The staff of Shanghai Scrap conclude that, a) Foreigners can feel confident that they can quote Shakespeare, in English, when discussing restaurants in China on the phone; b) the New York Times needs to widen its circle of sources on censorship beyond people who quote Shakespeare, in English, when discussing restaurants on the phone. Further study needed on whether or not phones used by New York Times correspondents and assistants are the most reliable means of judging phone censorship in China.Of course one set of anecdotes doesn't necessarily disprove the validity of another set of anecdotes. But I have to say that Shanghai Scrap's conclusion is far more reasonable sounding to me than those of the NYT.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
FACT CHECKING THE NEW YORK TIMES
Shanghai Scrap does it with glee. You'll want to read the whole thing, but here's the conclusion: