Western Media bias against China

Status
Not open for further replies.

Eurofighter

New Member
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

Gollevainen said:
well the situation is more fustraiting here in finland, i mean there is hardly any 'positive' news of any of these 'rogue' states like china, DPRK, Iran, Cuba...the so called 'free wrold' myth would work much better if the stances who controlls the media would least show some sort of effort to conceal the agendas. But when you brainwash kids from elementary school how the media is independent and not controlled anybody and we have freedom of speech and so on...no wonder that people buy all the stuff gets to their head and doesent questionize anything that is getting feeded to them...and if you claim anything controversial theres that big bad USSR goblin stamp to but onto you...

I think Gollevainen has addressed a very good point here. This really is the paradox of freedom of speech, or more specific, of democracy, isn't it?
People believing in the media, because they are so convinced that their media won't fool them because they are living in a democratic world where the freedom of speech is celebrated. However, this attitude towards the view of truth would make people's conceptualization of objectivity very vulnerable. And indeed, once the media does try to cloud the truth, there would be no way anybody would protest.....this implicit contradiction within our system kind gives me the creeps, isn't it the perfect way for the governments to indoctrinate their citizens? This really scares me, since the implications would indicate that the world of democarcy, human rights and the freedom of speech etcetera, as we Europeans or Americans would like to perceive them as something tangibe, rael and something worth fighting for, suddenly changed in to just sets of illussions and lies...where would we be then?
 
Last edited:

sumdud

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

Well, I define politics by three words, bad words, and the media fits right into one of the three slots. Yes, it's scary. Law-abiding citizens are good, but they are vunlerable to lies like these all the time......

I was invited (well, I didn't want to go, but the whole wanted me to since I was in fact one of the most informed people about the world in my school) to the World Affairs Challenge. It was a (regional?) contest concerning the students' history knowledge. The prices were really nothing, so the $40 was a real bargain for the host.
When the teacher told us to watch only the news from CNN, the Washington Post, and BBC, i totally quit. I first asked my teacher why these networks was chosen for knowledge of the current world, and she told me it was because it was more align with the government.........
Well, I quit, I am not going to be brainwashed like that. America was already being listed as a topic we were not to discuss on, so why does the Feds have to come in on that? It smelled really funky.....
I am not trying to discourage people from watching Western news, no. I am just saying, you need to know which news is a rumor and which is true. I watch MSNBC BTW. :)
 

Roger604

Senior Member
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

The society that is biased is the one that derives a feeling of superiority over others through a conviction that their political system is inherently superior.

When you have a deeply embedded need to feel superior, then you start ignoring or distorting facts. Your own faults are downplayed while the faults of others are exaggerated.

FuManChu said:
Isn't there a certain East Asian nation that harps on about the fact it has "5,000 years" of history? And people from there talk about how it will dominate the 21st century, out-perform all other countries, etc?

But the Chinese do not believe their political system is the only legitimate one in the world. Therefore, they are not vulnerable to this bias in regards to political systems. Maybe in regards to China's historical importance this is true. Maybe this is exaggerated in the Chinese collective psyche.

FuManChu said:
Again, I'd have to say that such a statement as yours is BS. "The West" doesn't exist. You may be talking about America, but that does not include Europe. And in Europe there is a great deal of introspection, more than you can find in China, Korea, Japan, etc.

It's funny when I think of stereotyping because there's no bigger stereotype than lumping everyone from the US, Canada, UK, France, Germany, the rest of Europe, Australia, etc all together and calling them "Westerners", saying they're all the same, etc. We think very differently and often have disagreements. But of course it's easier just to say that we're all against country X because we're from THE WEST and have a stick up our arses.......

:nono:

I think most people in English-speaking countries simply want to think their political system is superior. It makes them feel like they are simply better than other countries that have a different system.


FuManChu said:
But what else is there? "Benevolant dictatorship/autocracy" is even worse. It's ridiculous for people to present democracy as some perfect system. But as Churchill said it's the least worst. Until human beings can figure out how to be less selfish then we can't do much better. Democracy should be seen as a goal to reach, rather than something you can just declare overnight.

And I'm not saying you do, but I get fed up when people try to attack democracy in order to make a crummy system in another country seem less worse.

I'm glad you regard don't regard democracy as a flawless system. In fact, democracy is such a vague concept. But formally speaking, the definition of it is not important.

Bias is likely to exist whenever a society derives a feeling of superiority over others based on the alleged superiority of its political system. In that situation, the society is likely to distort facts about its own political system and that of others to support the national ego.

vincelee said:
Democracy is sweet because the process of decay is almost invisible to the general public, which, in all cases, is an uneducated mob.

So true, that is one of the major unavoidable flaws of democracy. The average person is stupid.

vincelee said:
Mind you, I realize that the Chinese system has major flaws, but I do not see democracy as the ultimate goal of social progress, and I get fed up once in a while when people would use democracy as an almost religious criteria.

You hit the nail on the head again. Democracy / non-democracy is used by people to incite conflict and demonize others in the same way religious differences were used 1000 years ago.

But many people today think anybody who doesn't believe religiously in the superiority of democracy is just evil incarnate.
 

Roger604

Senior Member
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

This is a prime example of a GROTESQUELY biased article from BBC

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China's censored media answers back
By Tim Luard


The media scene in China has come a long way since the days when revolutionary slogans blared from loudspeakers in paddy-fields.
But today's Communist Party bosses are as determined as ever to maintain control over every word published or broadcast in the world's most populous country.

A media clampdown - the latest of many over the years - has seen a string of journalists disciplined, dismissed or even jailed for violating official guidelines.

Some of the campaign's targets, however, are refusing to be silenced.

And they have found plenty of supporters - some in unlikely quarters - willing to speak up on their behalf.

"There is now an unstoppable wave of demands for more freedom of expression and resistance to the old propaganda policies," said Jiao Guobiao, who was forced to resign his post as a journalism professor last year after accusing the government of handling the press in a manner worthy of Nazi Germany.

The row over the extent of people's right to know shows that the Communist Party's authority is ebbing away, he said.

But without censorship, the party could not maintain its rule for a day, he added.

Climbdown

The international storm over the self-censorship of Google and other internet companies in China has probably caused little more than a ripple of amusement in the corridors of Beijing's propaganda department.

Far more embarrassing, not to say ominous, has been the chorus of domestic protest over the closure in late January of Bing Dian (Freezing Point), a weekly publication noted for its cutting-edge reporting on sensitive topics.

In an apparent climbdown, it was later announced that the magazine would reopen on 1 March, but without its two chief editors.

Unlike most journalists punished in the past, the two editors loudly disputed the move to censor them.

In comments widely aired on the internet, they called it an "illegal abuse of power" aimed at preventing the growth of a civil society.

The reopened magazine would be an empty shell of its previous self, they said, and had been ordered to print a full rebuttal of the article on historical censorship which triggered the closure.

Among those who have rallied behind the editors are a group of former senior party and media officials, including Mao Zedong's secretary and a former editor-in-chief of the People's Daily. The Taiwanese-born columnist Lung Ying-tai, whose controversial articles for Bing Dian may have been the real reason for the closure, has sent an open letter of protest to President Hu Jintao.

"Among 10,000 horses, there was only one left - and now its throat has been cut", she wrote.

She believes the move against the influential magazine was a calculated one made by the president himself. His power base lies in the Communist Party Youth League, whose newspaper, China Youth Daily, publishes Bing Dian as a weekly supplement.

The decision to reopen the supplement was an attempt to ease the anger about the closure, she told the BBC.

"Freezing out the two prominent and courageous editors", she added, was designed to "warn all other journalists to behave".

Force for change

Propaganda officials have also faced other public challenges to their authority, including a rare strike by reporters in support of three editors dismissed from a leading daily, the Beijing News, late last year.

But what really worries them is that those now pushing for a lifting of censorship include not just journalists and activists, but also people in business, government and law who believe media reform is a necessary part of China's modernisation.

"It is not good for the Communist Party to keep to its old ways", said Jiang He, who runs a hi-tech company in the western city of Chongqing.

China's rapid economic growth is proving a strong force for change, he said, pointing out that the media was already far more open in many ways than in the past.

"It's such an information age. There's no way anyone can block everything," he said.

China's 11,000 newspapers and periodicals, along with its 600-plus radio and TV stations, are more intent these days on satisfying the demands of the market than the state censor, who no longer pays their bills.

"People are not interested in reading politically-correct communiques in their newspapers," according to John Kennedy, a Canadian journalism graduate based in the southern province of Guangdong.

"The media have seized upon pushing harder and digging deeper, writing about corruption and Communist Party scandals as ways to sell more papers," he said.

China's leaders are faced with a dilemma. They need the media to help keep a rein on local officials, whose abuses of power are already causing unrest.

But they worry that too much exposure may cause still more unrest.

It's grotesquely biased because it assumes that Chinese people are so stupid that they would enthusiastically support a government that does bad things to them.

Give me a break: if the Chinese government is as bad as many western sources them out to be, they wouldn't enjoy the overwhelming popularity that they do! Otherwise, you would need to believe Chinese people are just stupid.

But this sort of rhetoric is often used by anti-China people precisely because they DO believe Chinese people are stupid. Or to be more exactly, they want to feel superior to Chinese people.... therefore, they willingly accept assumptions that confirm their egotistical bias!!!
 

FreeAsia2000

Junior Member
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

vincelee said:
I hope you're not equating freedom of intellectual excercise to unbiasness. Just because a person perceives himself to be free doesn't mean his brain is the most pristine shit ever. On the contrary, when you look at the US media, most of the morons have no fucking clue about what they're talking about. Lou Dobb rings a bell? His entire understanding of economics is based on extremist interpretations of supply side economics that fly in the face of classical economics, which he professes to be an ardent supporter of. Then there is Bill Gertz. A man with a high school diploma, yet writes for the Washington Post and is one of the more widely quoted "experts" on the Chinese military, although he doesn't read or speak one word of Chinese and probably doesn't even understand modern warfare. Let's not even get started with NewsMax and, say, the Psycho Bitch Ann Coulter.

To put it shortly, freedom does not mean a lack of agenda, and the presence of an agenda is to throw unbiasness out the window in favor of some influence, and because most people in America are so clueless, in regards to economics or military or even history, they fall prey to such tactics, yet because they are clueless, they PERCEIVE themselves to be under unbiased guidance and such.

Democracy is sweet because the process of decay is almost invisible to the general public, which, in all cases, is an uneducated mob.


Can I just go on the record to say...the above should be ENGRAVED on a plaque. totally true

Please put it on the frontpage.
 

Red not Dead

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

Well where to begin this from? Hum People huge scoop. Society is made up by individuals interacting with eachother...thus not being these completely free individuals...thus not always haveing those beautiful llibarl ideals in mind but acting more as a group...even hardcore individuals try to act like a group because when grouped you're always stronger.

Scoop number two. The "west" is declining as a "group" (as freeAsia is ill disposed from anything related to "classes" i'd have to use the term "group") and tending more to isolated individuals.

On the other hand the rest of the world is rather uniting it's effort on the nation level or above (think about the real community of feeling muslims seem to share). Why? Easy because "free" westerners have kept saying their system will bring joy and hapiness to the world completely forgetting how they got up here. They have reached the top of the world by being ruthless against their own sparking two major world conflicts, killing millions. That's the sad truth. So yes they feel china's warm breath on their neck and try to put all their cultural/political/economical and soon military power to keep on top.

Bias are very understandable, so are the new sense they're trying to give at the world competition wich now mean social civil war in the west. See Classes have not disapperaed they're just way too deep-rooted to be seen at first glance.
 

FreeAsia2000

Junior Member
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

Red not Dead said:
Well where to begin this from? Hum People huge scoop. Society is made up by individuals interacting with eachother...thus not being these completely free individuals...thus not always haveing those beautiful llibarl ideals in mind but acting more as a group...even hardcore individuals try to act like a group because when grouped you're always stronger.

Scoop number two. The "west" is declining as a "group" (as freeAsia is ill disposed from anything related to "classes" i'd have to use the term "group") and tending more to isolated individuals.

On the other hand the rest of the world is rather uniting it's effort on the nation level or above (think about the real community of feeling muslims seem to share). Why? Easy because "free" westerners have kept saying their system will bring joy and hapiness to the world completely forgetting how they got up here. They have reached the top of the world by being ruthless against their own sparking two major world conflicts, killing millions. That's the sad truth. So yes they feel china's warm breath on their neck and try to put all their cultural/political/economical and soon military power to keep on top.

Bias are very understandable, so are the new sense they're trying to give at the world competition wich now mean social civil war in the west. See Classes have not disapperaed they're just way too deep-rooted to be seen at first glance.

:D

I'm perfectly happy with the term classes...however I prefer the term 'interest
groups'. Have you read Ibn Khuldun's book on Muqadimah ?

I agree with some of your analysis that the means of production as well as what i would term 'Voice of History' ( i don't agree with Hegel's 'spirit of history' ) is shifting from the west to the east.

The return of network groups which had gone into a decline (apart from jews) in the 16th century due to the technological superiority of the west (as well as access to gold from the america's and industrialised slavery) means that eastern capitalists will now begin to challenge western capitalist on a more even footing. See for instance the spectacular rise in islamic financial markets

Over the last few years there has been a dramatic growth in the use of Islamic finance techniques in raising capital that complies with the requirements of Shari'a law. According to recent reports assets invested in an Islamic, Shari'a compliant, manner are now estimated to exceed US$250 billion with the pool of money held by Muslim investors estimated at US$1.5 trillion (and growing rapidly with high oil prices). The growth of the Sukuk market, which only opened in 2002 with the Malaysian government US$600 million Sukuk issue, is a prime indicator of this trend. By 2004, US$6.7 billion of capital was raised through the issue of Sukuks and in the first six months of 2005 the total raised reached US$6.2 billion.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


see also
Another possibility bandied about is the switch of petrodollars to petroeuros. This specter has been recently raised by the upcoming launch of the Iranian oil bourse. However, futures markets depend upon transparent legal systems (especially enforceable property rights), institutional trust, minimal state intervention, and a level playing field between long and short players – and the IOB fails on all counts. Furthermore, exchanges do not dictate trading terms; a euro-based oil futures contract will only succeed when the underlying trade switches its pricing mechanism.

A third and radical possibility is the emergence of a unified Islamic financial movement that could possibly center on the gold dinar. When Jude Wanniski wrote about this potential in November 2004, he cited the dinar's flawed promotion and the IMF ban on gold-backed currencies in debtor countries as two impediments to success.

But several things have changed in the last year and a half.

First, the IMF is losing its relevancy as a U.S. policy tool. As the world gets richer, it is starting to reject dollar-based loans. Argentina, Brazil, and Russia have decided to pay off their IMF loans, and Turkey – which suffered economic collapse in 2001 – has asserted it will no longer need IMF assistance by 2008. Also, the dramatic oil price increase has made most Islamic countries much wealthier in a short time span. What's more, the global easing of interest rates has made access to capital in domestic currency far easier and, at the same time, fiat currencies are quickly depreciating against gold.

Most importantly, the U.S. is becoming increasingly protectionist. By saying "no" to foreign investment, especially on an idiosyncratic basis, it is throwing down the gauntlet to foreigners, daring them to jettison their dollar-based investments. Therefore, several conditions – both financial and political – are in place to cause a shift in global finance.

Significantly, the fastest growing global money field is Islamic financing. Islamic bonds, or sukuks – unlike most U.S. bonds, which pay interest – are securities that pay out revenue streams from rents and leases in accordance with Shariah law. In its infancy, the field claims about a half trillion dollars. If the Islamic nations were to adopt a gold standard as their underlying currency basis, it could have multinational appeal.

Moreover, since Islamic financing includes the mainstream retail products of mortgages, small business loans, and consumer credit, its potential consumer market is staggering. (A mortgage, for example, is structured as a "rent to buy" arrangement.) Because its guidelines are religious tenets, its scope would be transnational.

Imagine the power of an Islamic financial supermarket, rivaling the sophistication of the U.S. market (itself only 30 years old), to channel dollar holdings into dinars for a billion-plus people! The embrace of a pan-Islamic, gold-backed system would create an unquantifiable financial upheaval.

Ironically, this could be the financial free market flip-side to the totalitarian Spain to Indonesia "caliphate" so vilified by the administration.

As U.S. lawmakers blithely vote to raise the debt ceiling to $9 trillion while angling for political points over the DP World scuffle, Dubai, coincidently, is sponsoring a four-day International Islamic Finance Forum for the week of March 19. It promises to feature the basics of converting conventional debt into Islamic financing, the techniques of Islamic securitization, and the training of Shariah scholars. Chuck, Norm, and Bill would do well to attend.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Thus in the world of the future capitalists will need to pay attention to the group belief's and traditions if they want to be successful. The countries which will find this easiest to learn as a lesson will be those which have no superiority complex. Of course if you insult the people who fund you then your share price will take a steep decline as they boycott your markets.

For a long time the existing ideologies in Europe have reinforced and been reinforced by their economic success (base and superstructure remember) however the bbc maybe in some cases consciously and others subconsciously because of the threat they perceive from other economies which clearly don't subscribe to their ideologies is looking to boost morale with it's reporting.

The future belongs to transnational groups and not governments and the more internationally diverse and accomodating a group is the more succesful it will be...
 
Last edited:

walter

Junior Member
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

Roger604 said:
This is a prime example of a GROTESQUELY biased article from BBC

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!




It's grotesquely biased because it assumes that Chinese people are so stupid that they would enthusiastically support a government that does bad things to them.

Give me a break: if the Chinese government is as bad as many western sources them out to be, they wouldn't enjoy the overwhelming popularity that they do! Otherwise, you would need to believe Chinese people are just stupid.

But this sort of rhetoric is often used by anti-China people precisely because they DO believe Chinese people are stupid. Or to be more exactly, they want to feel superior to Chinese people.... therefore, they willingly accept assumptions that confirm their egotistical bias!!!

hmmm? I'm afraid I can't see how you arrived at your conclusion that underlying this article is the assumption that the Chinese people are stupid. Obviously it doesn't expilicitly say anything of the sort, but after looking for some between-the-lines implication that Chinese are stupid, I came up empty. Where is it?
 
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
Re: BBC (Western Media) bias against China

Roger604 said:
It's grotesquely biased because it assumes that Chinese people are so stupid that they would enthusiastically support a government that does bad things to them.

Give me a break: if the Chinese government is as bad as many western sources them out to be, they wouldn't enjoy the overwhelming popularity that they do! Otherwise, you would need to believe Chinese people are just stupid.

But this sort of rhetoric is often used by anti-China people precisely because they DO believe Chinese people are stupid. Or to be more exactly, they want to feel superior to Chinese people.... therefore, they willingly accept assumptions that confirm their egotistical bias!!!

Oh stop whining. It never said any of that. Anyone who knows anything about China knows that the government maintains control primarily by manipulating the information people receive. On mainland forums that I've been to typing in the names of the President or PM automatically gets replaced with "^^". As it is Chinese people know more than what the government tells them, but there is much they don't know about. The entire point of that quotation was to show that if they knew the whole truth the CCP's rule would be near-impossible.

And how could you possibly know the CCP is "overwhelmingly" popular? The government doesn't allow the media to do polls of its popularity.

That quotation was made by a Chinese ex-professor, so I suggest you make your complaint to him before you deal with whatever chip you have on your shoulder about the non-Chinese media.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top