NY Times editorial defends China's policies in Hong Kong

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/01/opinion/hong-kong-china-security-law.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Something had to be done, and the Chinese authorities did it.

The scale and frequency of antigovernment protests has now subsided — thanks to a national security law for Hong Kong promulgated in Beijing on June 30.

The NY Times has become a total disgrace

[It’s so Joever]

Nice.
If you were supporting the “law and order” federal troops here, you should also support Beijing’s actions in HK (ftr I support both)
Otherwise you are a blatant hypocrite.

[PSOL]

Nice.
If you were supporting the “law and order” federal troops here, you should also support Beijing’s actions in HK (ftr I support both)
Otherwise you are a blatant hypocrite.

I support neither. Down to Deng thought! Down to White Supremacy!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Lots of authoritarian NUT takes in the Times opinion section lately, between this and Tom Cotton's retracted pro-police brutality editorial. PSOL has the correct position here.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Nice.
If you were supporting the “law and order” federal troops here, you should also support Beijing’s actions in HK (ftr I support both)
Otherwise you are a blatant hypocrite.

What a false equivalency

[HillGoose]

that's wack g

[Person Man]

NYT has a lot of Nazbois publishing opinions there despite them thinking it’s “fake news”.

[KaiserDave]

It's an op-ed. If we want to grade newspapers by the quality of their op-eds we have lots of work to do.

HP opinion though

[President Johnson]

The op-ed is kind of a joke here, but the Times is still a very good newspaper overall.

[lfromnj]

It's an op-ed. If we want to grade newspapers by the quality of their op-eds we have lots of work to do.

HP opinion though

Nope, the NYT retracted tom cotton's op-ed because it went too far. They have implicitly stated that its not the op-eds quality but also now the opinion that matters. Normally newspapers should be given leeway for op-eds but the NYT has its own standards.

[R.P. McM]

Headline's a bit misleading, no? Insofar as I'm aware, Regina Ip is a Hong Kong legislator, not the mouthpiece of the NYT's editorial perspective. Should newspapers run opinion columns they disagree with? I think so. It's just a question of which viewpoints merit inclusion. Ip presumably speaks for many Chinese, just as Tom Cotton spoke for many Republicans, so I don't think the decision to publish either piece is completely indefensible.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Nice.
If you were supporting the “law and order” federal troops here, you should also support Beijing’s actions in HK (ftr I support both)
Otherwise you are a blatant hypocrite.

You are so authoritarian NUT that S019 looks like Dule in comparison.

[HillGoose]

Nice.
If you were supporting the “law and order” federal troops here, you should also support Beijing’s actions in HK (ftr I support both)
Otherwise you are a blatant hypocrite.

I support neither. Down to Deng thought! Down to White Supremacy!

big facts, divisive gov can get f!cked

[lfromnj]

Headline's a bit misleading, no? Insofar as I'm aware, Regina Ip is a Hong Kong legislator, not the mouthpiece of the NYT's editorial perspective. So this is a repeat of the Tom Cotton conflagration. Should newspapers run opinion pieces they disagree with? I think so. It's just a question of which viewpoints merit inclusion. Ip presumably speaks for many Chinese, just as Cotton spoke for many Republicans, so I don't think the decision to publish said columns is completely indefensible.

Except they literally retracted Cotton's op ed.

[It’s so Joever]

Nice.
If you were supporting the “law and order” federal troops here, you should also support Beijing’s actions in HK (ftr I support both)
Otherwise you are a blatant hypocrite.

What a false equivalency

Why?
Is it false because anarchist BLM protestors are destroying private property and Hong Kong protestors are definitely going out of their way to not hurt small businesses?
https://reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1X001P

Is it because the authoritarian Chinese cops are severely injuring peaceful protestors?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/police-keep-using-force-against-peaceful-protesters-prompting-sustained-criticism-about-tactics-and-training/2020/06/03/5d2f51d4-a5cf-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html%3foutputType=amp

Look, just say you support one over the other for geopolitical/jingoistic reasons, as long as you don’t pretend to have some moral high ground, I don’t care.

[R.P. McM]

Headline's a bit misleading, no? Insofar as I'm aware, Regina Ip is a Hong Kong legislator, not the mouthpiece of the NYT's editorial perspective. So this is a repeat of the Tom Cotton conflagration. Should newspapers run opinion pieces they disagree with? I think so. It's just a question of which viewpoints merit inclusion. Ip presumably speaks for many Chinese, just as Cotton spoke for many Republicans, so I don't think the decision to publish said columns is completely indefensible.

Except they literally retracted Cotton's op ed.

Yeah, the NYT is responsive to internal/external pressure. What's your point? Are you trying to discern a reasonable approach to a difficult journalistic question, or just availing yourself of an opportunity to attack a press outlet you don't like? This issue is far from clear-cut, so I find the kneejerk reactions incredibly inane.

[PSOL]

Nice.
If you were supporting the “law and order” federal troops here, you should also support Beijing’s actions in HK (ftr I support both)
Otherwise you are a blatant hypocrite.

What a false equivalency

Why?
Is it false because anarchist BLM protestors are destroying private property and Hong Kong protestors are definitely going out of their way to not hurt small businesses?
https://reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1X001P

Is it because the authoritarian Chinese cops are severely injuring peaceful protestors?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/police-keep-using-force-against-peaceful-protesters-prompting-sustained-criticism-about-tactics-and-training/2020/06/03/5d2f51d4-a5cf-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html%3foutputType=amp

Look, just say you support one over the other for geopolitical/jingoistic reasons, as long as you don’t pretend to have some moral high ground, I don’t care.

Out of a lot of things wrong with the Hong Kong protests, their behavior to the police and private businesses aren’t one of them.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Headline's a bit misleading, no? Insofar as I'm aware, Regina Ip is a Hong Kong legislator, not the mouthpiece of the NYT's editorial perspective. Should newspapers run opinion pieces they disagree with? I think so. It's just a question of which viewpoints merit inclusion. Ip presumably speaks for many Chinese, just as Tom Cotton spoke for many Republicans, so I don't think the decision to publish is completely indefensible.

They shouldn’t publish any articles written by Chinese legislators at all . They should not be able to use an AMERICAN newspaper to publish their propaganda and New York Times should make it clear they are an American newspaper first

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Headline's a bit misleading, no? Insofar as I'm aware, Regina Ip is a Hong Kong legislator, not the mouthpiece of the NYT's editorial perspective. Should newspapers run opinion pieces they disagree with? I think so. It's just a question of which viewpoints merit inclusion. Ip presumably speaks for many Chinese, just as Tom Cotton spoke for many Republicans, so I don't think the decision to publish is completely indefensible.

They shouldn’t publish any articles written by Chinese legislators at all . They should not be able to use an AMERICAN newspaper to publish their propaganda and New York Times should make it clear they are an American newspaper first

Should they publish articles written by non-American - but also non-Chinese - legislators?
Say, Canadian, French, or Indian?

[ProudModerate2]

... The NY Times has become a total disgrace

I immediately clicked on the link, almost certain it was going to be an opinion piece.
LOL.
Right above the title of the article, in big-enough letters, it clearly says "Opinion."

What is so wrong with The NYT publishing an opinion piece?
This is what newspapers do (even in the "older days" on print/paper).
They are interesting to read, regardless of one's personal stance on the matter.
Geeesh.

[HillGoose]

... The NY Times has become a total disgrace

I immediately clicked on the link, almost certain it was going to be an opinion piece.
LOL.
Right above the title of the article, in big-enough letters, it clearly says "Opinion."

What is so wrong with The NYT publishing an opinion piece?
This is what newspapers do (even in the "older days" on print/paper).
They are interesting to read, regardless of one's personal stance on the matter.
Geeesh.

bruh tho u gotta think if uhhhh if this person who wrote it loves China so much why don't they move there am i right?

[ProudModerate2]

... The NY Times has become a total disgrace

I immediately clicked on the link, almost certain it was going to be an opinion piece.
LOL.
Right above the title of the article, in big-enough letters, it clearly says "Opinion."

What is so wrong with The NYT publishing an opinion piece?
This is what newspapers do (even in the "older days" on print/paper).
They are interesting to read, regardless of one's personal stance on the matter.
Geeesh.

bruh tho u gotta think if uhhhh if this person who wrote it loves China so much why don't they move there am i right?

It says, right under the title of the article ...
By Regina Ip.
Ms. Ip is a legislator and a member of the Executive Council in Hong Kong.

And at the conclusion of the article it says ...
Regina Ip is a member of the Executive Council and the Legislative Council of Hong Kong.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor.

[pppolitics]

That's a lie

This is an opinion piece by a single person.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Headline's a bit misleading, no? Insofar as I'm aware, Regina Ip is a Hong Kong legislator, not the mouthpiece of the NYT's editorial perspective. Should newspapers run opinion pieces they disagree with? I think so. It's just a question of which viewpoints merit inclusion. Ip presumably speaks for many Chinese, just as Tom Cotton spoke for many Republicans, so I don't think the decision to publish is completely indefensible.

They shouldn’t publish any articles written by Chinese legislators at all . They should not be able to use an AMERICAN newspaper to publish their propaganda and New York Times should make it clear they are an American newspaper first

Should they publish articles written by non-American - but also non-Chinese - legislators?
Say, Canadian, French, or Indian?

Those 3 nations aren’t totalitarian dictatorships

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

It's an opinion column, not their official stance.

However, it's also vile and the paper looks completely ridiculous for letting James Bennet get pushed out over the Cotton piece only to print this weeks later. Younger staffers who want the paper to be committed to a more activist liberalism are showing some very obvious blind spots.