All is not what it seems within China's High Speed Rail development.


latenlazy

Colonel
But that was your accusation on peoples perception of CDT.
I wasn't accusing anything about anyone's perceptions about the CDT. I was merely providing my own point of view on what the CDT does and does not do, and what kind of media source it is. Disagreement does not automatically translate to opposition. I have not said anything about anyone else's source of news, criticism or praise.

Anyways, if you want to continue this discussion I will gladly open another thread. I can't imagine BD being happy about derailing (no pun intended) the discussion. He's probably got his finger twitching over the vacation button right now.
 
Last edited:

i.e.

Senior Member
CDT, NED, Tibetan groups.

all have their own set of interests to pursue.

they intersect but are not necessarily completely equal to each other.

that being said.

the intersected part does have certain ideological bent to them.
 

latenlazy

Colonel
CDT, NED, Tibetan groups.

all have their own set of interests to pursue.

they intersect but are not necessarily completely equal to each other.

that being said.

the intersected part does have certain ideological bent to them.
Well, like I said. All media is propaganda, just not necessarily propaganda of or against the state.
 

latenlazy

Colonel
NED does not have diverse views or interest, the core interest is to further American interests. NED does not support CDT for "open and free media" but rather due to its anti PRC propaganda value. An anti American "open and free media" would not be supported by NED.
You're missing the point. I'm merely saying that it doesn't sponsor groups that always align with their views 100%. Just because the NED might be anti PRC, does not mean that all the groups it endorses must be. Does CDT have an "ideological bent"? Yes (and technically all media sources do). Does it have the same ideological bent as the NED? Not necessarily. They intersect on a notion of promoting free media in a country where media is controlled. That does not mean they have the same reasons for that intersection.

No, there are tons of non propaganda information in the media besides politics. What CDT presents is propaganda, if you care about the distinction so much,
Similarly, the CDT also has news that is not political, but that's dodging the point of contention. Neither sources are purely about politics, and therefore neither are purely propagandistic. And let's be honest. What the People's Daily or China Daily reports is just as much
"propaganda" as the China Southern Daily, or the Epoch Times, or the CDT. There is no such thing as objective news. In China's case the news itself is particularly polarized. That the CDT has an ideological bent is not surprising, but that does not set it apart from any other news source, and it does not mean it does not present valuable information.

If you've ever followed the CDT, you would note that it doesn't write articles, but rather presents sources from everywhere, including Chinese state media. Does it emphasize non state sources? Of course. But again, the CDT is only a collection point.

Of course, you're free to disagree with me. I was presenting my understanding and observations about the CDT. It does not have to agree with yours.


EDIT: You guys really need a delete post option so that we can recombine posts.
EDIT2: I'm going to open a new thread. Could a mod move the related posts to it? Thanks
 
Last edited:

nameless

Junior Member
You're missing the point. I'm merely saying that it doesn't sponsor groups that always align with their views 100%. Just because the NED might be anti PRC, does not mean that all the groups it endorses must be. Does CDT have an "ideological bent"? Yes (and technically all media sources do). Does it have the same ideological bent as the NED? Not necessarily. They intersect on a notion of promoting free media in a country where media is controlled. That does not mean they have the same reasons for that intersection.
They do have the same ideology as NED, notice how much Hilliary Clinton is quoted, how South China sea issue is blamed on China, how China's presence in Africa is blamed, support of Tibetan independence, etc.

What sovereignty to begin with?

UK Recognises China’s Direct Rule Over Tibet
In a blow to Tibetan sovereignty, the UK’s Foreign Secretary David Miliband said that Britain regards Tibet as part of the People’s Republic of China. From The Telegraph:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Similarly, the CDT also has news that is not political. Let's be honest. What the People's Daily or China Daily reports is just as much
"propaganda" as the China Southern Daily, or the Epoch Times, or the CDT. There is no such thing as objective news. In China's case the news itself is particularly polarized. That the CDT has an ideological bent is not surprising, but that does not set it apart from any other news source, and it does not mean it does not present valuable information.
I would say 99% is political on CDT. Again there is such a thing as objective news, which is news free of ideology bent and propaganda, which is not that uncommon, if you can not understand such a thing then I am sorry. In fact a lot of the Chinese news are far less ideological than their counterparts in the west.
 
Last edited:

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
Stay on topic please! The topic is China's High Speed Rail and not Tibet, Western media, plane crashes, etc!
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #197
The first is the responsibility of Operation company but equipment failure under normal usage is still the responsibility of equipment supplier . The same principle apply why car companies paid indemnity to the crash accident, if the failure can be traced to design defect.
By the same token if the cause of the car failure can be traced back to the neglect by the user , then the manufacturer cannot be held to be responsible.. Same for the train.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #198
Germany and Japan had its share of train accidents,

thousands of aircraft is airborne at this very moment and carrying hundreds of thousands of people,.

with modern technology, airplane are near impossible to crash either but guess what airplane crash every year too.
Theres some decent programs covering airline disasters and in most cases, investigations reveal a degree of human failing as the main or playing an important part in the disaster. I wouldnt be surprised if this was the in the current train disaster.

@solarz
However, because this involves China, accusations of shoddy equipment malfunctions spring up almost as soon as the accident occurred. All of the articles I've read that blames the accident on poor equipment quality and China's "break-neck pace" of HSR development. All without a single shred of evidence to back up their claims.
Agreed, but these same acusations are also occuring within China

However the alleged burying of the train plus the sacking of the officials is hardly an auspicous start to an investigation.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
I would consider McFinn's warning the last. Any one who posts off topic material here from this point forth will receive infractions.
 

Top