China has banned BBC World News from broadcasting in the country, its television and radio regulator announced on Thursday.
Something they said?
They're returning the favour of Ofcom, who revoked the UK licence of a Chinese news broadcaster earlier in the week.
Plus, obviously the BBC keep mentioning the Uighar, and Hong Kong and so on.
@PhotonQyv Hong Kong’s RTHK suspends BBC World News after ban in China over Xinjiang reporting
Not really all that surprising. As far as China is concerned Hong Kong is China and has been since 1999.
Last year we were surprised by the level of unrest and what the people were 'getting away with' downtown. There were ML cops in HK uniforms, some beatings on the MTR, but... the response was quite mild really.
The protesters grew bolder and came out more.
Now all the leaders are known and arrested.
We noted the SCMP has been "remarkably objective" lately also. Maybe there will be changes in management at SCMP and RTHK soon too?
I know, I think you misunderstood what I said.
What I meant was that the UK gave control of Hong Kong back to China at the end of 1999, so 22 years later, what China does or doesn't do with Hong Kong isn't really any of our business, any longer.
Yes, China has issues, but so do we, alienating China by trying to tell it what to do isn't going to help either country.
biggest irony is China built up its external broadcasting network from 2012 onwards using all the equipment sold off by the BBC (and even some of the journalists and presenters who were laid off!) when the BBC and UK Govt downsized Bush House and their other ventures (such as BBC Monitoring) as a cost saving exercise 😆
I suspect/fear it will all be storm in a teacup anyway -BBC depends on China for tech (only a few years ago they were working with CCTV and NHK Japan on 4K UHD cameras and broadcast infrastructure) - China depends on BBC and other "Western" broadcasters to train journalists in "Western" propaganda broadcast techniques, they already know how to do it "Soviet" way but are moving away from that - that CCTV was allowed at all here suggests it had commercial viability>>
behind the scenes the boomers who run UK media production companies (some of which are notoriously sketchy) are likely to be complaining about the loss of business opportunities caused by this political rift; and trying to get things patched up so money can start flowing again (irrespective of whether or not the HK protestors or the Uighurs get any better treatment in the end)
I don't buy this argument. Violence and oppression is everyone's business, everywhere. We're all the same humans, not some kind of tribal serfs.
On the contrary, we should be constantly talking about abuse in China and Russia, just as we should be talking about abuse in UK, USA or EU.
I was born in 70's Poland just as communist troops were shooting at protesting workers.
The worst thing could happen to us back then was the world to forget about us.
China is not keeping their word and that upsets us, but nothing will be done. The 'west' has no teeth and no appetite for conflict anyhow. And no real economic leverage either. A few 'sternly worded' diplomatic complaints are heard from time to time. I think Hong Kongers can look forward to as much help as Ukraine or Georgia got :-(
We actually have been through this a few times already - as Holocaust unrolled in the occupied Eastern Europe in early 40's, there were numerous witness reports about German atrocities, but they were widely ignored by the Western media precisely for the same excuses - no hard evidence, harms relations with Germany, wouldn't achieve anything etc.
Actually, we're repeating history over and over...
A comment I have 30 mins into this very interesting debate: they repeatedly say "we should", "we need" (as in "we need to think about what we can do realistically with Russia" etc).
I fundamentally disagree with the notion that there's any collective "we" in any country. This directly contradicts the very concept of liberal democracy, where we are individuals, with our own brains and ideas.
So I understand that say Milliband can be talking from *his own* position as a diplomat and politician and defending some kind of compromise and not talking about some abuse for the sake of some greater gain.
On the hand, there's nothing preventing from talking all the media and politicians in the country who do not represent it in diplomatic terms.
Not that I'm siding fully with the BBC, since it's been a long time since I believed that they were actually impartial or balanced in their coverage of events.
@gemlog Do you know anyone with a stupidly high power broadcast antenna that can be placed just outside the border with China?
@paulpritchard I think they already have.
When I was young I used to trust all kinds of institutions I no longer have faith in. I try to read as broadly as possible knowing all sources have some built-in bias. In fact, a source with an obvious bias is more honest and easier to navigate than one that claims to be unbiased and impartial.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!