This question is, which exchanges? The answer is only US-listed companies it seems. US-listed companies' data is already widely available so this isn't useful to me. Would be interested if other exchanges might be on the roadmap.
The exchanges would be mainly CBOE, NYSE, NASDAQ, OTC. Yes, mostly it is US-listed companies. Thank you for your proposal, we will add this to our to-do list.
At no point did the parent allude that. Perhaps the poster just doesn't have insight into every economy on the planet and didn't want to give nonfactual info.
I doubt this piece was signed off personally by Xi Jinping or anything, but all these little details lodge subconsciously in your mind. Like, you might not specifically think of Chairman Mao as a poor rural dweller famous for his love of spice after reading this article, but after reading dozens of pointless details like it you might start to think he wasn't such a bad guy after all.
Some advertisers spend on relevant keywords, others pay for generalized brand awareness. Many do both.
Anything published by a government in a foreign language has an agenda. It's propaganda. In this case, "brand awareness" propaganda.
Maybe the goal is to promote tourism, or to give a boost to exports.
Maybe it's to keep the country/government in the front of foreign readers' minds, to foster a sense of commonality or appreciation.
Whatever. There's an agenda. It's worth discussing and thinking about.
Like with advertising, it's important to know what role you are playing in the publisher's agenda. Accepting the material uncritically is not a neutral position -- it makes you a unwitting player in their game.
You are completely correct that the US does it too, both internally (presidential mythologies, to use your example) and externally (Radio Free X etc etc).
Propaganda is common though. Many companies have their own newsletter and plenty do paid advertising, some in subtle ways. Plenty of scientific research is paid for by companies for their own gain. Authors are destined to propagate their own opinion and mind. That doesn’t however means anything that’s not complete neutral is pointless. An echo chamber is very much like propaganda, few people is going to speak out against the majority. Our training should be to obtain useful information from the massively available information, not disregard everything.
I'm glad you see it that way. My response was so flippant because I do think people often see China as personally run, in its entirety, by Xi. Any news coming out of China, from as grave as genocide to as minor as Olympics festivals, is seen as part of a single plan. The actions of the Chinese gov't and press can be just as much bottom-up as top-down, even if the top takes credit.
I actually do think it’s relevant. They build credibility in your mind space via innocuous stories about peppers, so you’re more likely to accept their articles about more charged topics in the future.
Perhaps. OTOH - looking over Sixth Tone's front page, there are many "Here is a serious problem in China..." headlines. Far fewer "All is well" or "Interesting Story" headlines. And zero headlines about politics or national security issues, for Sixth Tone to be building cred on those subjects.
Sixth Tone represents a sort of progressive Shanghai-based view of China that is more palatable to people in democratic countries than the usual party line reporting. But, to be sure, the level of criticism is still always below the threshold of what the party deems acceptable. That doesn't mean the stories aren't pertinent or interesting, but it's worth keeping in mind that they will only ever go so far in reporting the facts on the ground. You may see criticism of corrupt behavior or generally "uncivilized" practices, but not of the broader party policies that led to the situation. In China, this is the best you can hope for.
And how is this relevant to story about chilli peppers? You all are just feeding troll when you approve pointing out company ownership at story about chilli peppers. Next time you see story about sausages on DW.com I hope you won't forget to analyze how it's site funded by German gov, same with France24 and French gov.
I think this is a weird take. You could analyze every human interest piece this way. Is that what the NYT does with Page Six? I read that and then don't think about the fossil fuel or tech companies' influence on their stories?
Just read a story about chili peppers and don't get all Joseph McCarthy about it.
It's nice to know these things, even if it doesn't necessarily invalidate the content of the article. "The CCP is investing in sharing China's history with Anglophones" is interesting and important to know.
Speaking as a non-american non-asian I think this is very relevant. Southwest china speaks a separate language, and has a military history. I think kumintag (later forced to move to taiwan) and ccp had battles there, probably significant ones but can’t recall details. Ccp had to keep handling unrest until few years after the civil war. So the article saying chili-red revolution is odd to say the least. There’s more, that it relates pepper and peasants. the article also starts off by mcdonalds and kfc, which are not the most high-end food, and also not chinese businesses. As for military history, some of southwest china is mountainous, mongols had a hard time capturing it too. Mongke khan died there, and according to wikipedia, some fortresses kept fighting for a few years after southern song falls. Is the article relating those who fight for southern song to be just McDonalds superfans?!! If that’s a thing! Of course not… but my guess it is saying something, maybe this is an anti mcdonalds ad?! I can’t tell, or care really. I’d rather read from a proper source about peppers than what is almost surely micro propaganda, Even good quality ones.
