News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
America is obviously implying China is especially untrustworthy. Is that actually true?
The distinction between China and United States is the Chinese state has a monopoly on information coming out of China that the United States doesn’t have. I’m free to point out when the state department says a bunch of bullshit in the US, Chinese citizens don’t have that same right
There's no monopoly, but the US certainly can control the narrative when it wants. Maybe you weren't alive for the lies about WMDs in Iraq. Or the Gulf of Tonken incident before that.
America lies about its enemies.
I was alive for the former but not the latter. I recall mass protests occurred for both incidents. It is a shame that more people didn’t see through the bullshit until after the fact but at the same time the government paid for these lies with eroded trust which makes it that much harder for them to sell a new lie in the future.
Yet you still trust America enough to tell you when China is lying, huh?
I’ve inspected enough of China’s foreign policy statements on my own to come to the conclusion that they aren’t trustworthy; I don’t need the US state department to tell me that.
Governments lie to save face or achieve their aims all the time. Authoritarian governments do it even more because there is even less accountability than there is in liberal democracies.
Okay, so why is America focusing on Chinese misinformation? Again, are they especially untrustworthy?
Because the bulk of China’s foreign policy goals are at odds with the United States’ foreign policy goals.
Fair enough, but I think that proves China's point - America treating China like an especially bad purveyor of misinformation is, itself, misinformation. They're just another country.
There's blind trust, and then there's trust with evidence. This is the latter, you seem to only understand the former.
No? I don't think we assume anything out of China is either true or false, we should try to look at it objectively and focus on the data.
Just assuming China is lying is wrong.
What if the only data you have available about China comes from the Chinese government? No liar will say they are lying.
So you just assume they're lying?
All we have to go on is past experience.
True. But you also found out they were lies, so...
Those lies killed millions of people...
Yes, and you know about them because the US is not that great at controlling "the narrative when it wants" which is what the topic of this discussion was before you realized you were wrong and tried to steer towards the number of killed people. Learn to stay on topic.
Yeah, I guess that's beside the point. It's just so horrific I got distracted.
I guess I'm just not really sure how "America gets caught when it lies" is proof that America is more trustworthy than China. Why is "yeah but you know they lied so it's fine" any kind of defense? And how does that prove China is somehow worse or less trustworthy?
If you are allowed to point out someones lies, they are more trustworthy than someone who you are not allowed to accuse of lying.
Ask Julian Assange about being allowed to point out US lies.
Just because the US gets caught doesn't mean it isn't also suppressing whistleblowers.
It's because you made up these arguments. No one here said the things you're implying. Just read through the thread again. You're constantly twisting words.
By singling out China and ignoring everyone else America is implying they are uniquely untrustworthy.
They're one of the biggest countries, they probably have one of the largest information campaigns.
If it's only a matter of size then surely they should be warning about Indian misinformation as well. The Hindu supremacy campaign has reached the point where they're literally changing the name of the country, that seems kind of worrying! But no, America won't insult India with accusations of misinformation.
Just China. Odd, isn't it?
Not really no.
Do you think China is not spending billions of dollars a year on foreign information manipulation? Do you think they haven't expanded efforts to shape the global information environment?
If they have, the US's claims (in this case specifically) can't be disinformation, since they would be true.
I don't think China is especially untrustworthy compared to any other major country. Do you?
I think they work more with soft power and information shaping than most countries yes.
I don't. I think they probably do engage in that, but no more than any other powerful nation.
Which makes the statement of the US true, and the statement of China false.
No, the US is claiming that China is somehow uniquely untrustworthy. Where are the warnings about Saudi Arabia? Or France? Or Israel?
America is singling out China. Why?
Where are they claiming China is unique? From the quotes I saw, they just claimed they were doing it a lot.
By singling out China and omitting all other purveyors of misinformation because they are US allies.
Off the top of my head, only North has a more comprehensive information firewall. And the common online whataboutism not-as-bad-as-the-US then taking about criticism of China is pulled straight from their foreign relations tactics. I wouldn't be surprised if they planted those arguments in online forums to start, and now the argument is self sustaining. Plus things like the nomenclature around Tiwan and other disputed territories is intentionally confusing.
The firewall doesn't spread misinformation, which is what the US is talking about.
I bet it is, but that doesn't make it misinformation.
The firewall does cause misinformation to spread by making their citizens and others in the country misinformed when talking to people outside, making them spread misinformation.
Again, 'what about' causes misinformation to spread by making conversation less useful.