World News

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] xep@fedia.io 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I had to double check when reading the article that this was indeed published by the Economist, particularly after this line:

As a private firm whose goals dovetail neatly with those of the Chinese government, it is becoming a model for how China thinks about innovation.

How do they know this, besides perhaps an official from the CCP making a statement about it?

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

Exactly, I was shocked that this was on the economist, it seems like a highly biased while mostly irrelevant article.

Very bizarre.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] xep@fedia.io 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

To give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps they are trying to stay neutral by publishing articles from various points of view, including the CCP's.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 years ago

I would be fine with that, and the economist has lots of great international articles, but my concern is with this article in particular.

They are very clearly starting from multiple false premises with zero direct evidence to back them up, and then book-reporting on piecemeal unrelated content in the article.

It's inaccurate and misrepresentative reporting of a straightforward and well-documented tech struggle.

parent

[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

The Economist does not typically list individual authors on their articles.

https://medium.economist.com/why-are-the-economists-writers-anonymous-8f573745631d

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago

Oh, okay. Thanks.

I actually like that reasoning, that what is written is more important than who wrote it.

This article is so poorly written and reasoned that I was curious, though.

parent

[–] Audacious@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

News articles without an author and date shouldn't be allowed to be posted. The legitimacy of news sources goes way down without those.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I mostly agree, although this particular case was my ignorance showing.

I've never noticed before that economist articles don't list their authors.

The economist uniquely states on their website that they deliberately don't post the author s for their articles because many of them are collaborative and they think that the content of the article should be more important than who wrote it.

Which in most cases is a very admirable mission statement, but can obviously be frustrating in cases like this where you want to hold a party responsible and the only recourse is to wait for a possible internal investigation by the new source themselves.

There are obviously a lot of pros and cons there, and I'm not. Convinced that the cons outweigh the pros, but at least they aren't deliberately hiding this specific author. The economist authors publish from anonymity as a matter of course.