Miscellaneous News

[Mt1701d]

Then on what basis does the CCP say censorship of international media in China, including the internet, are "internal affairs"? Or is it your view that it's ok for non-Chinese citizens such as myself and foreign governments to criticise censorship in China because it concerns the international media as well as domestic Chinese media? That would certainly be an unpopular position on this forum and PRC social media.

It’s interesting how you are arguing, responding to a ruling vs a demand to have a change in law is somehow the same thing... Are you equating the demand for a change of law (censorship rules in China) which is internal affairs vs a response to a ruling, which is open to challenge by the UK’s own rules...

The money is for the BBC (and a small amount goes to other channels like Channel 4). The government does not have discretion to not pay the funds to the BBC. If it didn't the BBC would take the government to court and the courts would order the money be handed over.

Also how the BBC is funded is irrelevant because it is not controlled by a political party. It isn't even controlled by the British state. Financing does not mean control.

Depends on how you look at it... while its true the government must pass the money from the tv license to the BBC + others... the government also determines the amount to set as the tv license fee and is reviewed every year, plus during the decision of setting the license fee the government could ask the BBC to take on additional responsibility... there is also the way in which the BBC’s mission is set out via the royal charter which sets out the obligatory of the BBC and is under review every ten years... it may not be that the government control every single decision made but it arguably does have some form of control... For the sake of argument if the BBC suddenly decided to full pro-CCP, no matter how unlikely, the government can step in, should the government view the BBC’s actions as not provide a good public service... my point is the stated mission of the BBC can be interpreted and actions enforced...

I honestly have no idea what you mean. The BBC carries critical reports of government internal and foreign policy. It hosts critics of both internal and foreign policy. It doesn't just repeat ministerial statements.

My point is that the 2 organisation has different methods of operations and reporting, one concentrates on critical reporting of event with huge amount of opinion, on more than one occasion in the name of fairness they host people that go on and talk obvious and complete gibberish, the other focuses on the facts of the matter, you might say they are repeating ministerial directions but they also as far as I know, don’t out right lie and call it an opinion, while ignoring the statements of the other side...

CGTN is required by Chinese law to follow media directives handed down by Chinese regulators. That isn't the same as to say it just repeats statements made by Chinese ministers. Along with other Chinese media groups it is handed instructions on how to cover various issues. China Digital Times publishes

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of these, but I'm sure they're available elsewhere.

Regarding the Chinese Kuomintang’s March 7 by-election for chairperson, it is important to keep it low-key. You may report objective news on the circumstances and results of the by-election to Taiwanese and foreign readers, but do not hype related topics. Reports must not touch on our relationship with the Kuomintang, and must not analyze or predict future cooperation between the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and the CCP. If the person elected makes critical, false, or negative remarks about issues concerning the mainland and cross-Strait relations, they can be criticized. (March 7, 2020) [

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

]

In contrast the BBC receives no such directives.

Again difference in methodology of operations... the current state owned Chinese media has been always operated as such.

Again, you're ignoring the Ofcom rules. CGTN had their licence revoked because it is ultimately controlled by a political party, the CCP. No one would expect a Chinese state TV channel to just run negative stories about China or even to be negative about China in the round.

If you have evidence that Al Jazeera is controlled by a political party, you're free to make a complaint to Ofcom. But my guess is they will want some evidence

Actually no it wasn’t... it was revoked due to the owner of said license not having ‘editorial responsibility’ and one of the potential recourse was rejected because of your controlled by political party argument. But I don’t recall whether there were additional recourse discussed or at they haven’t mentioned details in news reports

It means one of two things. One, the no political party ownership rule did not exist when the licence was granted and CCTV-9/CGTN wasn't in breach of the rules. Two, the rule existed but Ofcom simply didn't know enough about the channel's ownership to refuse the licence. If the licence was granted in error that doesn't mean CGTN can complain Ofcom finally understood that it was controlled by the CCP.

If the first was true... how convenient is the timing of these rule changes for a time when there is huge political tension between the two countries, further in the case of changes itself from no restrictions or having restrictions, it is obvious that a Chinese state owned broadcaster would never be able to comply due to how the Chinese state owned media operates in the first place... I don’t know, if these were the case sounds like it was targeted... like political bias/suppression disguised as fairness... there is also a curious question of why political parties in the uk did not have their own channels and have to rely on the BBC for any campaign messages

For the second case, that is even more ridiculous since the UK and the west has been calling Chinese state owned media the propaganda arm of the CCP for like at least 3 decades... prior to 3 decades ago it probably wasn’t important enough for them to even bother... anyway the fact that the channel was call CCTV-9 wasn’t obvious enough it was part of CCTV group, the most major broadcaster of the Chinese state and by extension according to UK the CCP...

 

[Gatekeeper]

The article suggests Americans should go to Taiwan to learn to speak Mandarin. I gather that written Chinese is slightly different between the two countries, is there any difference in spoken Mandarin?

No. Spoken is the same. Maybe assent. We've teachers in our Chinese school from China and Taiwan.

Written is the same as those in Hong kong. Where as mainland Chinese is just a simplify version of it. so it is easily understood between the two.

 

[Gatekeeper]

Depends on how you look at it... while its true the government must pass the money from the tv license to the BBC + others... the government also determines the amount to set as the tv license fee and is reviewed every year, plus during the decision of setting the license fee the government could ask the BBC to take on additional responsibility... there is also the way in which the BBC’s mission is set out via the royal charter which sets out the obligatory of the BBC and is under review every ten years... it may not be that the government control every single decision made but it arguably does have some form of control... For the sake of argument if the BBC suddenly decided to full pro-CCP, no matter how unlikely, the government can step in, should the government view the BBC’s actions as not provide a good public service... my point is the stated mission of the BBC can be interpreted and actions enforced...

You have a patients of a saint. My young apprentice! Lol.

May I add? Which his twisted mind conviently leaves out. Is The appointment of the BBC chairman is always appointed by government. You've got to ask why this is the case? We all know why. And I think he does too, which is why he left this very important details.

Also, during the Falklands war, only the BBC and other vetted journalists are allowed to report. A ministry of information was set up. I remember I was in Switzerland at the time a British war ship was blown up. I came back the next day and nothing was reported at least a week later. I was telling my friends this, and they all accused me of lying at the time. That's how conditioned get are in believing BBC always tell the "truth"!

 

[BrightFuture]

China is in a budding alliance with Russia. Don’t blame Ukraine for not cooperating.

Ever since the coup and the ongoing civil war, Ukraine became quite literally a fascist America's/EU's ass eating shithole. Russo-Chinese relations have nothing to do with this, anyone that knows Ukraine knew this was going to happen. They can't do anything without the US having a say in it, I mean, they were the ones that helped them with the cup, and the ongoing civil war, after all.

 

[hashtagpls]

Taiwan is pressuring the EU to get in line with US Hawks' priorities regarding China:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358356115415826439

Alongside, slow walking TSMC chips meant for german automotive factories, looks like Tsai is gearing up for a declaration of de jure independence later this year

 

[NiuBiDaRen]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358125478113144835

 

[hashtagpls]

China also has to sanction ScoMo and Frydenberg; particularly Frydenberg who blocked all Chinese investment into Australia, irrespective of how innocuous it was. For instance, what was the national security reason for blocking investment into Lion Milk?
China must also sanction the Murdoch family as well as the Garnaut family for their consistent anti China stance in the media.

 

[Mr T]

It’s interesting how you are arguing, responding to a ruling vs a demand to have a change in law is somehow the same thing..

I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Ofcom is the UK's TV broadcast regulator. It is the authority for regulating TV channels.

If the CCP has the right to object, I would expect it to be less defensive when other countries criticise censorship within China. It can't have it both ways.

Depends on how you look at it... while its true the government must pass the money from the tv license to the BBC + others... the government also determines the amount to set as the tv license fee......

You're talking about a future possibility where the BBC becomes like CGTN and starts following editorial direction from the government/ruling party. Call me when that happens - it's not the case now.

Again difference in methodology of operations... the current state owned Chinese media has been always operated as such.

Too bad. It's not allowed under Ofcom rules.

Actually no it wasn’t... it was revoked due to the owner of said license not having ‘editorial responsibility’ and one of the potential recourse was rejected because of your controlled by political party argument.

That's the whole point. Ofcom's investigation held that CGTN was not controlled by SCML but the CCP. The fact that SCML was not the true authority was not the deciding factor, because CGTN tried to rectify that as you said. But the rectification was insufficient.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"and because we consider that CGTNC would be disqualified from holding a licence, as it is controlled by a body which is ultimately controlled by the Chinese Communist Party"

Note the word "is" not "would be". CGTN is, in Ofcom's view, already controlled by the CCP. As such it cannot be allowed to retain a licence whoever is named as being the operator/controller/owner. The issue with SCML being named was a technicality that started the revocation of the licence but not the deciding factor in CGTN having to come off the air.

If the first was true... how convenient is the timing of these rule changes for a time when there is huge political tension between the two countries

Ofcom's investigation began in 2019. It's unlikely the rules would have changed as recently as that, but even if they did it wouldn't have made any difference because 2019 was not the flashpoint. Even in early 2020 the UK government was hoping for good relations with China after leaving the EU. It was 2020 that was the real decider.

I also expect that the chance of the rules changing in the last 5 years is low, because otherwise the Conservative Party would have tried setting up a TV channel when it was in Opposition until 2010 if it had been allowed.

For the second case, that is even more ridiculous since the UK and the west has been calling Chinese state owned media the propaganda arm of the CCP for like at least 3 decades...

Again, see my previous comments about separation of powers. Even if some UK politicians said that Chinese state own media was a propaganda arm of the CCP, that is irrelevant to Ofcom's job. It acts independently. Rule of law means that Ofcom has to apply its regulations irrespective of political pressure. Russia Today tried to challenge Ofcom's recent-ish fine in the courts but lost. If CGTN/CCTV-9 had its licence revoked or blocked decades ago just because of what politicians were saying, it could have sought legal redress and would have won if Ofcom had no evidence to back up its position.

I've tried to demonstrate how Ofcom has been acting fairly and that CGTN was simply not following the rules. Perhaps that's because you see UK politics through the prism of how things work in China, where the government/CCP says something and the regulators/media jump to it. I understand if that's the case but it simply isn't how the UK works with respect to broadcast regulation.

If you refuse to accept the explanations I've given I don't know what more I can say.

 

[Gatekeeper]

Oh look there goes another tumble weed!

That remain me. Anyone know who this fine gymnast is?

 

[hashtagpls]

Anglos have been put on notice that if they boycott the Beijing winter olympics, that they will be sanctioned:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358387752459411458