I didn't say censorship was good, I said western media will pick up any shit it can find in order to bash China while ignoring anything positive that might come from there. It's not just China, they do the same for everywhere that US/Nato doesn't like. A small handful of corporations controlling everything you know about the world.
In this case trivial shit motivated by fear, jealousy and hate spread by US government friendly media organisations and amplified by bots and shills eager to get their percentage of America's $300,000,000 anti-China propaganda budget.
Of course the US doesn't censor news, they don't need to when a compliant media simply doesn't report things their leaders don't like.
"Sports games are successful therefore don't care about the censorship" is not the sound argument you think it is.
Anything that could possibly show China in a potentially positive light is routinely ignored. That is censorship.
I see. So one kind of censorship is bad and another kind of censorship is good. How do I tell when it's the good kind of censorship?
I didn't say censorship was good, I said western media will pick up any shit it can find in order to bash China while ignoring anything positive that might come from there. It's not just China, they do the same for everywhere that US/Nato doesn't like. A small handful of corporations controlling everything you know about the world.
So because the West says bad things about China, China can't be criticized for censorship?
In this case trivial shit motivated by fear, jealousy and hate spread by US government friendly media organisations and amplified by bots and shills eager to get their percentage of America's $300,000,000 anti-China propaganda budget.
Of course the US doesn't censor news, they don't need to when a compliant media simply doesn't report things their leaders don't like.
So because it's "trivial shit" it is beyond criticism. I see.
What a stupid argument