Western Media bias against China
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
- Status
Mr T
Senior Member
You can't compare the two events. What happened in Xinjiang was not a carefully planned event. It appears to have been a spontaneous protest that turned into a riot - the 2001 US bombings were planned events of terrorism. You know the difference between protests that turn to riots and terrorism, right?
The first is where a lot of angry but ordinary people get together to express their feelings, turn violent for some reason but don't necessarily plan to do anything or kill anyone before they start out. The second is where a person or people plan to do something with the potential to kill large numbers of civilians from the very beginning.
Ambivalent
Junior Member
Well, I respectfully disagree. There are similarities in both events. You have an aggrieved population that perceives itself held back and discriminated against by a wealthier and more powerful majority. For each group, there was no representation of their views being made to the representatives of the governments who were attacked. One of the benefits of a representative government that allows the free expression of views is that minority and unpopular views have to be heard and acknowledged. When these are not, the grievances build until, predictably, the grievance become unbearable and violence results. Before you say the US is a fully representative government I might argue that the Arab viewpoint is not heard or widely understood in the US. Most Americans do not know the history of Palestine going back to Ottoman Turk times, or have any sense of the Russian/Polish origins of the Zionist movement. China clearly does not have a free press or representative government, so grievances in that nation are not aired in public but are permitted to fester hoping they will either be controlled by the police or will go away with time. I dare say there is one other dynamic at work in China, and I say this because of close fond associations I have with Chinese born friends. Asians have this sense of face that Westerners simply do not have. I have one close Chinese born friend who thinks if she does not complete college she cannot be close to me because it will be a "shame on my face". I laugh and try to convince her this is simply not the case in America, but this is how she thinks. Stuff happens to her and her family that is nothing to me that she considers shameful. She is 41 and attending college studying engineering and if she does not earn an A on every single exam and in every class she is ashamed! I try to tell her it took me three times to pass Linear Algebra with a C and it took her once to do it with a B, but she considers the sub A performance to be "shame on her face". Amazing to me. I suspect this notion of face will make having a free press and representative government difficult in China. In the west politicians are routinely vilified in the press, poked fun of in political cartoons and called all manner of names by their political opponents. So much for face! China and her government take offense when it's many flaws are exposed in the press, and often actively suppresses the press. China needs, I think, and I don't mean to be offensive by saying this, to learn that criticism is healthy to build a better society. Problems do not go away simply because they are too embarrassing to talk about. Problems need to discussed freely in the press and solutions debated publicly. When this happens, aggrieved parties seldom feel a need to resort to violence to be heard.
Last edited:
The mainstream media in the west, well since they are also the mainstream hub for news, they are basicly the mainstream media in the entire world, every other news agency are mostly just copy and paste thier stories.
But you are right in saying not all of them are same, some did report in a more objective way than other, that been said, still 80% of them are not that objective.
Pretty much every news agency's report of the incident seems to indicating that the chinese military have opened fire against the Uigher first and stated this as the reason why the Uighers rioted, trying to give them some kind of justification for the bloodshed, while at the same time, there exist absolutely NO such evidence to support this claim at all. But since china is a communist country, thier offcial story are considered untrustworthy, these foreign journalist can therefore just say what ever they want with or without evidence, citing rumours and even make up thier own, just claim the source want to stay anonymous "in fear of goverment and police", they risk absolutely nothing in reporting news in a "politically correct" way rather than a unbiased way.
The chinese goverment only show you the story of only one side in many cases, this is not new knowleadge, while the western media however, show you a discolored and selective story of both side, using suggestive and indicative methods and a careful choose of using of words, where to highlight and different sequence of infomation.
This is a PR war, and a ugly one from both side.
Mr T
Senior Member
There might be similiarities, i.e. that parties felt aggrieved, but that doesn't mean you can put the two events on the same level.
Osama Bin-Lala was the son of a wealthy man with high-ranking connections. He had no reason to feel that he was being held back (quite the reverse!), nor did the bombers in question. Their grievances were to do with US foreign policy amongst other things supporting Israel and interfering with their desire to build an international Islamic caliphate. The Uighurs were complaining about things like being left behind in China's economic boom years. It really is very different.
Amen.
That's still rather arbitrary. Who's in the 20% that are objective?
Actually the media reports I read said that events weren't clear and/or offered both sides of the story. I don't remember newspapers repeatedly stating the allegation of the Police being the cause made as fact.
Any journalist can say whatever they want. There's no International Media Truth Agency who blast their way on to news floors and hold someone at gunpoint when they try to write something that's not "true".
You think China's the only country who has dodgy reports made about it? Every country gets similar treatment at some point. The difference is that where they treat journalists better, journalists both find it easier to conduct their research, find the good story and are more likely to give the authorities more time to put their case. Because for so long foreign journalists have been harassed (in real life) and attacked (in the press) by the Chinese authorities, they're not going to give them the benefit of the doubt. It would take years of goodwill from Beijing and the local governments to turn that around.
If the Chinese authorities want to keep complaining about foreign journalism, they can, but those journalists are not going to change until they're consistently treated with respect for a prolonged period of time.
You're generalising again. The foreign media doesn't always report things perfectly, but who does? You're holding them to a standard that doesn't exist anywhere in the world. For the media as you will find around the world, they often do a reasonable job of putting more than one side of the story.
Last edited:
Ambivalent
Junior Member
Engineer
Major
It is the responsibility of a journalists to report facts. If they want to say whatever they want, then that falls into fiction, and is not part of journalism.
Also, let me point out that journalists can't say whatever they want. Recall that after 9-11, several journalists suggested that America's foreign policy was a cause. Western censorship came in and the journalists were fired afterward.
If the western media wants respect from the Chinese government and Chinese people, they can. But first, they need to report in an objective way. In the mean time, the Chinese government should stop blocking information, and as a sign of good will, show the west's bias reports on CCTV's 6-o'clock news and let the western media discredit themselves.
Last edited:
Ambivalent
Junior Member
The press doesn't owe any government anything. They are logically in confrontation with government and this is entirely healthy. Likewise, and advocacy press is essential. Different political views are represented by competing media. Without this there can be no free dissemination of information. The opposing points of view keep both sides honest by exposing, often gleefully, their perception of the other sides falsehood and omissions. Here are a trio of quotes from James Madison that nicely sum up my opinion of press freedom.
To the press alone, chequered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression.
A man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them.
A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce, or a tragedy, or perhaps both.
Rather than stifle or regulate the press, let is be perfectly free and allow people to make up their own minds. When I see efforts to regulate the press I see governments who do not give their own citizens credit for having the wisdom necessary to manage their own affairs, as if their citizens were children requiring direction.
To the press alone, chequered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression.
A man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them.
A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce, or a tragedy, or perhaps both.
Rather than stifle or regulate the press, let is be perfectly free and allow people to make up their own minds. When I see efforts to regulate the press I see governments who do not give their own citizens credit for having the wisdom necessary to manage their own affairs, as if their citizens were children requiring direction.
GreenestGDP
Junior Member
:nana: Answer these:
1) Why did the Uighur attacks against Han & Hui in Xinjiang happen simultaneously at the same time, on at least 8 different locations in Urumqi?
Straight Fact: :nono:
The terrorist Uighur ringleader ( Rebiya Kadeer ) is hiding and being nicely protected by "you know who" in ( Washington DC, USA )
2) Why did ( Rebiya Kadeer ) call her brother in Urumqi in advance, and warned him to stay clear, because of the impending Uighur attacks against Han & Hui?
If the Uighur attacks against Han & Hui were spontaneous as were propagandized by the western media, then ... ...
3) Why did ( Rebiya Kadeer ) know the Uighur attacks against Han & Hui before the events happened?
4) Which country "you know who" did recently ( on 10 JUN 2009 ) release 17 Uighur terrorists from Guantanamo into a safe hiding in Palau?
5) Did you know that in Palau, the 17 Uighur terrorists from Guantanamo got wonderful welcoming kits in the forms of wonderful mobile phones by "you know who" agents?
People say timing is everything.
Do you think "you know who" also believe that timing is everything?
6) Did you know that ( 1 OCT 2009 ) is a huge milestone 60th birthday for People's Republic of China?
The huge milestone 60th PRC birthday is only 3 months away.
Do you think someone wants to destroy or at the very least depress the huge 60th celebration in the awesome achievements of PRC?
:nono: Answer: Let's be clear ... ...
Western Media = ( Media in USA, Media in England, Media in Israel, Media in France, Media in Canada, Media in Australia, Media in Germany, Media in Italy, Media in India, Media in all NATO block countries )
Just connect the dots and the Western Media means the Western Media in the countries that are looking at "you know who" for leadership.
They are very simailar,
Rebiya Kadeer was the richest woman in china during her time, she was in the china's highest political body at that time, had 11 kids, promoted as a national hero in china. She had no reason to feel that she was being held back, nor did the Uighurs in this case. Their grievances were to do with china policy amongst other things not allowing their independence.
20%?? That is still too high, just did a search on google.news, using china as the key word. One can see how biased the real world is towards china and now Chinese. Even the ABC clip posted here never said a single world about how many Chinese had died; all they said was 1/3 of the dead are Uighurs. It’s almost like Chinese dead don't count or somthing.
newspapers? do people still read those? http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif On the same google search one can find these link on the first page. The PM of turkey is even calling this as 'a genocide'.
I don't think that is the case at all, maybe I am just 'old fashioned'. I remember there was a time when a journalist had integrity associated with it, but time changes...
- Status