george h w bush, who years on how big is the gap between american perception and we'll reality. well to discuss that i'm now joined by luke sheen and anchored with china state run see on channel. she had a great pleasure for me to talk to you. i'm such a big fan of your work. thank you very much for making the time for me. thank you for the invitation. yes, i come from c g t n. we call ourselves the international television of china. i mentioned you're working for a state run channel without any judgement. i myself work for a state funded channel. and in fact, the, a great value in, in a national effort to try to shape the global story. but i noticed that when you talked to some of our western colleagues, they, they're always a bit skeptical. if not condescending, all of your installation, if you're still ration somehow influence or the quality of your work, you have, you have any, anything to say. i the reason why i have to correct people almost all the time, including my colleagues from our team, for instance, is because i believe this is part of the essence to use perception to shape people's understanding of the world. because in a western context, the word state is almost has very negative connotation to it. it's opposed to the people in represents power. that is not necessarily representing the over interest of the people. it is kind of viewed as the opposite side. whereas in the eastern context, for instance, it is very different. and so i don't, i don't want to be given that label before i open my mouth, which is the case every time. and i don't know about your case on twitter for instance. we are, we are given the label status in the media, which immediately gives people the impression that we are not so credible or what we face propaganda. so be very, very careful. whereas, whereas those people who work for money, you know, they're not given the, the tag. copper media for instance. if you look at the state or media, we have many state broad media by the way, all over the world. you mentioned this distinction perception and reality. and you heard my introduction this, this much is i think very central to how western media operate. and since you catered to an international audience, i'm sure you encounter the effects of it in your work. but do you subscribe to and do you believe that's perception trumps reality rather than the other way around? i think perception is, unfortunately a way how human beings see the world, whether we like it or not. and that is used sometimes for good cause. sometimes for a bad cause it can be weaponized. everything we are doing in journalism is about perception because you are hearing me talking about china all about myself. and it is your perception that will make up your mind what you see, what you get, or what you kind of image you can do in your brain. so perception is, is absolutely critical, but how do we make sure that we don't manipulate perception so that people have the wrong or a very, an impression of reality that is very much twisted or very distant from reality. i think that is the challenge because nobody is able to give reality 100 percent as it is. but how close are you able to give it and how to for how genuinely, professionally repaired professionally. you're trying to do a job do a job. i think that is the biggest challenge really. i mentioned we what are in my introduction, the use republican strategist, who in my new influenza american political, immediate communications for decades to come. and he also played on this very emotional badge issues. and all sorts of unscrupulous means he truly believe he was very open about it, that any mean justify that goal and it also needs to be added and died very young, all of a brain tumor. i wonder if you think that the approach of trying to manipulate the perceptions so that you have the reality that you live, you can actually ural doesn't tend to sort of choke up on its own content over a pretty short period of time. misperception is very you may, if you're very good at it, for instance, if you work in the media and you know how to do it, you can do a very good job and manipulating public opinion. you can paint white as black. you can, you know, totally trust reality and sometimes not even by lying, sometimes just by picking what you want to pick or putting things in a certain order or putting human emotions into one side of the story. well, while not giving irrational analysis of the whole picture, and that's where we're moving in on a daily basis. not just what we see in our hands on tv and our phones, but also how we produce constantly as journalist as to the present. and so it is, i have to say it is part of human nature that we're prone to manipulate. it is also the beauty of human life that we are emotional animals. the challenge is whether we're able to cultivate our literacy, our ability to distinguish what is missed information. what is this, what's, what's perception, what's reality? and how we can on ourselves with the ability to say ok, this is perceived in this way. but what is the reality that we are in a constant pursuit of truth as closely as close as possible? is great conversation i came across your interview with a b, c. i think it was locked here where the journal, if the sterling journalists tried to really on the state of freedom in china and how supposedly constricted it is in comparison to the west and fast forward one year. and i'm sitting here in moscow with my channel being taken all the air, all social media for explicitly legal reasons. to me, it's not even ironic. i think there's something very to tell the terry and then that that's why i wanted to try to try to table here and ask you about this. they've all media freedoms in the west of you see, i think at this moment with the extremely clear what they mean by freedom press right. when freedom of press is in other country, they're defending it even pay money. the latest us competes act allocates actually $500000000.00 us dollars to you know, false so, so code independent media in, in china, basically to malign china. but when it comes to freedom of press in their own countries, i'm not sure whether they will be leading by example, despite their claims. as you said, r t has taken all which is out of the reach by the regulators. i understand it is not done. due to due process, you know, there are all kinds of bottom lines that have been just totally ripped apart because i guess it's a war on the west. the russia is waging, and for them, it's just totally not possible. and everything russian seemed to have become a target. so where's the freedom of expression bed? so i think it is laying, it is laid back in front of the rest of the world. what they really mean by freedom, by freedom of expression, how unified their standard really is. well, you know, the problem. they are always right. when it comes, you know, they can never be wrong. so like, so long as they are on the right side of history. if they have western liberal style democracy, you know, it seems like they can justify everything they do, even if they are wrong. they do it and they still say they are right. and that is that kind of exceptionalism. that kind of double standard i think, is really a huge problem which is really exceptionalism or is it supremacy? i mean, i don't know how you approach, but i think you're one of the most eloquent english speaking. i encourage, i'm not trying to be sacrificing here with you. true. have very good come out of the language. you not only to read off news news, all other q, but also in live debate in analysis. and that's a huge effort. i mean, if somebody calls to speak english as that as non native language, i understand how much word goes into that. and yes. in interview after interview, i can see you not being discounted, but sort of kept as, as somewhat not on par with all the people who speak english fluently, a job by the nature of being born in that country. i mean, do you think our colleagues, our western colleagues understand how much human acrid goes into what we do not just state farm, but basic human effort into even being able to deliver what we are trying to deliver in that language. and also within the framework, or there will be busy on not only learning the language, you're also learning the culture the will be set for. i think one idiom would be good here. it's their house. so we have to follow their rules. and if you want to speak to an international audience, which is, you know, prevalent in english, which is english speaking primarily, you have to learn their language, you have to their culture. and i've been doing, i was an english language major when i was in university that was in, in last century. and i've been using english all these years i've, i've had so much discussion sometimes in my spare time i, i talked to myself, i asked myself questions. there's so much thinking that's going on. so much discussion so much reading. why not? because i like it or mad or something because these are the questions that, that we want to. i'm so how can we talk to people in other parts of the world who don't speak chinese? i have to reach out to them and i cannot wait for everybody to, to, to be able to speak chinese because been, we will never understand each other. so i want to, i want to reach out. i want to go over, but it's very, very difficult. 25 years that i've been, i've been working in this profession. i love it. i'm enjoying it and i'm ever more energized and empowered, but it's not been an easy path. that's why that's why i'm angry. i'm angry when people say, oh, you come from the state media you doing? i'd say excuse me. there are thousands of people more than thousands of tens of thousands of people working stream. the hard to bring information from one language from our native language was which is chinese to you. and you say one word propaganda. you discredit everything. that's why i'm, i'm extremely angry. don't, don't, don't mess with what i say because i won't take, but i remember the back end developer. the 19 you had a bit of an argument with the fox news hoss. you described her as being all emotion, little substance. and i think that was a criticism, but i want to ask you, why do you think emotionality, rather than critical thinking, have become such a dominant feature of western broadcasting because arguably, is easy for them to not only talk but being in english, but for some reason there's a very, very determined push and pull toys, emotionality. the 1st i have to say with all due respect to, to trish reagan, my kind of part in that debate. when i wrote that opinion piece which triggered the debate, i didn't mean to say bad. she was all emotions and no substance, but you see that's the problem. because i was thinking in chinese and i wrote the piece, i was actually saying her research was not well done, but i read it in the she's had been, you know, all emotions a no brainer. but i guess, you know, that made her feel offended and about her, her personality or even her. so my question is more about the approach to or when talking about emotion, emotionality. we mentioned that just now i think we are all emotional animals. that's why life is so beautiful. that's why life is so easily manipulated. that's why we're so credulous as well. that's why we as journalists, who, who are people who shape who can shape people's minds, have such a huge responsibility that we do not use in motion in excessive in a manipulative way. sometimes there are true emotions which have to come out and it can be extremely powerful, no shunning away from the motion. but when you are you making a motion to push your political agenda, i think that is a very dangerous thing. so both as a reader, both as a consumer information and as a producer information, i'm extremely aware when it comes to emotion, i rather keep my tears in my eyes when i see something because i don't want myself to be manipulated by my emotions. and according to western philosophy, actually what is freedom? freedom is when you are able to restrain your animal instinct and make the right choice. and despite your emotions, that is when you achieve true freedom and i want to have that kind of freedom. and i want to give audience the choice to have that freedom as well. so we have to take a very short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments in ah with ah welcome back to world report with dtn anchor lou she, she and i wanted to ask you about the coverage of russian military action in your crane from the chinese perspective, but before we go there, this is not the 1st conflict in which russia and the wes find themselves on the opposite side. we've been there in libya, in syria, on many other issues. and i wonder how is it perceived from so far away in the east? do you see that as a struggles within europe? us, charles, within the west, or do you see russia as a separate entity? neither would the west know with the east or perhaps both here and there. i think it's really, it's really a very good question because what russia straddle straddles europe and asia. part of you is where the west out of you is in the east. so russia is really in a very unique situation, and i think that kind of explains the kind of complex situation you are in. these are the west, or these are the europe. sometimes i, i make mistakes. i say, look, i told my german interviewer, for instance, i said, look, russia is not going away. russia is right at your a. but after i say that as russia is also part of europe. so this relationship love and hate, if you like it, between russia and europe, will very much determine how you get along with each other. but at the end of the day, you are not drifting away from, from each other. russia will all be there. geographically, europe will always be the geographically, you have to find a way to co exist and people are feeling the pain when you, when you start have to, when we are not able to do that. we open here pro western commentators that in a final analysis, china would always put material or even monetary considerations 1st about everything else. and i think that's one of the reasons why many western analysts were surprised why the russians were not russia. the chinese reaction to russia actions, it wasn't pro russian by any means. it wasn't also a pro wester and it was firm, but also very much aware of the context. and i wonder if you personally have noticed a change in beijing position in how these presents itself on the international stage during this crisis. perhaps even before that, i wouldn't say i perceive the changing position because china, i actually wrote an opinion piece on this. since the start of the war, and i wanted to look at china's traditional foreign policy and to find out if there is any legacy that has been inherited. and i think it is very clear that china has the 5 principles of peaceful coexistence. for instance, none interference in each other's internal affairs, respect of sovereignty, and territory and integrity. mutual respect, neutral benefits and peaceful coexistence, peaceful coexistence, basically is what russia and europe wants from each other. and i think in that we got chinese position has always been persistent, has always been the same. did you think china has become perhaps a little bit more for the coming m, stating it's position a little bit, a little more blond if i may say so, because if i haven't noticed, i haven't noticed the change. let me, let me, let me repeat that. i haven't noticed the change just recently. the chinese state council on foreign minister said china want peace in ukraine. and i think from the very beginning that message is very clear. so i haven't noticed a considerable shift because john is also a friendly country with the ukraine. also friendly in terms with the west, also wants to be in good terms with the united states. and of course, russia is all things truly important for china. we have a very strong relationship back to back. so this piece and of course war is no good for anybody. so peace is the message, has always been the message. i think this, this is consistent. i also want to highlight for our audience how china reacted to the un drop resolution on russia. the actions and the chinese side, specifically pointed out that the drug doesn't take into consideration the history complexity of the current crisis. these up the cation of the context of the chinese side. clearly point you is that a matter of ignorance on the part of the west, or do you think it's a deliberate tactic? well, i think nothing comes out of the blue. there is when there is a result. there's always a cause. and i interviewed ordinary chinese people on the tree that well aware of the history, you know, the 5 rounds and nato expansion, for instance, towards russia. the very complex relationship between the people of ukraine and the people of russia and what has happened in eastern ukraine since 2014. so there is not a clear cut right or wrong, or who did, who started the 1st job or, you know, so to try to do that would be, or try to make things look like that would be counter productive because if you have a military conflict, the most important thing is to find ways to stop it as soon as possible. so anything that is consider conducive to finding a peaceful and quick solution to the conflict is considered not in the interest of china and china. lee, i understand trying to believe that is not in the interest of world peace either. so that's why china at stain and that position is actually shared. and i think this piece of information does not understood widely by people in the west, adequately that, that position is actually shared by the great majority of countries in the world. you have 141 country voting in favor of that resolution of the new and general assembly resolution. but you have $35.00 countries abstaining and 5 countries, including russia, voting against. if you take out the population of russia, the, the population of those who are against the resolution actually are the majority of people in the world. so i think that says a lot and the west didn't get the word they wanted. they didn't get people to agree to condemn russia on that. let me know that specifically because i found this fascinating if you know that you're saying that they didn't, didn't get the words that it wanted. because in your analysis of that resolution, you make a clear distinction between the words, conduct merican media, put them the headlines and the words the floor which was the features in the chair of the resolution. and you say that the choice of words was critical. therefore, you know, would be out in that account. i mean, the, the choice of course would have been different account would also have been different. how come a chinese journalists like yourself is more attentive, more sensitive to the variations of meaning in english them are a native speaking colleagues, isn't that ironic? i don't know. i asked the question to sometimes that's why sometimes i cannot tell whether it was an honest mistake or just information that that's the distinguished distinction between missing nation and distance. this information, i think as native speakers they must know the difference between contamination and deploy. by the way it's to deploy in the strongest terms. so there's a slight difference there, but still to deplore and to condemn a different words to condemn is much stronger and it has a moral aspect to it, right. you condemn some something that is almost considered evil. so the, the one us, mainstream media television actually fed the un passes resolution to condemn russia. and if you look at the original text, it doesn't actually say it condensed the announcement of russia's military operation and ukraine. but it doesn't condemn russia's military operation in ukraine, per se applause in the strongest terms. so these are the details that often gets lost and that's why sometimes it is very different. it's very easy, but this information missed information to travel because people are lazy. how many of our viewers will go to the original source to, to, to look through all of the piles of documents that are hidden somewhere and to read, to go through the legal language. some of it is really not very human friendly and to find the differences between condemn and diploma. they would just say, oh, this particular this, well we got a television says so, so it must be the case. and my question, my job is to ask exactly what happened and why it happened. is that an honest mistake or was it something more than that? sometimes i can tell. i hope it's not just information. i hope it's just an honest mistake. i want to ask you something about that. would you just mentioned that the international audiences are you or can sometimes be? well, i don't want to call them lazy, but i think people have been indulged in payment for way too long and their attention are rather sure they are not always want to get into the sort of so the issue is how do you personally decide how you can afford to be with you analysis without making your audience. but this is also a very interesting issue for me as well because i like thinking and analyzing, but i understand that some people don't take it easily. yeah. no, you know, i am kind of person that doesn't take no as an answer and i just bought a motto, the human brain from cow, the chinese shopping platform. i say i am going to put the model of the human brain is half out of the box. i. i want to put it on the ball on the tables of all my colleagues and make them think out of the box all the time because that's what we have to do. how we do our job in, in entertaining, easy to follow way that's, that's still extremely professional. and that is honest and fair and easy to follow . when i write by script i, sometimes i joke about it, i say no to my audience. let's imagine they have primary school literacy level. it's not huge, huge words because they're not, they're going to scratch their heads. and then if they scratch one price, they're going to say ok, she looks nice, but i'm going to switch channels. i don't want them to. i don't want that to happen . so i try to make it interesting and i try to, i try to make, i try to illustrate what i say because the human, the human brain works in a way that when they see something, they tend to believe it. that's why more and more, if you go on social media, for instance, you see messages being being put into graphics. instead of mere language typed words, because that is more effective when you want to send certain messages. and i noticed the us state department is doing more and more that i noticed more and more social influences trying to do that. sometimes i do that, but i try not to do because when you have to that, i'm like the where they want to say something that is very, very, very they want you to, to, to, to see. but yeah, it's a fascinating thing, but i think there is a way to do it without going low, without sacrificing the quality of the discussion and still bringing out the best discussion you can have and so make it fun. that's best my aim and it's my opinion . i really am clear. thank you very much on this opportunity to engage. they've been great pleasure for me. thank you so much. oksana the for the invitation and the best luck way a job. keep it out and thank you for watching hope to see again next week. also part ah, with to what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy confrontation, let it be an arms. race is often very dramatic. development only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successfully, very critical time. time to sit down and talk a goal with this with you is with you. i'm with i just saw a it's a bit trapped. it an elevator 20 minutes can be pretty long time right and a load trapped in an elevator for 20 minutes. not knowing what's gonna happen, not knowing where you are, the sense of sensory deprivation. i think that is your life. now, 20 minutes, but an hour. not at all. yeah. and the intercom is nothing i was trying to get you out. i was keeping you in is your communication ah, that's existence. ready ready ah.

Related Keywords

Germany , Moscow , Moskva , Russia , United States , Beijing , China , Libya , Syria , Ukraine , Russian , Russians , Chinese , American , German , Trish Reagan , Ronald Reagan ,