You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
CTI is well-known for being pro-CCP in Taiwan. Its shows are full of pro-CCP talking heads, parroting China Central Television. Its audience are pro-China old folks. I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here.
Since people mentioned corruption here, disaster management provides another perspective. Additionally, one of the hosts is a former member of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP):
Since people mentioned corruption here, disaster management provides another perspective. Additionally, one of the hosts is a former member of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP):
bro, he hasn’t been with the DPP for a very long time and not sure why you bring him up? CTI is well know pro China. what's there to dispute?
This is the meat of your post:
"The disaster management provides another perspective" – bro, the whole clip is talking about California DEI. If you want to parrot MAGA talking points, you can just find a clip from Fox News instead. That way, maybe people can understand what you're trying to say, as I assume most people on this forum don’t know Chinese.
bro, he hasn’t been with the DPP for a very long time and not sure why you bring him up? CTI is well know pro China. what's there to dispute?
This is the meat of your post:
"The disaster management provides another perspective" – bro, the whole clip is talking about California DEI. If you want to parrot MAGA talking points, you can just find a clip from Fox News instead. That way, maybe people can understand what you're trying to say, as I assume most people on this forum don’t know Chinese.
They initially compared the responses from China (earthquake) and the US (wildfire), as both events occurred in early Jan. However, they later shifted the discussion to DEI.
My point is that even people in Taiwan have more confidence in the long-term prospects for China. This is understandable, as people across the strait share the same language. They have a clearer understanding of what is happening on the other side, rather than relying on preconceptions.
On the talent front, the U.S. has several key strengths: (1) a smaller but highly efficient talent pool; (2) the ability to attract top global talent through immigration policies; and (3) greater flexibility in career paths, enabling graduates to explore diverse opportunities. In contrast, China faces notable weaknesses: (1) an emphasis on quantity over quality in STEM education; (2) limited research opportunities, especially in cutting-edge fields; and (3) a lack of groundbreaking innovation. These challenges are evident in recent trends, such as a significant mismatch between education and jobs. For example, tens of thousands of college graduates are working in the gig economy as delivery workers, while millions compete for just 200,000 government jobs in 2023—a phenomenon often attributed to ‘involution,’ where intense competition leads to diminishing returns for individual efforts.
My point is that even people in Taiwan have more confidence in the long-term prospects for China. This is understandable, as people across the strait share the same language. They have a clearer understanding of what is happening on the other side, rather than relying on preconceptions.
Why not just state this directly? Why post a pro-China TV show with talking heads discussing the DEI narrative?
Regarding Taiwanese confidence in the long-term prospects for China: I’ve been to Taiwan many times. There are pan-blue and pan-green supporters, and both sides have a lot of backing. I wouldn’t say "even people in Taiwan" have long-term confidence in China. Hell, I’m not even sure the Chinese themselves have long-term confidence in China, given the current economic decline.
What makes pro-independence TV shows in Taiwan more accurate? Equally, they often distort reality.
What I do believe is that their assessment of the matter aligns with what I know, read, and hear.
People have made all sorts of predictions about China. However, based on what I’m observing in Australia, more and more cars are coming from China (GWM, BYD, Chery, etc.).
I am not interested in taking sides; I am simply re-citing news.
Why not just state this directly? Why post a pro-China TV show with talking heads discussing the DEI narrative?
Regarding Taiwanese confidence in the long-term prospects for China: I’ve been to Taiwan many times. There are pan-blue and pan-green supporters, and both sides have a lot of backing. I wouldn’t say "even people in Taiwan" have long-term confidence in China. Hell, I’m not even sure the Chinese themselves have long-term confidence in China, given the current economic decline.
You get Chinese folk in China saying its tough going at the minute and there are some struggles, on various platforms.
Then you get the foreigners , specifically the ang mohs , in China saying its the greatest place ever ....Utopia and that US n UK specifically are sheet-holes.
There is an online army who believd China does not and will never have the struggles of any nation that is trying to climb the ladder.
I really don’t understand what makes pro-independence media in Taiwan more accurate. If I were the owner of such a station, of course, I would skew the information to target my audience and generate more ad revenue.
I really don’t understand what makes pro-independence media in Taiwan more accurate. If I were the owner of such a station, of course, I would skew the information to target my audience and generate more ad revenue.
Xunhua is the official Chinese Communist Party's mouthpiece, or simply a CCP's propaganda machine. Do we really need to associate our Semiwiki discussion to such an entity?
Xunhua is the official Chinese Communist Party's mouthpiece, or simply a CCP's propaganda machine. Do we really need to associate our Semiwiki discussion to such an entity?
Unfortunately, only state media provided comprehensive coverage. You can search for videos on YouTube. I suppose the high altitude and remote location make it challenging. If Taiwanese media is impressed with the emergency response, there must be valid reasons to support their assessment.
Unfortunately, only state media provided comprehensive coverage. You can search for videos on YouTube. I suppose the high altitude and remote location make it challenging. If Taiwanese media is impressed with the emergency response, there must be valid reasons to support their assessment.
So you tried to convince people that Xinhua is a creditable news media? Please don't forget throughout the CCP's oppression against tens of millions innocent Chinese people, Xinhua has been an active propaganda machine and a cheerful promoter, even today.
One of the common practices of the CCP's propaganda operations is to post links (knowingly or unknowingly by third parties) to as many websites, blogs, and social media as possible. CCP hopes it will create a perception or better search engine rankings that are favorable to CCP's agenda.
I don't think our Semiwiki needs to help Xinhua to get more references, exposures, and credibility.
I always do my research as wide and as deep as possible. But one thing for sure, I won't be stupid enough to waste my time on Xinhua, a Chinese Communist Party propaganda operations or even become a Xinhua's unpaid promoter.
I always do my research as wide and as deep as possible. But one thing for sure, I won't be stupid enough to waste my time on Xinhua, a Chinese Communist Party propaganda operations or even become a Xinhua's unpaid promoter.
I don't see it that way. I don't see things as black and white. I try to judge the information content in a piece of news. Depending on your belief, you can assign a value between 0 and 1. But we should let people assign their own values. I won't call the entire population stupid given they consume state media daily.
I don't see it that way. I don't see things as black and white. I try to judge the information content in a piece of news. Depending on your belief, you can assign a value between 0 and 1. But we should let people assign their own values. I won't call the entire population stupid given they consume state media daily.
Here's an idea. If you're going to post something you know is from Chinese state media (or indeed anyone posts anything from any censored media), why not add a short label/disclaimer so we know. Most of us probably have little idea what these source of these Chinese media posts you reference is.
As it is, this seems to be triggering some people as political content and getting us into endless discussion threads about non-semi content.
en.wikipedia.org
zh.wikipedia.org
