Originally Posted by Fellowship
I think you are missing the texture of the full context.
No, I'm not. I understand the context just fine.
First of all these questions were being conducted in China by western media.
For domestic consumption. Not one chinese (outside of those living in the US) will see it.
Now we all have differing opinions about how "free" our western msm media truly is but no matter how you slice it the western media is at far greater liberty to report and edit freely than is the state censored Chinese media I think many would agree.
So what? It's a communist country that oppresses people. Sometimes brutally. That their media is censored is a given.
I think partly the reasoning for the asking of tough political questions simply shows that the western msm will not "out of respect" or what have you be muzzled over "topics" which are touchy from the vantage point of some. They are showing that western press values and liberties are not set aside just to appease the Chinese.
Yah right. We're not talking appeasement. We're talking about taking a break for a week before going back to business as usual.
In any case, this was a liberal taking pot shots at a President he doesn't respect but was gracious enough to appear on his show anyway. That I don't care for the President doesn't mean I'm blind to what was going on.
2ndly I believe the press in this case was simply doing its job. There has been a lot of buzz over should Bush go or not go to the Beijing Olympics etc. for reasons which were outlined and covered.
So sure it is not purely coverage of the sporting nature of the Olympics at the exclusion of every other concern in the world.
I don't share your outrage.
This is on par with asking about some dirty laundry about the groom at someone's wedding. Given that if it were not for the Chinese there's a good chance the Olympics wouldn't be around (by crossing the Soviets in 1984) I'd give them a bye for the week on thier first one. We can be snarky when the Olympics go to Shanghai or something.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/sp...nted=1&_r=2&hp
Now the Chinese did it for their own reasons (not kowtowing to the Soviets for one) but even so it did make a difference and lookinig at the changes from 1984 to 2008 I can say that the policy of engagement has been a real winner.
Its not outrage as much as tired annoyance.