you figure it out

Cuz the article by TFI says he’s embracing being monitored

And this says he’s not being monitored he’s just lying low

So either eeeeeeveryone is lying

Or just a few clearly biased sources

You tell me

So what exactly is the crux of the issue with epoch times? Do you fault them for association, the articles, is it both? If so, then post a conflicting source that meets the standards of both.

I think that would resolve the confusion on everyone's part.

Look at this interesting bit

This was released in Oct 2020

The same info is only now released on media you trust

Could it be that it is used for another purpose

Like for example, fearmongering and further distrust of the CCP

(For clarification here, I’m not defending the CCP, I just don’t want my info to come from illegitimate sources backed by cults and maniacs)

Jack Ma, the multibillionaire founder of tech companies Alibaba and Ant Group, went missing after criticizing China's financial system by calling for changes and reforms.
>>>>>
Apparently Ma would not agree with your evaluation of things... fotrunately he is safe for now

Where is this from?

So the problem I have is, by your rubric, would posting CNN be considered a good source? Like if we applied the scrutiny of association and not the quality of the article, does your post count?

You asked me to find a source

CNN, to me, is as reliable as The Epoch Times

The article in itself doesn’t matter in this scenario but it shows that the information was out there way before

I asked to find a source that fits the rubric you want for the epoch times.

Cause if we are using associations and not the work as a rubric, then what exactly are we left with. I don't mind CNN when they get it right. Same should go for all publications.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/23/cnn-msnbc-15-spooks-mccabe/

@ToxicTransgender if you had to look up a source for the events of Tiannamen Square, what would you use? I always find new sources articles about past events to be interesting litmus test for how diligent their work is.

I could use anything to look for Tiananmen Square but it’s accuracy I couldn’t necessarily judge since I’m not too well learned on that subject

https://www.history.com/topics/china/tiananmen-square
This is a rundown of the massacre at Tiannamen Square.

History.com is a website that just reports on historical events. If you had to get a rundown of events from a news company, who would you use as a source.

You’re gonna hate me for this

Probably CBC

(Canadian BBC)

I don't hate people, too much wasted energy. So you would use CBC to get information about the Tiannamen Square Massacre? Does the CBC meet your association requirements that you place on the Epoch Times?

CBC has been proven to be trustworthy and accurate many many a times

It’s one of the best news organizations in the country

And I trust their information in most cases

Wait, so its a different rubric for the CBC?

(I don’t like to look at opinion pieces)

You can go look that up

But I would consider the CBC to be very trustworthy

So you judge by the articles and not who invest/runs it?

State run media rarely gets praise here. But I guess there is a first for everything.