i’m not talking about the report, i’m talking about the dutch govt’s actions. you say they’re based on this report. i cant see how.
edit:
to try to explain what i’m getting at, i’m puzzled by this sentencve of yours:
Before you start bashing on it for it being biased because the TV program is government funded, a lot of Dutch politicians at the time strongly wanted to increase our trade agreements with China, this item was actively hindering that.
you’re going to have to explain how this item was hindering that and why only this item and why much worse violations of human rights committed by the netherland’s other trade partners do not hinder trade with those countries.
I am not saying that, perhaps i worded it weirdly. I was merely trying to explain a reason why this report can’t simply be put down as ‘biased’. But since you are apparently not interested in the contents of said report I guess there is no convincing you. I just want to implore you to just like with any other country (or entity for that matter) to never blindly defend them.
Don’t think I’m defending the Dutch government here, I strongly oppose the current government (what’s left of it), but I do want to praise actual good journalism. It is something that is unfortunately becoming less and less common.
so the dutch government is terrible and does not base its decisions on human rights records, but somehow the journalists funded by them are unbiased. magically.
Right, I know this is an unwinnable discussion, but whatever.
Perhaps a bit of a language barrier. English is (as you probably guessed) not my first language.
In the Netherlands government and the state are 2 different things. The state is the entire governmental organization as a whole.
By the government I mean the coalition, the ministers and the prime minister.
The NPO (which Nieuwsuur falls under) gets its funding from the state. They get allocated a fixed amount each year.
The government can not directly influence anything that is done with this money.
So yes, I strongly believe this reporting is unbiased. I base this opinion on the years of reporting they have done before this item, and the years after. They do t let themselves be influenced by the ‘daily opinion’, they criticize left and right equally.
The current government is currently not at all what I voted for, but I also know that there are plenty of parties in opposition that do seriously use these reports to hold the coalition (government) accountable. So yes, I do think that good reporting can help steer the government away from making deals with countries as such.
What part of the report makes you think it is biased against the Chinese? I don’t dislike the Chinese people, just the factually proven mistreatment of the Uyghur people.
I am also interested in your perspective. Why do you think this report was made? Why can’t it be trusted, but other reports that say it is al fine there can be trusted?
Genuinely curious, if you have the time or enthousiasm to continue if course.
i’m not talking about the report, i’m talking about the dutch govt’s actions. you say they’re based on this report. i cant see how.
edit:
to try to explain what i’m getting at, i’m puzzled by this sentencve of yours:
you’re going to have to explain how this item was hindering that and why only this item and why much worse violations of human rights committed by the netherland’s other trade partners do not hinder trade with those countries.
I am not saying that, perhaps i worded it weirdly. I was merely trying to explain a reason why this report can’t simply be put down as ‘biased’. But since you are apparently not interested in the contents of said report I guess there is no convincing you. I just want to implore you to just like with any other country (or entity for that matter) to never blindly defend them.
Don’t think I’m defending the Dutch government here, I strongly oppose the current government (what’s left of it), but I do want to praise actual good journalism. It is something that is unfortunately becoming less and less common.
so the dutch government is terrible and does not base its decisions on human rights records, but somehow the journalists funded by them are unbiased. magically.
right.
do you see the disconnect here?
Right, I know this is an unwinnable discussion, but whatever.
Perhaps a bit of a language barrier. English is (as you probably guessed) not my first language.
In the Netherlands government and the state are 2 different things. The state is the entire governmental organization as a whole.
By the government I mean the coalition, the ministers and the prime minister.
The NPO (which Nieuwsuur falls under) gets its funding from the state. They get allocated a fixed amount each year.
The government can not directly influence anything that is done with this money.
So yes, I strongly believe this reporting is unbiased. I base this opinion on the years of reporting they have done before this item, and the years after. They do t let themselves be influenced by the ‘daily opinion’, they criticize left and right equally.
The current government is currently not at all what I voted for, but I also know that there are plenty of parties in opposition that do seriously use these reports to hold the coalition (government) accountable. So yes, I do think that good reporting can help steer the government away from making deals with countries as such.
What part of the report makes you think it is biased against the Chinese? I don’t dislike the Chinese people, just the factually proven mistreatment of the Uyghur people.
ok. yes, this discussion is fruitless.
I am also interested in your perspective. Why do you think this report was made? Why can’t it be trusted, but other reports that say it is al fine there can be trusted?
Genuinely curious, if you have the time or enthousiasm to continue if course.