this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2026
722 points (98.8% liked)

Socialism

6704 readers
188 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 31 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)
[–] CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 14 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I'm not sure people who want to shit on China will trust a gov.cn website, regardless of the content

[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 26 points 6 days ago

I don't expect them to. Even if I provided a link from whatever their approved list of sources happens to be I doubt I'd get real engagement anyway. It's mostly for interested third parties.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago (1 children)

people who want to shit on China

Won't believe anything that doesn't shit on China.

[–] CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't know, I think it's good to somewhat push people to confront their contradictions, and they won't if they think the claim cannot be trusted. If the claim is made by some lib source they trust though? At least they would have to confront the facts and couldn't dismiss them outright.

That is if they're discussing (or just reading) in good faith

I think it's important in public spaces especially, where the person you're discussing with is not the only one reading the messages & people of varying political stances are around. In that context, a NYT article that is pro-china (could happen in some instances I'm sure, lol) will be far more impactful than an official statement from the PRC

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 2 points 6 days ago

They downvote legacy *media in these spaces quite frequently; more often than not.