Advice from Oz for the anti-China media

Written By: - Date published: 11:44 am, August 10th, 2021 - 23 comments
Categories: australian politics, China, journalism, Media, newspapers, Peace, Politics, Propaganda, Satire, spin, war - Tags:

There’s so many of them here – Guyon Espiner, Anna Fifield, Lucy Craymer, Sam Sachdeva, Laura Walters, John Daniell, Emile Donovan, Paula Penfold, reef fish with the same few sources. Australian Paul Strutynski provides the textbook in his “Guide for budding foreign policy journalists wanting to work for the Nine Network or Newscorp.”

He starts off:

The uniform reality of our US-leaning foreign policy media  experts suggests a possible template for training suitably compliant foreign policy journalists.

Then:

First, identify the good guys and the bad guys, to determine which side you’re on. (Big tip: we’re always the good guys.)

Next, demonise the bad guys. (It’s what foreign policy journalists do.) And no matter what the response, never trust them. Remember, they’re the enemy. And enemies always lie. You getting it?

Focus laser-like on their crimes, which you must condemn, as high-mindedly as possible (as befits people of elevated principle like yourself). And don’t worry about exaggerating those crimes: the greater the evil, the more admirable your condemnation.

The whole piece is worth a read. I particularly liked this bit:

And never admit that any of their moves could possibly be defensive. With our enemies, any move equals aggression, by definition. It’s axiomatic, of course, that we are always noble of purpose and defensively minded to a fault.

Always insist on negotiating from a position of strength. Bombing helps. They respect that. After all, the only thing they understand is force. And that’s not being racist.

And for something completely different this excerpt from the Harvard Business Review “Three Things the West gets Wrong about China” is also definitely worth a read

 

23 comments on “Advice from Oz for the anti-China media ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Sanctuary 1
    10 August 2021 at 11:47 am

    "..t.here’s so many of them here – Guyon Espiner, Anna Fifield, Lucy Craymer, Sam Sachdeva, Laura Walters, John Daniell, Emile Donovan, Paula Penfold,…"

    Mike Smith is the man who has never met such an obstinate and pig headed bunch as the other eleven people on his jury.

    • mac1 1.1
      10 August 2021 at 12:53 pm

      OTOH, have we ever known the minority to be right?

      If we did not have minority opinion challenging the status quo, then we would still have the divine right of kings, slavery, an earth-centred universe and a flat planet.

      Better to debate the issues, generally……….

      And beware false prophets, rabbit holes, social media, and internet opinion, including this one.

    • Subliminal 1.2
      10 August 2021 at 2:09 pm

      I guess that the point Mike is making is that nobody is even trying to look at the situation from China's side which is also the point of the Harvard study. It's not hard to list a number of instances when this type of group think has led to serious consequences. Equating countries to Nazi Germany is not any different to acquiescing to / encouraging war being waged on that country. As the articles suggest, this is a tactic that puts your team in an unassailably righteous position that requires no admission of the terrible consequences of our wars of aggression. Against some Hitler personified all terror is justified.

      • Andrew Miller 1.2.1
        10 August 2021 at 3:09 pm

        Plenty of people have done that. Plenty of people have managed to do whilst not blinding themselves to the reality of the CCP. Let’s not kid ourselves he’s carrying out a kind of academic level service of merely seeing things from the others perspective.
        It’s entirely possible to try and understand why the Chinese leadership do what they do without dissolving into relativistic mush regarding human rights and basic human decency.
        when Mike manages that his piece will stop being pathetic apologia.

        • Drowsy M. Kram 1.2.1.1
          10 August 2021 at 4:04 pm

          One person's "pathetic apologia" is another's 'balance' – depends on where, and how, you stand, imho.

          • Andrew Miller 1.2.1.1.1
            10 August 2021 at 4:07 pm

            Of course, you can relativise away literally anything if you put your mind to it.

            • Drowsy M. Kram 1.2.1.1.1.1
              10 August 2021 at 4:17 pm

              Could you? "Anything"? Impressive wink

              • Andrew Miller …
                10 August 2021 at 4:28 pm

                Yes, it’s not terribly difficult.
                Doesn’t mean it’ll stand up to scrutiny but there’s always true believers happy to lap it up.

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  10 August 2021 at 8:04 pm

                  Written with the certitude of a true believer – the parallels are uncanny.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer

                  • Andrew Miller …
                    10 August 2021 at 10:15 pm

                    What point are you trying to make with what amounts to some weird circular reasoning?

                    What exactly am I a ‘true believer’ of? As someone else noted acknowledging the truth about the CCP doesn’t make you an apologist for the US or prevent someone holding them to account for their crimes and failures.

                    The historic record regarding the Mao era isn’t really seriously open to dispute, nor indeed is the scale of China’s current totalitarianism.
                    The fact it appears to be in what I supposed to be a mainstream left wing site, not a bunch of Marxist cranks is frankly depressing.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      10 August 2021 at 10:58 pm

                      I'm a Kiwi born and bred; a true believer in democracy – cause and effect? Many citizens of China (I've met a few) hold a different belief.

                      The point I'm trying to make is that I believe Mike's post has value – alway good to be offered points of view different to one's own, imho. Such as yours, for instance.

  2. coreyjhumm 2
    10 August 2021 at 2:16 pm

    Ummm "Guyon Espiner, Anna Fifield, Lucy Craymer, Sam Sachdeva, Laura Walters, John Daniell, Emile Donovan, Paula Penfold" are hardly us imperial stooges.

    Honestly attacking journalists for their coverage is Trumpian.

    Most of this country was furious that NZ wasn't more vocal with rage over Hong Kong, this is a country with a long history of standing up to super powers and it made us incandescent with rage that we'd be so timid simply over trade fears.

    You know where labour and the lefts support support should be ? With the exploited workers, with the prisoners , with the democracy activists not with the CCP

    Bugger the CCP.

    Honestly Mike I respect the hell out of you but every time you do a blog on this site it's about how we're being to mean to the CCP

    Why can't we be critical of both USA and China.

    There is much to criticize both over we are a sovereign nation we don't have to side with one or the other.

    • Mike Smith 2.1
      10 August 2021 at 3:04 pm

      Thanks for your comment Corey. I am not attacking the journalists, simply pointing out as did the Australian I cited that much of their coverage about China is one-sided and limited. Hong Kong is returned to China after it was forcibly ceded to Britain in 1842 so the British could pay for Chinese goods in opium rather than silver. Rioting is over and peace is restored – see this https://johnmenadue.com/how-many-are-fleeing-hong-kong/. As for the CCP, it has eliminated extreme poverty, managed the Covid outbreak well and is focused on achieving the well-being of all of its people, which is why it has much higher levels of citizen satisfaction than Western countries. Socialism with Chinese characteristics has much to recommend it, which is not to say it is perfect. I do agree with you that we don't have to side with the US or with China but a persistently anti-China media is not conducive to peace.

  3. Andrew Miller 3
    10 August 2021 at 3:03 pm

    Of all the hills to die on Mike Smith has bizarrely chosen the ‘apologist for political party who since taking power have been responsible for 10s of millions of deaths and who continue to oppress 100s of millions’ hill.
    The weasel words in response to that may well convince some on the left who want to believe, but they’re not terribly interesting. What is interesting is why? And no, not the reason he’d give us but the reason he’ll keep to himself.
    These days no one can be that much of a useful idiot, surely.
    And yes, I know it’s me who’s the useful idiot for Western propaganda blah blah blah….
    My one hope is that at some point in the future The Standard look back at publishing this unintentional comedy and cringe.

    • Mike Smith 3.1
      10 August 2021 at 3:21 pm

      Have a look at this Andrew https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9bVOq0JXf8. Always good to get other points of view

      • Andrew Miller 3.1.1
        10 August 2021 at 4:05 pm

        Thanks, but I’m already well aware of the achievements of the Mao era. Sen for instance has written and spoken about it widely particularly in relation to India’s comparative failure in certain eras especially certain aspects of health and education. He of course has also been scathing in its often barbaric policies.
        I’ve also read Dikotter’s trilogy so won’t blind myself to the reality of the cost, nor to the reality of the it’s current rule.
        I stand by everything I say in relation to your bizarre ongoing campaign.
        if The Standard was some obscure Marxist/Lenninist/Maoist site of which there remain a bunch I could understand it, but it isn’t so as don’t.

        [Don’t tell Authors what to write or how we should run this site and read the Policy.

        Another Moderator has moderated you before for this exact behaviour, which I like to remind you of: https://thestandard.org.nz/we-must-resist-us-pressure-on-china-that-could-lead-to-war/#comment-1779916.

        Please read both again and count this as your last warning – Incognito]

        • Incognito 3.1.1.1
          10 August 2021 at 5:09 pm

          See my Moderation note @ 4:05 pm.

        • Andrew Miller 3.1.1.2
          10 August 2021 at 10:32 pm

          Oh bless, your right to print apologia for a totalitarian regime is of course your right. But the fact you think criticism of that call is out of bounds is comical.
          Please go ahead ban me, I’m not terribly fussed. If I was warned before I didn’t read it.
          The only reason I even commented is the fact that such smug insular thinking that means some of the worst crimes against humanity happening anywhere on the planet are talked away as nothing whilst the real villains are apparently China’s critics, passes for left wing thinking annoys the hell out of me. It’s only possible in an echo chamber.
          I guess given the hissy fit you threw when Edwards dared suggest your links to Labour, I should have realised you don’t take kindly to criticism.

          The pomposity of the warning did give me a laugh though, so thanks for that.

          • Incognito 3.1.1.2.1
            10 August 2021 at 11:01 pm

            Thank you for reading the Moderation note and responding. The irony of your response made me laugh, so that makes two smiling people tonight. Not bad.

  4. Adrian 4
    10 August 2021 at 3:50 pm

    I think it is in Tim Marshalls Prisoners Of Geography that he explains why Putin and Russia are the way they are and it is because the western border of Russia is indefensible as it is almost 2 thousand kilometres of dead flat Great Northern European Plain and Russia has paid dearly in the past because of it. It doesn't excuse its push out to the Caucases and the Carpathian ranges for natural security but it does explain it. Most other countries have naturally defendable borders, mostly seas and oceans and high mountain ranges so they are slightly more relaxed about it.

  5. Nic the NZer 5
    10 August 2021 at 4:53 pm

    Weren't we reliably informed by somebody important that Australian media was basically proxy Chinese State propaganda? I mean for what other reason could their media be critical of their PM.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.