566
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

A US State Department report that accuses the Chinese government of expanding disinformation efforts is “in itself disinformation,” Beijing’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed Saturday.

The ministry shot back after the State Department issued a striking report this week in which it accused the Chinese government of expanding efforts to control information and to disseminate propaganda and disinformation that promotes “digital authoritarianism” in China and around the world.

The US report, issued by the Global Engagement Center on Thursday, alleged that China spends billions of dollars a year on foreign information manipulation and warned that Chinese leader Xi Jinping had “significantly expanded” efforts to “shape the global information environment.”

It also underlined US concerns about China as a main military competitor and key rival in the battle over ideas and global disinformation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 63 points 11 months ago

This is funny. It also reflects in Lemmy. For example, take this tankie comment claiming "zelensky made having peace negotiations with putin ILLEGAL", based on an article which says "Zelensky’s decree released Tuesday declares that holding negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin has become impossible after his decision to annex four regions of Ukraine."

Then watch how mods from lemmy.ml and lemmygrad.ml ban users and delete comments which question their narrative.

Cherry on top: A user from this curated bubble remarks that "Nobody actually has any argument against this", because of course they are shielded from comments who pointed out the inaccuracy of the claim, and don't question it themselves.

Compare yourself:


Now read that comment in the basement of this thread again:

Understand we American make more lie for pleasure and entertaining. Not chinese lie. China always with great truth.

[-] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Had to open the links up in web version to see the difference. Ngl, it's something I expected lemmygrad to do. I'm glad to be on lemm.ee. I love the admins and their transparency and how their policies are democratically decided like when we voted to defederate Threads.

I also think there is nothing wrong with stuff like this and it's what lemmy was made for. If one instance doesn't like something, they can remove it, other instances may still want to see it, if members don't like it, they can move or have their own instance but can still interact. It's the beauty of decentralization.

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

comments which question their narrative.

But don't you see that's NATO propaganda. Want proof? Have a look at who posted it.

[-] Vilian@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago

to be fair it's lemmygrad so it's the worse of qorse, not exactly lemmy in general

[-] bobman@unilem.org -3 points 11 months ago

What are you talking about? The first reply to that comment has more upvotes and debunks it.

[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

The first reply to that comment has more upvotes and debunks it.

Yes, from our point of view. This is fine. My point is, compare to their point of view.

All comments rectifying the lie got removed. Users from that instance see a whole other story. Only now that weird comment makes sense:

Nobody actually has any argument against this except ad hominems, which is usually fairly telling.

The OP article seems to talk about a similar situation, just in geopolitics, while we play in Lemmy. Two parties with very different narratives. One is heavily filtering and censoring, which allows people living in that bubble to honestly believe what they are being told. Because that's all they see, their Big Brother takes care.

[-] bobman@unilem.org 2 points 11 months ago

Sorry, I am unsure how this federation thing works but your explanation made it much clearer.

[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

It's unclear what you mean with "that comment", since my comment refers to three distinct comments, and two different views of a comment section, with different replies and upvotes. If you can narrow down your question (preferrably with a link), I will try to answer it.

[-] 1847953620@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago
load more comments (46 replies)
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
566 points (98.5% liked)

World News

38531 readers
3028 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS