YouTube takes down Xinjiang videos, forcing rights group to seek alternative

> My point still stands, the mainstream media's report on Xinjiang is lazy, they have no first-hand deep reporting.

That is demonstrably false. I think the problem is that you expect them to report on this like it was an easy story to report, but it's an extremely difficult story to report because of the interference.

> For example, when reporters are followed by government employees, that's the usual lazy bureaucratic reactions to western media. Those are not evidences of "vanishing Uyghurs".

It's the exact opposite thing to do if you're trying to dispel allegations of such a thing. The interference, on its own, proves nothing, but lends credence to the things that have been learned about through other channels.

> Instead, if they just pretend to be normal travellers, and hop on trains, on bus, on the street, and gather the information through small talks and gossips with real locals, they'll have much more freedom to reach deeper.

I don't think what you describe is actually legal in China. First of all, journalists need to declare themselves by getting a special visa, and its unlikely they could fly under the radar if they worked for a major outlet. Secondly, if they do try that approach the government is going to swarm them with minders and plainclothes police to prevent what you're suggesting.

e.g.:

https://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/going-to-com...

> Hoping to hear both sides, Mr. McDonell spent several days traveling across Xinjiang, planning to interview local residents and Chinese officials. Instead, he filmed a segment that communicates the lengths to which the government was willing to go to prevent him from finding out what is really happening in the region.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/insider/china-xinjiang-re... (posted earlier)

There was also one account I read where a journalist had to go through ridiculous lengths to avoid the minders, but that only bought him less than a day (maybe only an hour or two) before they caught up (he traveled at that last minute with no warning and made sudden changes).

> There has never been any successful deployment of voting democracy outside of US for decently sized countries, let alone the largest country on earth.

Huh? I'm sure there are at least a few other countries that would like a word.

> Considering the historical importance of Cold war and its victory by the western world, don't you think China deserves some mentioning. No, never... not even a hint.

It does get mentioned, or at least it did when it was relevant. I mean, this alliance was even mentioned in an action movie from the 80s I watched as a teenager (Red Dawn, about a Soviet Invasion of the US. Some teenage insurgents ask a down piloted who was helping the US fight the Soviets, the answer was only China, not even Europe).

> That's the problem, right? One should start realize that their preferred media might not have the 1st-hand information on other regions of the world. And start looking for that.

But the MSM does have first hand information. For instance, like that gathered from foreign correspondents and foreign bureaus.

> And for that, because of the vast size of China, YT videos, even rando ones are more useful than media reports, because they are showing nuances.

Or are fabricated: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/06/22/technology/xi...

> These and thousands of other videos are meant to look like unfiltered glimpses of life in Xinjiang, the western Chinese region where the Communist Party has carried out repressive policies against Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities. Most of the clips carry no logos or other signs that they are official propaganda....

> A monthslong analysis of more than 3,000 of the videos by The New York Times and ProPublica found evidence of an influence campaign orchestrated by the Chinese government.

> The operation has produced and spread thousands of videos in which Chinese citizens deny abuses against their own communities and scold foreign officials and multinational corporations who dare question the Chinese government’s human rights record in Xinjiang.

> ... Establishing that government officials had a hand in making these testimonials is sometimes just a matter of asking.

> When reached by phone, the man said local propaganda authorities had produced the clip. When asked for details, he gave the number of an official he called Mr. He, saying, “Why don’t you ask the head of the propaganda department?”

> And I need to see it through my own eyes to be confident about my judgement.

And what of things you're not allowed to see?

> I think the problem is that you expect them to report on this like it was an easy story to report

WTH are you talking about!?

Reporting Xinjiang issue is exceedingly difficult. And western media is extremely lazy about it!

How can you exactly read my statement as polar opposite...

That's why first-hand information is critical. It's extremely hard to get the information. And it's also extremely difficult to categorize and making a coherent analysis on them as well. So that's why laziness is the worst kind of mistake in reporting.

> It's the exact opposite thing to do if you're trying to dispel allegations of such a thing. The interference, on its own, proves nothing, but lends credence to the things that have been learned about through other channels.

Well, if western media has been more objective since 1949, I bet there will be much less interference. Heck, even during cultural revolution, I'd bet there is more comprehensive and balanced reporting on China.

> I don't think what you describe is actually legal in China. First of all, journalists need to declare themselves by getting a special visa, and its unlikely they could fly under the radar if they worked for a major outlet. Secondly, if they do try that approach the government is going to swarm them with minders and plainclothes police to prevent what you're suggesting.

Since when Western treat China laws as enforceable.

Till today, it is reported as China bans FB etc company. But in fact it's FB etc chose to not follow the laws in China, so they essentially shut themselves out...

If you decide to follow Chinese law, why not report within the lines of the state law then. Like daniel dumbrill did? Of course you'll not get much non-compliant reporting. Then why not try something else...

> Huh? I'm sure there are at least a few other countries that would like a word.

Which one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberia? The laughing stock of "voting democracy"?

> It does get mentioned, or at least it did when it was relevant. I mean, this alliance was even mentioned in an action movie from the 80s I watched as a teenager (Red Dawn, about a Soviet Invasion of the US. Some teenage insurgents ask a down piloted who was helping the US fight the Soviets, the answer was only China, not even Europe).

Sure 80s, you are old enough to see this.

Ask people born in the 80s, and see what they told you.

I find you being incredibly insensitive to the vastness of US, and even more so to China...

You seem to the kind of people who should start travelling around the country and the world and see how everything is working nowadays...

> But the MSM does have first hand information. For instance, like that gathered from foreign correspondents and foreign bureaus.

You have seen the reporting from MSM, and the results obtained by those correspondents. I seen little first-hand information.

> Or are fabricated

Of course. What do you expect from any information. Heck, even the code I wrote myself requires myself to write tests on them.

> And what of things you're not allowed to see?

What do you want to say?

I am saying the western media are lazy and had little first hand information. You posted me a bunch of summary without concrete information.

And TBH, I have told many people that the western society loses its sense of perspective. And start to not only favor the one-dimentional view point indoctrined in the past centenry, they are now incapable of thinking in different angle altogether.

The example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Las......

The End of History and the Last Man

What a laughable idea from a renowned intellectual.

China has literally a separate Internet, and fines/jails those who use it w/o permission; Russia crushes dissent, to the point of assassinating opposition leaders and incarcerating journos.

The US doesn't seem to be as effective in brutal opposition to infiltration. There's no moral equivalent.

> I actually did make that same point:

Yes, I am sorry, I think it's error prone to read comments for such complicated matters.