Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

OK, I'm a Noo Yawkah, born and bred (even if I'm currently exiled to the wastes of DC).

ANd I know it's kind of hard ot argue for any sort of 'purity' in Times Square.

I remember in 1995 they did a celebration for the anniversary of VJ Day complete with a reenactment of the famous Sailor-Nurse kiss. The only difference, this time they did it under a giant Suntory whiskey sign.

I laughed.

But when I was there for Sept 11 I spotted a new jumbotron. And there, in a square named after the @#$%ing NY Times, three stories tall, in gorgeous high res was a screen from...

Xinhua News.

Xinhua is the official news agency of the PRC, they're a propeganda arm of a dictatorship. THey regularly lie and bury stories about things like oh milk the kills babies so as not to cause social disharmony.

And someone sold them space for a jumbotron in the heart of Manhattan to show us all how happy Tibetans are and how on June 8, 1989 in the middle of Tiananmen Square, nothing happened.

Again it's Times Square, it's a place for all kinds of vices and greed is one of them. And I'm sure the Red CHinese paid a fair price but still pissing off people is never good for business. Who the hell thought this was a good idea?

Although I have read that their news agencies have got a lot more freedom than they once had. I think the government there has learned from the mistakes of Gorbachov and Glasnost, where the public were given everything all at once and the whole regime fell on its ass. Instead, the freedoms are coming gradually and in a measured way. Not to forget of course the difference between East and West, and attempting to proscribe western values to a culture that is much different (and much older in fact) than our own.

At least their execs get punished when they make a bad decision that results in something like that. I remember reading about a senior executive who had was responsible for sub-quality drugs (I think he was creaming money from it). He ended up being executed for it I believe.

Oh yeah, link

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2011/08/02/xinhua-takes-on-times-square/

Thread title is just a slight exaggeration.

The title did kind of have me getting ready to spring from bed and rally a militia to march on NY. Then I read the thread and I was like, "oh. not literally..." Then I considered marching on NY anyway.

daedalus wrote:The title did kind of have me getting ready to spring from bed and rally a militia to march on NY. Then I read the thread and I was like, "oh. not literally..." Then I considered marching on NY anyway.

Everything I've ever heard about New York has only made me want to march far, far away from it. . . this included.

If a dictatorship offered me money to play their stupid, transparently false news, I would take their money. I think you guys should to.

Either way they'll keep lying to their people, why shouldn't they give you some money along the way?

Pacific wrote:Although I think the government there has learned from the mistakes of Gorbachov and Glasnost, where the public were given everything all at once and the whole regime fell on its ass. Instead, the freedoms are coming gradually and in a measured way.

As is many other countries.

Y'know for months people were all spun up because a Muslim group wanted to open a community center a few blocks from the WTC. Utter and complete BS arguements were used for why Muslims can't practice their religion within X miles of Ground Zero.

But somehow the same fear mongers are silent about a Chinese propeganda jumbotron in Times Square.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Y'know for months people were all spun up because a Muslim group wanted to open a community center a few blocks from the WTC. Utter and complete BS arguements were used for why Muslims can't practice their religion within X miles of Ground Zero.

But somehow the same fear mongers are silent about a Chinese propeganda jumbotron in Times Square.

That might have just a little bit to do with Muslim terrorists knocking a couple tower down and killing a few thousand Americans...

China is not a threat.

Pacific wrote:Although I have read that their news agencies have got a lot more freedom than they once had. I think the government there has learned from the mistakes of Gorbachov and Glasnost, where the public were given everything all at once and the whole regime fell on its ass. Instead, the freedoms are coming gradually and in a measured way. Not to forget of course the difference between East and West, and attempting to proscribe western values to a culture that is much different (and much older in fact) than our own.

At least their execs get punished when they make a bad decision that results in something like that. I remember reading about a senior executive who had was responsible for sub-quality drugs (I think he was creaming money from it). He ended up being executed for it I believe.

I think you've spent too long watching the Xinhua jumbotron.

Yes China did learn the lesson from Glastnost, they liberalized the economic system but not the political.

Human rights in China are worse than they have been since 1989, with bloggers, artists Buddhist Monks, Catholic Priests and oh yes a Noble Peace Prize Winner being disappeared. Not arrested. Not tried. They just go away.

Asking questions about why XInhua did not report on poison milk, or how come schools collapsed in the Sichuan Earthquake is enough to get someone jail time.

Internet censorship grows every year.

The Chinese have for years used the same arguement about 'democracy is not compatible with Chinese culture'. But funny thing is democracy works fine in Taiwan (not to mention South Korea, Japan, Thailand, Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia...). And it was Chinese people who demanded democracy in Tiananmen square. And it's Chinese people going to jail now when they call for human rights.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:That might have just a little bit to do with Muslim terrorists knocking a couple tower down and killing a few thousand Americans...

China is not a threat.

We had a protesant terrorist blow up the federal building in Oklamhoma City and no one demanded churches be kicked out.

Al Qaida are murderers with Muslim rhetoric, they're no more good Muslims than the IRA are good Catholics or the Burmese Junta are good Buddhists. Painting all Muslims are terrorists is just what they hope for, they want a crusade and religious war. Christians and Muslims peacefully co-existing is their nightmare.

Poor form.
But hey dollars from the new kid with cash to spend > ethics.

fwiw that is NOT a reference to GW



althought it does apply

It's part of the great American hypocrisy. If a white guy does it he acted alone and wasn't a Christian. If an Arab does it all Muslims are evil. Didn't you get the memo?

Since the Empire State Building was lit up in yellow and red to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Communist take over of China, nothing in NYC surprises me.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Y'know for months people were all spun up because a Muslim group wanted to open a community center a few blocks from the WTC. Utter and complete BS arguements were used for why Muslims can't practice their religion within X miles of Ground Zero.

But somehow the same fear mongers are silent about a Chinese propeganda jumbotron in Times Square.

The response to the Ground Zero mosque was 132 different kinds of stupid. The solution isn't to be stupid about the Jumbotron as well.

I'm suprised they didn't just show a picture of this guy.

Could have been worse K_K, it could have been a Fox news screen with 24hr "news" straight from the brain of Chairman Murdoch.

The article says that it's a billboard, not a television.

However, I agree that the prevalence of state-run foreign news services into the United States (broadcast in English) is starting to become a worrying issue. For many of them it appears to be a political move to enhance their image within the United States:

Al-Jazeera (Qatar), RT (Russia), BBC (United Kingdom) and now Xinhua News (China) are all available from a number of domestic cable companies.

(I include the BBC because they're state-run, although they're less biased [or absurd, I'm looking at you RT] than the other networks).

The Russian one is absurd? Dang, I want to see it now.

biccat wrote:However, I agree that the prevalence of state-run foreign news services into the United States (broadcast in English) is starting to become a worrying issue. For many of them it appears to be a political move to enhance their image within the United States:

Could you expand upon why you consider it to be a worrying issue? Is the concern only over state-run media outlets, or over majority owned foreign media in general?

I don't yet know how I feel about this. I certainly don't have any real sympathy for China's government but can't quite conjure up a cogent argument about why this should be disallowed without it leading to a slippery slope of things we should not allow.

MrDwhitey wrote:The Russian one is absurd? Dang, I want to see it now.

Sometimes they provide real news. Sometimes they broadcast this type of thing. Or this.

And for the height of absurdity...

Ouze wrote:Could you expand upon why you consider it to be a worrying issue? Is the concern only over state-run media outlets, or over majority owned foreign media in general?

It's the concern over state-run media outlets. I have no problem with media that is owned by foreign corporations or individuals, because private owners will generally act according to standard economic forces (give people what they want => more advertisers => more income). Foreign governments, in contrast, will generally seek to advance their political messages.

If anyone spends much time watching BBC America, you can see the blatent political advertising that occurs. It's mostly about introducing British culture to Americans (not a bad thing, non-culinarily speaking), but it is clearly political. I couldn't imagine any public media company pushing an issue as strongly (to the extent that the BBC does it).

Ouze wrote:I don't yet know how I feel about this. I certainly don't have any real sympathy for China's government but can't quite conjure up a cogent argument about why this should be disallowed without it leading to a slippery slope of things we should not allow.

I'm not really sure whether there should be some government action to disallow these companies from running segments on US television.

The BBC are not state run Biccat
There is iirc some state funding, to supplement the licence fee required by a television user.

However the Government has no direct control over the service which is totally independent.

Thanks biccat! That channel looks... fun...

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:However the Government has no direct control over the service which is totally independent.

It may be an independent branch of the government, but the BBC is supported by tax that is collected under the auspices of government. That makes it a state-run network.

It isn't a tax collected by government - the BBC is responsible for collecting the license fee. The only input the government has is to set the license fee.

http://www.nao.org.uk/whats_new/0102/0102821.aspx?alreadysearchfor=yes

The TV licence fee is used to fund public service broadcasting and the BBC has been responsible for collecting the licence fee since 1991.

In fact, it is in the BBC charter that it must remain independent and free of political bias at all times.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_media

...the public broadcaster in the United Kingdom, the BBC, although funded by the public license fee and government, is independent of state control.

Thanks Filbert.

Successive governments on both sides of the house have at times claimed the BBC were biased against them. Which suggests that the BBC is doing something to annoy the government of the day. Hardly what one expects of a state controlled media.

All I'm going to say is...

Hurts doesn't it?

The rest of us have had to put up with an American invasion of our public spaces for years now. It would be nice if I could walk through my city without seeing countless advertisements for foreign cultural artefacts. It would be nice to restrict American businesses from entering the UK marketplace, and stop them elbowing out locals. That said, they buy the space fair and square. That freedom of exchange is important for our economy.

But hey, it's only protectionism when other countries do it, right?

I'd rather watch this than Fox News. It would probably be more informative and truthful as well.

I almost jumped on my horse and rode around screaming "The commies are coming! The commies are coming!"





edit: that last pic was way too big.

Is this going to be another thread where biccat steadfastly resists learning how the BBC operates?