316
submitted 6 months ago by Five@slrpnk.net to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 22 points 6 months ago

What are you referring to here? Your statement seems to contradict not just the headline but the entire article.

[-] halykthered@lemmy.ml -3 points 6 months ago

The first link referenced in this article. That article mentions the punishments and the severity of the crime required for those punishments.

This article seemed to only latch onto the more dramatic portions and threats of the death penalty to generate clicks.

[-] abfarid@startrek.website 12 points 6 months ago

I agree with you that the article is clickbaity, it implies that it's the default punishment. But technically, it isn't wrong. It's still possible to get death penalty for advocating for Taiwan independence.

Without looking at your post history, I think your downvotes are unjustified. You merely pointed out the clickbait. But it would be better if you presented it in more affirming way, cause right now your comment kinda reads like you're refuting the article and "it's not a death sentence, it's only a 3-year imprisonment", which is also not true.

[-] Slayan@lemmy.ca 12 points 6 months ago
  1. For those who commit the acts specified in Article 2 of this Opinion, the ringleaders or those who commit serious crimes shall be sentenced to life imprisonment or fixed-term imprisonment of ten years or above.

Among them, those who cause particularly serious harm to the state and the people and whose circumstances are particularly bad may be sentenced to death

; those who actively participate shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years; those who participate in other activities shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, control or deprivation of political rights.

Tbf it's not super clear i had to read the whole thing 3 time. Sorry about the brillant people calling you a tankie, they prob don't even know what it mean..

[-] halykthered@lemmy.ml -4 points 6 months ago

Yeah, it's legal language that's been translated, so I can't expect vernacular clarity.

I don't get the tankie comments, either. My original post was about the article being biased towards sensationalism. It seems lots of people have strong opinions and feel the need to lash out.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 9 points 6 months ago

I mean I think it makes sense to focus on the most severe possible punishment in this context.

That said, I did not find any mention of the death penalty in the linked page. I do not speak Chinese so I was relying on the translation feature in my browser, so I’m not sure if it was mistranslated, the article is wrong about that, or what. Curious if anyone has further information on this.

[-] halykthered@lemmy.ml -2 points 6 months ago

I used google's webpage translation. It does mention death as a penalty, but it's far from the only possible outcome.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

OK so probably a translation issue. But to respond to your statement, if your city announced it would punish illegal parking with penalties ranging from 3 years imprisonment to fucking murder, which would you be more concerned with? And which would you rather local journalists make you aware of? Would you really be criticizing their clickbait headlines if they ran a similar story?

Like I said, focusing on the more severe possible punishment makes perfect sense in this context. Not to mention that all of the punishments are extremely excessive.

[-] halykthered@lemmy.ml -3 points 6 months ago

I never discounted the inclusion of the threat of death, I only commented on the fixation on it in that article. Of course the inclusion of the death penalty needs to be a part of the discussion.

We can spend the rest of forever discussing what-ifs and hypotheticals. I don't think it does the original discussion justice to boil it down from the severity of secession to parking issues. I fear your simplification misrepresents the original discussion, as the nuance of the China-Taiwan situation cannot earnestly be recreated with parking violations in a city.

But yes, to answer your question, I do think that journalistic integrity is important at any level.

If you keep reading in that translated article linked in the original article, it says that if you change your stance and make an honest attempt to undo the damage you did, the charges may be dropped. So one could end up with no punishments at all.

this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
316 points (95.7% liked)

World News

39387 readers
1293 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS