FYI, global times is a well known CCP mouthpiece.
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
34 points (80.4% liked)
World News
32317 readers
625 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Who do you think would have better data about Chinese trade than China?
white left assumes everyone except for other white sources are lying to them all the time
Who do you think would have a good reason to misrepresent the truth? China and Russia getting away with trade without US involvement is good for China and Russia, so it benefits them to state that even if that's not exactly what's going on.
In this case it makes a ton of sense given the sanctions against Russia, but I do try to look for independent verification of any large story when the only source has interests in misrepresenting the truth.
Pretty obvious that western media has a lot of great reasons to misrepresent the truth to keep people such as yourself thinking that disastrous policies western governments are pursuing are actually working.
Sure, which is why I try to get multiple sources.
The problem with countries like China (and probably Russia) is that their governments can directly interfere with news reporting. That's possible to an extent in western countries, but it's a lot less likely to happen without journalists making a big fuss because of our cultural and legal freedoms of the press.
I'm hesitant to believe anything when I have a single source, and I'm more hesitant if multiple sources are from the friendly countries where the governments have direct control over the media.
Doesn't the US have a track record of literally assassinating journalists who dig into things they aren't supposed to?
Doesn't the US also have a track record of hunting down whistleblowers around the world? Of extrajudicial surveillance and illegal international surveillance and mass surveillance?
Not sure the Western world has a great role model there.
Yes, the US is far from perfect, which it why is a good idea to get news from a variety of sources. I try to read about the Ukraine war from other perspectives, for example.
But those instances are:
- illegal and therefore quite rare
- generally limited to instances of revealing state secrets (as in the case of Assange, Snowdon, etc)
- very unpopular
So in general, journalists have much more freedom to criticize their government here in the US vs Russia or China, and to me that has value. It's not perfect and you can certainly get a lot of misinformation through strong biases here (i.e. many people assume their country is in the right), but it's way better in pretty much any western country than a country with a much more authoritarian government.
You can argue pretty much the exact same three points about government intervention in journalism everywhere.
Not really selling your point.
Your argument just seems like classic bothsidesism. Yes, western media isn't perfect, but western news media is far more free than Russian or Chinese media. So I'm gonna have a lot more skepticism about Russian and Chinese media than I do with US or European media.
In this case, I'd prefer something outside both regions. So maybe Indian news? Or my go-to, Al Jazeera.
So our standard is... "we're killing journalists and stifling perspectives, but not as much as the other guys?"
Great. I guess Western news media is driven by profits instead of government objectives, which makes things so much better.
No, our standard is, "we're killing journalists (very rarely) and stifling perspectives (rarely), and that's not okay, but at least that's just not expected like it is with the other guys."
That's under the assumption that perspectives are only rarely stifled...
Which I'd love to think is true, but really is a question of whether you consider "publishable but no one will read it" to be a stifled perspective or not.
What it really comes down to is how often journalistic suppression actually happens. I like to look at the extreme examples, such as the Edward Snowdon case. There was certainly some interference there, but that's surely nothing compared to what would happen if something similar happened in China or Russia.
The bigger issue that we have, imo, is that major media companies self-censor because they want to drive a narrative. But there's still high quantity journalism going on, you just need to look outside of the major news networks.
But if your high quality journalism only reaches 1% of the population while the other 99% of the population considers it fake news, what's the point? It'll have no political impact anyway, which defeats the purpose of journalistic integrity because good journalism isn't getting attention or shifting public perception.
You don't need to convince 99% of people, you only need to convince about 10% or so. Something like 80% of voters will vote a straight ticket in the US and ~10% confirmed they would split their vote.
The majority are going to go for the biased media of their choice that tends to support their side. That's just basic tribalism, and it's alive and well in the US and probably the rest of the world. 
.
Here's a media bias chart. As it turn out, I tend to get my news from Reason (I consider myself Libertarian, so it's my biased news of choice), BBC, The Guardian, and The New York Times, and occasionally a few others on that list. I rarely read/watch anything from the left or the right, though occasionally I'll read an article or two from The Daily Mail or Huffpost. I also like my local independent journalism (seems to be left leaning; I'm in a very conservative area, so I think it balances out).
There's a lot of variety and scrutiny in the US, and I'm sure the same is true in other western countries. Yes, sometimes governments interfere when there's a big news piece they don't like, but the truth eventually comes out. I can't say the same is true for Chinese or Russian news because those governments have so much control over their media vs western countries.
I agree with your thoughts on reading multiple sources, but in regards to your trust for Western over other countries see the Propaganda Model, specifically on sourcing, ownership, and anti-communism/fear
I'll have to check it out. I'm a fan of Noam Chomksy (esp. in linguistics), I just don't agree with a lot of his political conclusions.
Manufacturing Consent is a seminal work and consists of actual "case studies" where they contrast the coverage of similar news events occurring in communists countries at the time vs countries/groups allied with the US. It's pretty eye opening.
It's still applicable today, maybe even moreso with the increasing rate of media consolidation.
Also worth mentioning that if you look past the article into the actual context, you'd end up with a headline that reads: "Two struggling economies under the threat of collapse due to mismanagement and poor resource allocation begin trading their depreciating currencies in a desperate attempt to stay afloat."
Since when is China a struggling economy? They are kicking western ass year over year.
Just like many western outlets are mouthpieces for us in the West. If there are other sources that present different data please post them to dispute this.
I didn't dispute the data, I'm saying that the source isn't neutral.
The data may very well be accurate or not, I don't know enough to comment either way. I suspect it's not entirely accurate because both Russia and China have a history of massaging numbers and having inaccurate reporting.
But putting that aside - Russia and China both want to get rid of the US dollar as the dominant currency for their own interests. It's not surprising that Russia-China trades are now conducted mostly without the use of US dollars. The fact that this comes from a known government mouthpiece means it's just nationalist self-promotion.
Questioning the motive of the source is always good practice. If you see an article saying "Survey shows Hyundai emerges as the best car brand in 2023", it would make a difference if this news was taken from the Hyundai website or BBC.
It's not a matter of being pro-US or pro-Russia/China. There are skewed news sources in ever country, the US included.
What is CCP?
The folks with their dick in the asshole of the guy you are sucking off. Kind of difficult to see from your vantage point but everyone else can see it.
Gringo morfa tereso te va caber el facaso zopeda de toga.
Its the communist party
You could see this coming years in advance. People started dropping the dollar when American politicians weaponized the dollar to push their agenda on the rest of the world.
Keep weaponizing the dollar and there will be nobody left using it
They're not avoiding USD because they want to. They are avoiding because they don't have a choice.
The value of using USD is its consistency (compared to nearly all other world currencies). China regularly manipulates its currency and sovereign economic indicators. If Russia is holding lots of Yuan China has a huge amount of control over the fragile Russian economy. If China is holding lots of Rubles China has even MORE control.
Russia would far more prefer to settle in EUR, USD, or GBP, except they don't have those as choices.
view more: next ›