The whole article is quite funny, especially the lists of most used tankie words, or the branding of foreignpolicy as a left-wing news source.

  • Preston Maness ☭@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    (An aside: I’m thoroughly impressed with the amount of uncoordinated, ad-hoc, impromptu – and yet rigorous – dunking and researching that is going on in this post)

    • renownedballoonthief@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We really owe it to the researcher for making themselves so easy to dunk on. My favorite to add to the list:

      “there being stories of r/GenZedong users attacking Uyghurs and promoting violence against them in the press [ 27],”

      which leads to this infamous source:

      [27] Andrew R. Chow. 2022. Reddit failing to control hate speech on Global Forums: Mods. https://time.com/6121915/reddit-international-hate-speech/

      Dunking on the Rushan Abbas AMA = attacking Uyghurs. Filter that narrative through enough reports and citations of articles citing reports that cite articles and you have the Truth™.

      • darkcalling@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Best part is they’ll eventually ban Genzedong, remove/scrub that reddit thread and random online haters (same variety making ridiculous claims about Lemmy’s devs) will begin to claim the removed reddit sources actually were proof of actual genzedong users actually physically attacking Uyghurs.

        It’s almost inevitable with the game of telephone they’re playing. Just launder something enough time through enough sources while being vague and generous with words and it magically becomes fact to everyone but super serious and honest academics (e.g. not the type who write this garbage) who really don’t impact the discourse at all anyways as if one discovered it and wrote anything at all it’d probably be a 1-2line citation in some voluminous work mostly unrelated to the fact, a total aside that they researched it and found it false, which obviously will never be seen by anyone.