U.S. imposes new rules on state-owned Chinese media over propaganda concerns

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I think we set this precedent with RT. Personally I'm not a fan, it should be personal responsibility to distinguish whether a source is credible or not. I see the death of critical thinking as one of the biggest threats to the world along with trying to make personal responsibility taboo.

Why would anyone ask their government to tell them what a legitimate outlet is?

Our government has been just as sloppy as China on all of this, my trust for them isn't much higher.

You're misunderstanding. This is for government owned media outlets.

We shouldn't let the people of America be deceived by state run Chinese propaganda from a chinese state owned media source.

No; we shouldn't. It's not like private news agencies have to do this. If the chinese government is releasing propaganda on purpose; you're of the opinion that our government should just allow that to happen? That's a threat to national security.

If you were a critical thinker, you'd think about this for a moment.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: chr0naut

The press support for the Hong Kong protests are clear evidence.

Can you cite an occurrence of this ?
From an official Chinese news group.

hongkongfp.com...

thediplomat.com... iwan-keeps-its-press-free/

Press Freedom Index
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China, generally, does not have a free press. I totally agree with that. The US isn't at the top of the list, either, though, and I was suggesting that this latest political move is a further downgrade to freedom.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: chr0naut

That would be a false equivalence. China has no free press and their operations worldwide are propaganda arms of the Chinese government.

What China does to its own citizens, by having nothing but government controlled propaganda hidden under the guise of media, is the same as the Nazi controlled propaganda.

Not all of the Chinese press is under the control of the Chinese government. The press support for the Hong Kong protests are clear evidence.

But, apparently, it has escaped you that the US has a 'less free' press now, too.

Which Chinese press that is based inside of China is not censored by the government of China? The reporting on the Hong Kong protests was carried by the press of the whole free world. I doubt the tone of articles in Chinese government controlled press was pro protests.

Actually, we have more sources of information than ever in history in the US. Our Internet is not controlled or filtered. We don't have any government censors. The only control here is done by the owners of privately owned sites. We are all free to start our own press and report anything we like. You think you can do that in China?

a reply to: chr0naut

That's Taiwan and Hong Kong. Hong Kong I suspect won't have it for long. You kind of went far afield to make that point.

a reply to: SRPrime

You're misunderstanding. This is for government owned media outlets. We shouldn't let the people of America be deceived by state run Chinese propaganda from a chinese state owned media source.

I want to access whatever information I want. It's easy for me, or anyone really, to know China is a dictatorship and not a credible source. I do want to see what they're running though so I can get a feel for their angle and what they're trying to signal to us and their citizens.

It's not a big deal if our government deems them foreign belligerent actors... Because, that's true. I doubt that is going to stop us from accessing it, for now.

But, this line will continue to get blurred... So I'm not particularly a fan of it especially when it's not really serving a purpose at the moment than telling everyone what we already know, China bad. I don't need nerfed and sterilized access to information someone is trying to "protect" me from. I'm a big boy and can decide what is credible and what is not. I think most large outlets are BS anyways, not just them.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Thenail
a reply to: Doctor Smith

We should outlaw propaganda in the USA . Any news outlet is the government talking to you . The government uses the news to tell you everything they want you to believe

Problem is, who deems what propaganda?

As we can already see, everyone has a different list.

i would define it as:

1. words in the news that elicit a desired emotional response instead of simply reporting facts.
2. opinion expressed as fact.
3. news filtered to make a political party look bad/good
4. news sources that only highlights the "bad" of one political party and the "good" of another.
5. news that does not fact check.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: chr0naut

That's Taiwan and Hong Kong. Hong Kong I suspect won't have it for long. You kind of went far afield to make that point.

Yes, it was a stretch. I openly admit that.

The point is that two 'wrongs' don't make a 'right'.

You can't excuse the actions of the US administrations by saying 'he did it too'.

a reply to: chr0naut

How is acknowledging China's news sources being propaganda tools interfering with their press anyway? This seems to be about what they own and who they are bringing into the country more than anything. They are basically spying operations as well as propaganda tools. All this does is give the State Dept. a way to monitor what they own and who they are bringing in or out of the country.

Makes perfect sense to me.

I would be worried if they blocked them, like China does to others.

a reply to: subfab

In my opinion almost every large outlet offends most or all of your list. But I also don't want them to be censored just because that's my opinion. The only way I'd get what I want is if people woke up and saw the war being fought for their minds. I highly doubt that will ever happen, but I wouldn't force any of my beliefs on them, because I hate when that gets done to me, which is pretty much all the time.

I don't take any outlet for their word, and if they make a large claim I see who the source is (if they are named or it's all alleged), what other angles or rebuttals there are out there, and if it passes simple logic (I'm not a pro but I try).

a reply to: Blaine91555

My guess is we already keep eyes on Chinese nationals who are part of a news organizations since they have ongoing corporate (and other) alleged espionage cases in almost every state.

But in my opinion, this is just sabre rattling and symbolic more than any actual meaningful measures. I sure hope I'm wrong, but understand I'm a bit skeptical whenever the feds decide to change the landscape for our protection. It usually ends up turning into infringement on basic rights.

I get that a lot of people trust the current administration, but this could lay groundwork for future admins to take a bit more in this space.

Again, my biggest thing is what does this really do besides set precedence? We're in a free society, and they'll be able to get publicly available information just as we all can, and air their propaganda on the internet like anyone else. Maybe this forces them out of plain sight so to speak and makes it a bit harder to spot. But the real problem is our society isn't naturally vigilant and healthily skeptical as it is on their search for information if they search at all.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: chr0naut

How is acknowledging China's news sources being propaganda tools interfering with their press anyway? This seems to be about what they own and who they are bringing into the country more than anything. They are basically spying operations as well as propaganda tools. All this does is give the State Dept. a way to monitor what they own and who they are bringing in or out of the country.

Makes perfect sense to me.

I would be worried if they blocked them, like China does to others.

OK, they said it was due to concerns about Chinese propaganda.

What they are actually doing is collecting personnel details and asset lists.

How could this inhibit the influence of propaganda, except by using it to place pressure on the journalists by detaining them and/or seizing assets?

This bit of legislature doesn't sound like the right tool for the job.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

I got excited until I read the article and Disney wasn't one of the five corps listed. =/

a reply to: chr0naut

The State Dept. can control who comes and goes and what they buy into. Makes sense to me. China exerts far more control over our press in China. It's somewhat of a tit for tat.

a reply to: chr0naut

Your post has no bearing in reality. Zero. Nothing is being censored except possible foreign propaganda.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: chr0naut

How is acknowledging China's news sources being propaganda tools interfering with their press anyway? This seems to be about what they own and who they are bringing into the country more than anything. They are basically spying operations as well as propaganda tools. All this does is give the State Dept. a way to monitor what they own and who they are bringing in or out of the country.

Makes perfect sense to me.

I would be worried if they blocked them, like China does to others.

OK, they said it was due to concerns about Chinese propaganda.

What they are actually doing is collecting personnel details and asset lists.

How could this inhibit the influence of propaganda, except by using it to place pressure on the journalists by detaining them and/or seizing assets?

This bit of legislature doesn't sound like the right tool for the job.

Are foreign agents tasked with propaganda journalists?

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I got excited until I read the article and Disney wasn't one of the five corps listed. =/

Their are many US Companies but they are privately owned. If not anyone can buy them.

America's Largest Private Companies

By allowing anyone to buy the company on the stock market you lose control of the companies. I can buy foreign companies just as easily. I just don't like totalitarian countries buying up everything.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I think we set this precedent with RT. Personally I'm not a fan, it should be personal responsibility to distinguish whether a source is credible or not. I see the death of critical thinking as one of the biggest threats to the world along with trying to make personal responsibility taboo.

Why would anyone ask their government to tell them what a legitimate outlet is?

Our government has been just as sloppy as China on all of this, my trust for them isn't much higher.

No, not with the censorship that is spreading around the world. The death of critical thinking comes when all you have to get your information from are state run sources in the guise of independent media outlets, who then use their power to silence smaller independent sources.

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Trump is endlessly doing good things in the USA.


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration said on Tuesday said it will begin treating five major Chinese state-run media entities with U.S. operations the same as foreign embassies, requiring them to register their employees and U.S. properties with the State Department.

One official said that the disclosures would help the State Department better understand how the entities operate in the United States.

U.S. imposes new rules on state-owned Chinese media over propaganda concerns

Call me crazy if youd like, but I would have thought this would already be a thing the governments did. After all what's to stop a spy from pretending to be a reporter?

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I got excited until I read the article and Disney wasn't one of the five corps listed. =/

Their are many US Companies but they are privately owned. If not anyone can buy them.

America's Largest Private Companies

By allowing anyone to buy the company on the stock market you lose control of the companies. I can buy foreign companies just as easily. I just don't like totalitarian countries buying up everything.

I know this is just a conspiracy....... But wouldn't those entities, that own the public stock market have an advantage over private companies? This would drive them out of business perhaps. Then the big companies would have competition removed. The public stock market is being held up by USA cash. But private businesses are only getting loans??????????? This will get them in dept through no fault of their own????????