holy shit, I knew media fact bias was a garbage website, but I checked out what that site has to say about RFA because it uses them as evidence that grayzone is bad and stinky which is bad enough on it's own, and jesus, it calls them center left, and gives it a "high" factual reporting rating what the fuck, how are liberals so brazen with this shit man
What even is that mediabiasfactcheck site, and why does every Lemmy lib think it's akin to the infallible voice of God?
remember, liberalism likes to disguise itself as a non ideology, "it's just the way things are!" and as such there's based true objective non-biased reporting and then there's evil lies spread by tankies, and that site is supposed to measure that and the more center you are the less biased you are
A shitty site that compresses multiple complex spectrums (left vs right, biased vs unbiased) into a single one-dimensional line, eliminating the possibility of centrist bias since centrism and unbiased are conflated. When they do add a second dimension, it’s how “factual” the sources are, and comes in a bell curve (which also functions as horseshoe theory) where biased sources are basically considered inherently counter factual.
Um sweaty dont you know centrist media is inherently the most factual? It's literally on the chart
Show
I like that they put WSWS as more reliable than any other communist paper, and also further left than explicitly liberal publications like Wonkette. Like, what is it about WSWS that makes them more relaliable than an incredibly well researched liberal feminist journal?
Well, WSWS are mysoginists, and this is a reddit meme sooooo
Their state affiliated propaganda
Our reliable and unbiased publically funded media
i had a quick look at this lemmy.world thing (both their china subreddit and the main page) and my god
how is this different from reddit again? what's the point of this? why did these users even migrate off reddit?
A lot of them were upset over API, but otherwise want to keep posting all the same stuff. They like Reddit itself and want to have Lemmy be exactly like Reddit, just without the specific stuff they got mad about.
Presumably these are the people who made a consumer boycott of reddit for not allowing them to have their special reddit apps, so I'd assume them to be more self-righteously liberal than the normal, average redditors.
Self-righteous libs are the worst. They're the same ones who tried to boycott character ai for not letting them fuck the bots, citing some bullshit ptsd dick disease.
for not allowing them to have their special reddit apps
You know those apps have accessibility features that the official app doesnt have and that Spez has made only vague promises of fixing this problem right? Most of the rhetoric I saw on reddit regarding the boycott was focused on standing up for disabled people. Maybe that was just the corners I was in, but still. Discounting this seems shitty.
Admittedly I'd bet there's a lot of redditors who used that as a talking point but don't really care all that much, but it's kinda impossible to know, so I definitely wouldn't shit on them for it unless a disregard for accessibility actual shows up in their words and actions.
The apps also don't have unblockable ads, so "you have to see ads now" is a good reason to stop using something.
So I was in a class where Darren Byler came to speak on Xinjiang, recounting the experiences of his student of being given an ethnic ID card and subjected to checkpoints.
I asked him when he visited China and he said he never had, he'd only interviewed his student.
Then I asked how we could sort out reputable info on Xinjiang from stuff by right wing cranks like Adrian Zenz and he clammed tf up before saying that he had a lot of respect for his collegue Adrian.
Afterwards I did some research and found out he'd co-published with Zenz!
I am probably more skeptical of CPC line on Xinjiang than most of this site, but what really struck me was that the professor who brought him in was an abolitionist and anti-racist activist.
In addition, Darren Byler's slant was as a lefty. He was theorizing China's approach as one of using the threat of terrorism to discipline an ethnically defined labor force.
The state was explicitly trying to target lefties and flip them on US foreign policy issues. An approach we saw them roll out again with "Russian Imperialism in Ukraine"
I don't like love what China or Russia are doing in those two places, but the way the US has blatantly and openly tried to manipulate us about it leaves a covid level swamp taste in my mouth.
Its fucking insidious.
https://zscruggs.substack.com/p/xinjiang-and-the-propaganda-war?r=bjopi&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=
you may find this helpful on xinjiang:
and this: https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Xinjiang_Vocational_Education_and_Training_Centers (sources are provided)
Man, no offense but I am completely averse to that genre of rhetoric. The smug tweets, the curated tourism show in a rich family's house, the population graphs, the focus on the think tanks. It's not real evidence but it wants me to feel like the smartest guy in the room for agreeing with it.
What I like really want is a breakdown of like:
What proportion of people go through these rehabilitative detention centers?
How is power exercised outside of them? Is it through clubs and associations like in in the east part of the country?
How free are people to practice traditional life ways, things like language, governance, sustenance (and in fact, what are these institutions and what is their history? Who's had a hand in shaping it? Presumably more people than a few right wing think tanks have had their hand in the pie)
but I can't find this shit the propaganda is so thick on both sides that you absolutely cannot find any normal information on this stuff the way you could other, more studied parts of the world where right wing think tanks aren't muddying the waters with the most annoying aspects of the online left responding in kind.
I'm reading through the law itself rn, gonna read the UN reports next.
The law is pretty bad though. Like, implementation is always an open question but it gives the state authority to define "distortions of religion" and states a goal of making Islam "more Chinese" which is exactly what the critics have been worried about.
It also escalates vandalism to being extremism. Imo this law is similar to US "gang" enhancements. Take normal crimes and increase their severity when done by a certain ethnicity. Just like gang enhancements, it's in response to a real problem, but we already have strong critiques of these practices.
The context is that terror attacks have been happening, and they are not trying to make them "more chinese", they're giving them vocational training so they can speak chinese for example in workplaces.
They've also banned head coverings and calling anything besides food "haram" or "halal" and instructed every single cultural and political institution to curb "extremism" (incredibly broadly defined) using whatever tools they have. For the police and prisons, those will be violent and carceral tools.
Like, I believe you that they're offering vocational lessons but I've got questions like "are they arresting people for wearing burkahs?" These are real questions that can only be answered with field work that no independent scholars have done.
Like, we get so hung up on proving it's not a genocide we end up looking past the fact that it's still something we'd be fighting tooth and nail in our own countries.
I share your concerns but just want to address:
Like, I believe you that they're offering vocational lessons but I've got questions like "are they arresting people for wearing burkahs?"
I'm not gonna suggest that this definitely isn't happening, because we don’t know, but what we do know is that if the west had anything that even looked like evidence for it, we would be having it shoved in our faces nonstop, like they tried to do for a while with those satellite images of high schools they claimed were extermination camps before walking it back a couple years ago.
Of course, that doesnt make the situation not bad. I think that broadly, the CPC's course of action is probably the least worst option for diffusing the homegrown-Afghanistan situation the US has been trying to stir up over there for a while, but acknowledge that their solution, like all policing/reeducation initiatives, creates power differentials that are ripe for abuse. Real damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, and I really hope they manage to thread that needle.
Sure, it's an insanely heavyhanded policy, and it's not really "good" in any way, but racial profiling and ethnic discrimination does not make it genocide, or even a cultural genocide as certain libs like to call it. I also don't really like the heavyhandedness that China uses, and wishes they had come up with something else, but I guess the logic was that the heavy hand was needed at first to create enough stability for the government to begin investing and doing development.
This is referring to Chinese national identity, not Han culture. China is a multicultural nation, which I'd have expected any principled leftist to know.
You don't convince those assholes, but you might convince someone reading along. Don't lurkers outnumber posters 10-1 or something?
Like all debates you aren't trying to convince your opponent but the audience
I can't believe you tankies would disparage the good name of business-humanrights.org 😔
Wait is Bardfinn that one Redditor who was famous for a copypasta or were they a former hexbear poster? I'm getting my internet characters mixed up
That was shittymorph way back in 1998 when The Undertaker through Mankind off the top of Hell in a Cell, plummeting 16 feet through an announcer's table.
Honestly who cares about your one-man argument, I'm not brigading for this, but this thread has turned into a nice list of resources for debunking the latest zenz bullshit so respect
if i could i would try to rewind a bit and try to nail on with semantics by blurring the lines between a cultural genocide and natural cultural drift
could also cite uyghur population numbers but he might be wise to that since he's already couching with cultural
also i heard something like ofcom doesn't regulate bbc international, they're basically allowed to publish fake news and face zero consequences, ofcom only regulates domestic stuff
welp, time to engage debatebro mode and just frame the argument so that it's more obvious that he's lost
harp on the lying, the conversation is now about how much of a liar he is and how insecure he must be in his position if he has to resort to lies to back it up.
I will say that I dont like that one lemmygrad poster dismissing the concept of cultural genocide at all: ETA: Link deleted because linking speciifc comments doesnt seem to work, but its not hard to find.
I also think the reply from Bardfinn is wrong because the trans genocide in the US has actual deaths on the line not just "culture" thats a shitty comparison. But cultural genocide does exist. There just isnt one happening in Xijang. I dont want to make an account there to correct that person but Im a bit annoyed.
Keep in mind that virtually every state-media outlet claims editorial independence, regardless of all the evidence to the contrary.
For example, Radio Free Asia, Radio Free Europe, Open Technology Fund, Voice of America, Current Time TV, Alhurra, Radio Sawa, and Radio Televisión Martí are all part of the US Agency for Global Media (formerly known as the Broadcasting Board of Governors), which requires its outlets through its top broadcasting standards to be “consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States” along with its broadcasting principle of “The capability to provide a surge capacity to support United States foreign policy objectives during crises abroad”.
USAGM’s CEO is appointed by the U.S. President. The current CEO is
Kelu ChaoAmanda Bennett (as of December 2022), who was appointed by Biden and has been reinstalling many of the USAGM executives at Radio Free Asia and Radio Free Europe that were purged by the former CEO Michael Pack (Trump’s appointee).https://www.usagm.gov/who-we-are/oversight/legislation/standards-principles/ https://web.archive.org/web/20210109232313/https://www.usagm.gov/who-we-are/oversight/legislation/standards-principles/
Bro I got in an argument on Lemmy the other day with someone who was insisting that turtles don’t have noses… what is that website even
That's hilarious and we need to invite that person here to be initiated into our motley ranks
