Quote:
Originally Posted by smallpox
All I could find was:...
|
It is everyone’s right to choose whether or not to read an article. But if he decides to comment on an article, particularly if he wants to jump into the conclusion that something was missing altogether, perhaps it would be better to read the whole article first.
Quote:
LOL it IS in Italians, so beside a few names, I have no idea how Chinadaily might have distorted it in translation or for that matter who these people are that I should put blind faith in their article that I can't read. I'm just going to say this:
Serious citations only please
and in English or French.
|
First of all, Google auto-translation does a reasonable job in the Italian to English mode, and you could have had some idea if China Daily distorted it badly. The point is, maybe you can’t judge on the credibility of these Italian journalists, but you can at least verify the veracity of Chinadaily’s translation fairly easily.
Secondly, not all things were reported in English or French, but they could still be happening.
Quote:
|
No, but if China Daily posted anything controversial (meaning anything relating to China) then I have little reason to waste my time reading it. China Daily has proven to be nothing more than nationalist propaganda.
|
Anything relating to China is controversial? Didn’t you find that statement a little bit, eh, over-generalizing?
Also, I think the best way to learn something is to view it from different angles. Not understanding one’s opponent’s stance puts him at disadvantage most of the time.
Quote:
|
My whole point of saying I don't watch CNN was to show that there's no such thing as western media.
|
Tell that to Washington Post, the Guardian and Die Zeit (it’s called
Westliche Medien in German). I didn’t invent the word. It existed long before the current standoff between Chinese netizens and some western media.
Quote:
|
You can't just say western media do the same things because it's a gross over-generalization.
|
You are certainly good at twisting words. Do you remember why I cited CNN? I quoted an article by an Italian journalist, and you responded that “Wow… if it is in Italian, it must be valid.” implying that I put blind faith into foreign media, right? As far as I am concerned, Italian media is part of the “western media”. I quoted CNN to show you that I am aware of the media distortion in the west, hence I know that the Italian quote could also be distorted representation of the interview. Furthermore, I said
some western media have a history of biased reporting. Does this sound like a gross over-generalization? I didn’t say ALL, I said SOME. Are you going to argue against that statement?
Quote:
|
I can say Chinese media is biased and unreliable BECAUSE there's only ONE source -- the CCP.
|
Define Chinese media. Does it include those written/spoken in Chinese, or by Chinese? Or does it only include those state-run newspapers and TV stations? If it’s the latter, of course there’s only one source, by definition (state-run). Have I ever questioned this? There is no need for you to set this up as a straw man to beat up in our debate here. If it’s the former, your statement is way off the mark. Since you have shown your (rudimentary, maybe?) understanding of Chinese in a few occasions, you may try the following internet nexus (add
http://www. to the front), particularly the blogs and political forums within:
MITBBS.com (未名空间)
CREADERS.com （万维）
HUAREN.us（华人）
WENXUECITY.com（文学城）
TIANYA.com.cn（天涯）
These are all maintained by Chinese, most of which are pro-China. Several are accessible from within China; some are even based in the mainland. Yet, one will have no problem finding all sorts of information there, including sharp criticism of the government, even those advocating Tibetan Independence.
Now if you don't understand Chinese enough to access those popular Chinese news sites, then your conclusion of Chinese media having one source is a severely underinformed one.
You can criticize CCTV-x all you want, but it doesn’t mean that Chinese posters here necessarily know less about China than your average Joes. Many young Chinese people nowadays, both inside and outside of China, get their information from sources other than the official mouthpieces. If you include the foreign language media, they can certainly obtain a lot more information than what you thought (they could).
Quote:
|
Western media on the other hand is a giant contingency of various private individuals with their own objectivity and sometimes subjectivity.
|
So, is there such thing as “western media”? It seems to me that you just defined “western media” here. A little bit self-inconsistent, wasn’t it?
Quote:
|
They can be VISUAL all you want, I'm still not going to sink to levels of citing youtube videos....
|
You are right. Let’s all float to the level of not citing anything at all, as you seemed to prefer. Hey, you don’t have to believe in youtube videos, but you could at least still find useful information that you can verify if you so desired.
Quote:
|
See now THAT I can believe. Alright, the CIA was involved in sneaking the Dalai Lama out of Tibet. Makes me like the CIA even more. Good for them.
|
I can only provide the facts. How people view these facts is their own problem. CIA was involved in a lot of other subversive acts, such as the infamous Pinochet’s coup and repression in Chile. I am sure some people also love these.
Quote:
|
I guess I was profiling Cole's motives from his previous posts earlier in the thread.
|
Glad that you finally acknowledged this.
Quote:
"If anything, it further supports my statement quoted above."
Then what is "it"?
|
It refers to the Cole quote (
“Dalai worked with Beijing for 10 years without any drama till he was led astray by CIA and deviant lamas.”) you provided in response to my statement quoted above that
”I still couldn't find any post by Cole stating that CIA was behind the current event, other than that CIA has a not-so-graceful role in the early years.”
Clear?