新会员区

第六感
[主页]->[新会员区]->[第六感]->[写给华尔街三名记者的一封信:请恪守媒体人的原则与灵魂,并致美国记者协会]
第六感
·“习马会”之后 看看习先生和马先生的微信朋友圈
·美媒:中国在全球推进“去美国化”战略
·也说屁股和脸
·“习马会”给美国干预台海上锁!
·李美歌参加裸体派对被拍!!!
·李美歌参加裸体派对被拍!!!
·北京首虎市委副书记吕锡文涉嫌严重违纪接受调查
·中国未来30年 乡村将成为奢侈品
·终身受用的世界顶尖思维
·比“天价虾”更狠
·中国困难之际,美国用一艘旧军舰帮助中国
·中日关系为什么必须翻开新一页?
·自封佛爷,理当“八戒”
·"三退“造谣让李洪志也越来越难堪
·两岸若统一后国号叫什么?
·李洪志的风流艳史
·美舰南海撒野是好事还是坏事?
·法轮功让美国景点大煞风景
·土取消购华导弹内情曝光
·谁“活摘”了李美歌的子宫?
·演员吸大麻,张艺谋为何不举报?
·两个中国人的握手将被历史铭记
·轮子淫乱的必然
·“三退”猫腻多!
·制造巴黎恐怖主义袭击的IS是从哪里获得钱财的?
·巴黎恐袭,多元文化政策的苦果
·后法轮功时代谁人当家
·李洪志怎样捂好钱袋子
·震撼!四川海螺沟现巨型“狼图腾”景观
·正在走向孤岛化的香港
·2015中美大博弈
·民主的尖叫 VS 自干5毛的哀嚎
·神秘人1.7亿美元买幅裸女画有人赞,国家8300万美元买苏35有人喷,贱人一对
·大陆民间对台态度大变 ,武统论升温
·英国科学家称植物油做饭可致癌
·李洪志的亲信,他们去哪儿了?
·连自己都不相信的谎言,又凭什么去让别人相信呢
·李美歌的“酸甜苦辣”
·请李洪志解释女弟子卖淫
·土耳其总理谴责中国 连德国网民都愤怒了
·土耳其惹的麻烦————库尔德人等来了机会
·在当今世界,我们要暂缓在国内推行儒家思想
·俄军报复猛烈!空袭土耳其车队17死伤
·习李王能破掉美国给中国做了30 年的“局”吗?
·张口闭口“文字狱”的人,真的不明白吗?
·看完《南周》对浦志强访问有感
·美国专家:天安门自焚事件真实性毋庸置疑
·刘思影与轮格格李美歌命运之大比拼
·“天安门自焚”十五年祭殇
·以一个母亲的视角看刘思影自焚事件
·1·23的火使人看清了法轮功伪善
·1·23的火使人看清了法轮功伪善
·拷问,自焚者燃起的火
·人生没有如果
·陈果:美丽是这样被摧毁的
·昭昭前事,惕惕后人
·旺角暴乱后致香港“回归一代”:请回望这片被你无视的土地
·旺角暴乱:能够成为香港自我救赎的一次机会吗
·再致香港回归一代:放开心中矛盾理想一起去追
·三致香港“回归一代”:其实你和我拥有共同的梦想
·三致香港“回归一代”:其实你和我拥有共同的梦想
·香港青年回信内地“改革一代
·韩国KBS电视台取消法轮功神韵演出
·老战友王国庆谈“哥们儿“早年轶事
·李洪志身世大揭秘
·从惑众敛财的骗子到西方反华势力的马前卒
·“轮家身后事”的荒谬“剧情”
·咱公主岭咋出这么个玩艺儿,太丢脸了
·他比台湾诈骗犯手段更绝!
·春风十里 “师父”真坑你
·英文“总统”,你想将台湾带向哪里?
·港人骂李洪志是卖国贼
·法轮功“二号人物”枯坐纽约街头
·多人听完李洪志洗脑后发病栽倒
·中国间谍卫星高清拍摄美军港 航母清晰
·【銅鑼灣書店風波】呂波張志平挺李波 指責林榮基講大話
·風險事、刀口錢 屈穎妍
·人活着真的不要很累很累
·佛母已故,生死两茫茫,愁断肠!
·中国一流大学校长为何洋相百出
·美华裔夫妇杀死5岁女儿 凶手疑受李洪志邪说洗脑
·港界“金融大鳄”肖建华:私生活极度糜烂,堪比古代昏帝!
·多次卷入争议性交易!“隐形富豪”肖建华的种种黑色发家史
·安全专家:肖建华全用女保镖不寻常,与卡扎菲「媲美」?
·澳大利亚知名器官移植问题专家:“法轮功”所谓“器官活摘”被作为政治工具
·给“滕彪们”的一点批判与忠告
·给“滕彪们”的一点批判与忠告
·揭秘“谢阳遭酷刑”,全都他妈的是套路!
·揭秘“谢阳遭酷刑”,全都他妈的是套路!
·“谢阳遭酷刑“,假的!律师江天勇变身导演
·郭文贵:做人要善良 不要欺负穷人
·郭文贵诽谤--财新传媒声明
·郭文贵跳梁小丑欲盖弥彰难掩媒体耳目
·郭文贵其人:活脱脱一个攻人下三路的怂包!
·郭文贵谎言:傅政华已经被中纪委控制
·郭文贵谎言:傅政华已经被中纪委控制
·郭文贵,你说的被控制呢?
·郭文贵,你说的被控制呢?
·是不是有钱就玩女人?中国大陆隐性富豪郭文贵竟然糟蹋了一批公司女员工!
·是不是有钱就玩女人?中国大陆隐性富豪郭文贵竟然糟蹋了一批公司女员工!
·细数“泸县太伏中学生死亡事件”中造谣生事的海外反华组织
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
写给华尔街三名记者的一封信:请恪守媒体人的原则与灵魂,并致美国记者协会


   Dear Miss Kate, Miss Aruna and Mr. Cezary:
   
   On October 22, the Wall Street Journal published your report, China’s Pursuit of Fugitive Businessman Guo Wengui Kicks Off Manhattan Caper Worthy of Spy Thriller, which reported some of the contacts between official from China’s Ministry of State Security and Guo Wengui. The report writes about situation when four officials from China’s Ministry of State Security met with Guo Wengui, and cited insiders in the White House and documents given by Guo.
   

   I have no objection to your report and actually it's a good story to say. But after repeated deliberation, there are a few serious problems that have forced me to write to you and submit the letter to SPJ.
   
   First, in the report, you quoted Guo Wengui’s files which show that he was persecuted by Chinese government. What needs to be stressed is that these files are false documents. Not only Chinese government, but lawyer Wen Yunchao, Teng Biao and at least thousands of others pointed out that the documents are fake.
   
   As professional journalists, I'm sure that you captured this vital point, then, why didn’t you indicate in time in your report that Guo Wengui’s files were widely considered to be forged or at least controversial?
   
   I looked through your report, and find it at last in the 18th paragraph below the picture of documents, i.e., the second paragraph to the last that says with only a few words of understatement, “Beijing has said the document is a forgery.”
   
   This is a typical and irresponsible way of writing that deliberately mislead the readers. Due to the hassle of the long report, most readers will not browse through the end, which means that many of them can't see the simple statement at the end of the report.
   
   I ask you, as professional media , if you report Guo Wengui’s events out of serious and objective media ethics, would you still write the report in this way? Will it highlight your rigorous and objective attitude if you mislead readers to believe in Guo Wengui’s forged papers? Can the standard of your work represent the Wall Street Journal's professional level?
   
   Second, it is true that events of Guo Wengui have become sensitive and complicated due to legal issues that are added by political colors. But it doesn't change the fact that Guo has insulted and offended women. If you don’t believe in the previous content, can you accept and promote Guo Wengui's practice of abusing "Ma Rui is pig, and if she rape a pig, the pig commits a suicide" in his live broadcast. Do you despise women's rights and ignore the network humiliation of the victim just like this?
   
   Harvey Weinstein sex scandal got picked up by all the major news services, but medias became blind when Marui was raped and Guo Wengui used social media to expose Marui’s privacy and abuse her. I want to ask you, what is your report’s principle, objectivity or optional negligence based on color or race. If Marui is a white, will you report Guo Wengui indiscriminately and describe him as a political symbol and try to get him off?
   
   Third, many medias and network have revealed a great deal of record and video evidence that Guo had bribed Chinese officials and tried to win support of Britain and American reporters such as Michael Forsythe, Tony Blair and others since this year. This evidence makes it clear that Guo is trying to bribe everyone he contacts. It is also evident that his disclosure is fabricated and fabled.
   
   I am not opposing to your report about Guo Wengui, but the way you deliberately hid some relevant details and cited so-called “people familiar with the situation” makes me wonder with every reason that during the process you wrote the story, Guo had tried to bribe you. Whether you have reaped the benefits is a problem I can not leave alone.
   
   Besides, there are reasons to be sceptical the people you cited are puppets bought off and controlled by Guo Wengui. Given this, dare you swear to god that your report is rigorous, objective and compatible with American media’s value?
   
   Fourth, I know that the Wall Street Journal is opposing President Trump. There’s no problem in it, the society in America is a free one, people have the right to support or oppose the President. Whether support or opposition, when being presented in a news report, it should not be tinged with the tendency of opposing for the sake of opposition.
   
   According to your report, people who have been cited 21 times should be some senior advisers in the White House. President Trump was chosen by the people, his staff and team represent for the interest of America. If this team could forge ahead in unity, it would be a good news for people of America and the whole world.
   
   However, the way you wrote the journal may put the team in a state of mutual suspicion. If the government can not focus on the developing of America because of mistrust, then who is to blame? Is it President Trump, the government, or you who tried to polarize the government?
   
   In this world, China and America have become the progressive role models of this great era. Set aside ideological differences, if both countries could deepen mutually beneficial cooperation in economy, legislation, security, environmental protection and other fields, it would good news for people in these two and even the whole world.
   
   It doesn’t make sense to me why someone would want to hinder the development of the world, why someone tried so hard using a clown and criminal to impede China-US cooperation, why someone attempted to deter people with a cheat and exhibitionist, who is of no political and economic values, from pursuit of well-being.
   
   If there really is someone as described above, I have to say, the tycoon named Guo Wengui, who used to trap officials and medias through bribery and bugging, has successfully repeated the tricks in America, you and your so-called insiders have been bribed and become his puppets.
   
   Because of this, I urge departments such as the American news management office and Journalists Association to launch a careful investigation into the biased report about Guo Wengui to maintain the credibility of American medias, clear names of the three journalists under questioning and reply to tens of thousands of netizens who had voted to question the journalists.
   
   Written by @TwiZhanJ, a humble and ordinary Twitter user who cares about universal values and human development.
   
   
   写给华尔街三名记者的一封信:请恪守媒体人的原则与灵魂,并致美国新闻管理机构
   
   尊敬的凯特、阿鲁纳女士,塞尔瑞先生:
   
   10月22日,华尔街日报刊登一篇由你们执笔的,题为《中国国安人员赴美劝返郭文贵,各方交锋堪比谍战片》的报道,文章主要援引白宫知情人和郭文贵提供资料等方式,报道了中国国安人员与郭文贵接触的一些情况。
   
   首先,我对你们报道该起新闻事件没有异议,可以说这是一篇看起来很不错的报道,但仔细推敲下来,有几个严重问题使我不得不给你们写信,并同时将信件提交给美国的新闻管理机构。
   
   第一、你们在报道中引用了郭文贵用以证明其受到中国政府迫害的文件。但需要指出的是,这几份文件,在郭文贵出示后即已被广泛证实为虚假文件。除了中国政府的声明,温云超、滕彪律师等至少数千名网友均指证该文件却系伪造。
   
   作为专业的新闻人,我相信几位一定捕捉到了这个至关重要的信息点,那么,为什么在阁下的报道中,并没有及时指出郭文贵所出示的文件被舆论广泛评价为伪造、或至少存在争议性的重要情况呢?
   
   我翻遍阁下的报道,终于在你们配发这几份文件图片的十八个自然段之后,也就是文章倒数第二段才看到了轻描淡写的几个字:“北京方面指出这份文件是伪造的”。
   
   这是一种典型的刻意误导读者选择性相信的不负责任的笔法,因为,由于文章的冗长,大多数读者并不会一直看到结尾,也就是说,他们会因为没有看到你们刻意安排在文末的简陋声明,而误以为郭文贵出示的文件就是真的。
   
   我请问,作为一个专业的媒体人,假如你们报道郭文贵事件完全是出于严谨客观的媒体伦理,你们还会这样安排行文吗?你们刻意误导读者相信郭文贵伪造文件为真的做法,能够凸显你们的严谨客观吗?能够代表华尔街日报专业媒体的专业水准吗?
   
   第二、诚然,由于简单的法律问题被赋予政治色彩,导致郭文贵事件变得敏感而复杂。但是,这并不能改变郭文贵对女性侮辱侵犯的事实。如果你们不相信以前的,那么郭文贵在直播里辱骂“马蕊是猪、马蕊强奸猪猪都会自杀”的做法,就是你们可以接受和弘扬的吗?难道你们就是这样蔑视女权,无视受害者遭遇这样的网络羞辱吗?

[下一页]
blog comments powered by Disqus

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场