See links in the comments on that page for a more technical explanation.

It’s bulltibetshit. I suspect a lot of people here when children used to like pulling the wings off flies. Why shouldn’t a little man in Nanjing pay for an ad in a local paper? Why do you find that so astonishing? Why are you soooo suspicious? The Central Government is not going to be playing media games by placing anonymous ads in small provincial newspapers. China is a nuclear power. It doesn’t do stupidity like pretending to be a local resident in a small circulation Nanjing local daily. You’re out of your minds and losing the plot if you think so.

Support Tibetan, E. Turkestan, Shanghai, southern Mongolian and HK independence!

I am thankful but surprised to see such a lengthy response to my simple request for clarification and my subsequent comment on the lack of factual proof and/or sound reasoning.

Quite frankly, I find your long-winded remarks hard to follow for its poor logic and over-stretched imaginations.

First of all, I made no attempt whatsoever to hide my feeling that Josh didn’t PROVIDE factual proof and/or sound reasoning in the original text. However, I didn’t make the assumption that Josh didn’t HAVE such proof and reasoning, hence my initial unequivocal request for clarification. Therefore, your “highly disingenuous insinuation” charge is totally groundless and unnecessary.

As for your “subtly deride”, “belittle”, or “uncritical nationalism” charges, I can only say with disbelief that they are probably all fruits of your astonishing paranoia, the source of which is clueless to me. Since when, I beg to ask, did a simple question about the basis of an opinion become an act of sabotage or uncritical nationalism?

From what I can read from your illogical utterance, there is one thing that truly separates us - for me, any serious opinion from any source needs to be substantiated with proof and reasoning; whereas for you, there is no such need as long as that opinion or intuition is against the “closed-media, totalitarian state”.

That said, I’d like to reiterate that it is fine with me if one wants to voice one’s opinion or intuition just for the sake of it, but I for one will certainly pay much less attention to such opinion or intuition. And this is NOT an act of sabotage, believe it or not.

And Josh,

I trust I have amply made my point. Final question to ask is, does Cup of Cha “apparently frowns on” my poor “attempt at light-hearted humor” as rynsa warned?

Upon further consideration, I am fairly certain I did not lodge a “personal attack” against anyone in this thread. My closing question was an ironic re-positioning of the jeering implications in Windswing’s ridiculous desire for “proof.” It was also an attempt at light-hearted humor–though obviously not a successful one. I really do feel people should chill out a bit.

None the less, I would like to apologize to you and others for any harm that may have occurred by my words. It was not my intention. Of course, the road to hell, etc., etc…

@Windswing

My ultimate criticism of your initial request for “proof and/or sound reasoning” stems from what I believe is a highly disingenuous insinuation on your part, namely that the reasoning in this post was somehow ill-conceived. Asking for “sound reasoning” implies that you feel Josh has not yet provided it (as was later proved true in your subsequent comments). To which I must ask, what proof do you have (beyond some woefully incomplete linguistic deconstruction)?

All of this suggests not that Josh has made an intellectual mistake but that you are not particularly knowledgeable about news media, public relations, and the Chinese government’s perennial habit of manipulating them for political gain. Or, even worse, perhaps you are knowledgeable about those issues but prefer instead to subtly deride independent bloggers simply to avoid dealing with the really pertinent matters of the day. Whatever the case, it is the very definition of ridiculous.

It seems to me that burden of responsibility for procuring “proof” does not fall on Josh’s shoulders, a mere citizen, as you seem to be suggesting, but on the state’s. Why should Cup of Cha do what mainstream, well-funded, state-sponsored propaganda bureaus like China Daily have never done?! Equivocating one Western blogger’s motives in this way with that of the Chinese government is, as I stated earlier, entirely disingenuous. You are not authentically seeking the truth surrounding a given advertisement in Nanjing, China, you are attempting to belittle the “intuitions” of one man with a website.

We do not live in a vacuum, Windswing. Cup of Cha does NOT have to play by the arbitrary rules of the establishment. I encourage you to differentiate a little more.

I’m afraid your commentary is based on an insincere argument; an argument, by they way, steeped in the tragically poor logic of uncritical nationalism, Chinese or otherwise. I saw this kind of thing in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq–die hard Americans wrapping themselves in the flag and targeting anyone, no matter how articulate and informed they may be, who dares to question the legitimacy of the state. It was ridiculous then, and it’s ridiculous now.

As to this comment : “And seriously, I have heard of ‘a closed-media, totalitarian state’, but have never heard of the ‘blogosphere.’” I do not even know where we are right now…” I can only assume you are being facetious (oh, lordy, I hope so). Fair enough, I get it, but be ye warned…Cup of Cha apparently frowns on that kind of thing ’round here.