It doesn't affect the point you wanted to make, but I think it's good to point out inaccuracies even in contexts where they don't matter, since they might matter in others.
In the past few years, China seems to have a dispute with many countries - Australia, USA, UK, Japan, various countries in Southeast Asia, and more.
Perhaps this quote is appropriate in this situation: “If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.”
It's not a joke, it's a way to insult both someone's opinion ("nobody would write that if they weren't paid") and their economic standing (because they only get half a yuan for their effort).
Insults against other users are, of course, against the HN guidelines and should be flagged.
I didn't mean to imply I thought it was funny per se, it would have been more accurate to say "didn't get the reference". If you aren't familiar with the terminology, it's quite confusing.
BBC getting it from all sides these days. The left don't like them because they are seen as too soft on the Government, the right don't like them as they are seen as too PC/Woke and weren't sufficiently pro-Brexit.
Well as another user has pointed out BBC has been banned since May 2018 https://en.greatfire.org/https/www.bbc.com. I don't know why Chinese companies/media outlets expect the same freedoms as everyone else when foreign companies and media outlets have practically none in China.
So I think you are being overconfident in your assessment of the situation for foreign media outlets in China. Some are blocked, some are not.
I also disagree with your suggestion that Chinese media shouldn't expect the same freedoms as everyone else just because China doesn't guarantee freedom of the press. There's no reason to copy them in that regard.
2. The Reuters article doesn't seem to weigh in on the key issue of fact: whether the BBC reporting on China is accurate or is "fake news" as claimed by the Chinese officials. If the reporting is accurate, then the "fake news" criticism is unjustified.
25 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 60.8 ms ] threadI wouldn't call that "never been accessible".
Perhaps this quote is appropriate in this situation: “If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.”
Insults against other users are, of course, against the HN guidelines and should be flagged.
Often coming with accusations of hurting the feelings of the Chinese people.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurting_the_feelings_of_the_...
I believe China is in a state of war with all of their neighbors. The CCP is diverting the Himalayan headwaters, which they all depend on.
China national here.
CNN: https://en.greatfire.org/https/www.cnn.com
Die Zeit: https://en.greatfire.org/https/www.zeit.de
Le Figaro: https://en.greatfire.org/https/www.lefigaro.fr
All currently accessible.
So I think you are being overconfident in your assessment of the situation for foreign media outlets in China. Some are blocked, some are not.
I also disagree with your suggestion that Chinese media shouldn't expect the same freedoms as everyone else just because China doesn't guarantee freedom of the press. There's no reason to copy them in that regard.
2. The Reuters article doesn't seem to weigh in on the key issue of fact: whether the BBC reporting on China is accurate or is "fake news" as claimed by the Chinese officials. If the reporting is accurate, then the "fake news" criticism is unjustified.