is several systems of very lengthy official names, but basically a dual-use firewall of CNCERT. CNCERT does not report to any police.
Re: China blocks the Guardian, censorship-tracking website says
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right. The nice thing about the Chinese press (xinhua, chinadaily) is that they are so biased and divorced from reality that no one takes them seriously. Just one step above the North Korean Press. This is quite more honest than the western press, which try to hide their agenda more carefully and present information that we could possibly believe.
I've actually found Xinhua quite reasonable for anything that the Chinese government doesn't care about, e.g., fashion, movies, the odd natural disaster and human interest story, that kind of thing, and even political events in other countries that are sufficiently divorced from China's interests. [Obviously when it is something the Chinese government cares about Xinhua just repeats the party line verbatim, regardles…
Any news about local policies or something that would affect my daily life, I have to read it counter-factually: e.g. if they say they won't do something, it means they are probably refuting a rumor and they will do it. For example, they were vehemently denying rumors that cars would be restricted in Beijing in the press a couple years back just before they actually did that.
Some of the translated editorials about politics are absolutely bizarre and incoherent. Chinadaily has great comedy value.