These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.
- Overall, we rate China Digital Times Right-Center Biased based on one-sided editorial positions opposed to the Chinese Government. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to the promotion of anti-Chinese Government propaganda.
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180
Founded in 2003, China Digital Times (CDT) is a California based English-language news website that focuses on combating Chinese censorship and CCP propaganda. China Digital Times (CDT) describes itself as bringing “uncensored news and online voices from China to the world.” The website is made up of sections and subsections covering subjects such as Politics, Society, Law, Culture, World, and Translation. Xiao Qiang is the founder and editor-in-chief of China Digital Times and Sophie Beach is the Executive Editor.
Funded by / Ownership
China Digital Times (CDT) does not state who the owner is, however, they do state they are supported by “the Counter-Power Lab out of the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley.” They list their sponsors as “Jack and Dorothy Edelman, John D. and Catherine MacArthur Foundation, Open Society Institute, Internews, HIVOS International, Open Technology Fund, the Wild Thyme Fund, and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).”
Analysis / Bias
China Digital Times is sponsored by Open Society Institute which is owned by billionaire investor George Soros who actively criticizes China such as here “Soros urges Trump to maintain pressure on China’s Xi”. Further, they frequently publish stories that reflect Soros’ views on China.
In review, China Digital Times publishes articles with emotionally loaded headlines such as “MINITRUE: DO NOT REPORT ON WITHDRAWAL OF HK EXTRADITION BILL”. In another article with emotionally loaded language, they report “BEIJING FINDS PROPAGANDA OPPORTUNITY IN WIDESPREAD U.S. UNREST”. When it comes to sourcing they use media sources that fit their anti-CCP narrative, among them CNN, Propublica, NY Times, Washington Post, Wikipedia, The Guardian, Wall Street Journal, and Financial Times.
In addition, we compared articles on how other sources covered a similar incident such as these two articles about China’s Sharper Eyes Project. First, According to Japanese media source Asia Nikkei with a headline titled “China’s ‘sharp eyes’ offer chance to take surveillance industry global”, they state “Trade war tensions threaten overseas ambitions of public safety players: China’s security industry is booming, driven by Beijing’s drive to install state of the art surveillance technology on every street corner. Now, however — just as many companies are beginning to succeed in markets beyond China’s borders — a new front may be opening up in Washington’s trade war with China that could hinder those overseas ambitions.”
China Digital Times on the other hand reported the same incident with this headline “SHARPER EYES: SURVEILLING THE SURVEILLERS” with a quote from the article that reads “This Communist Party slogan was heavily used during the Cultural Revolution, an era in which citizens were incentivized to spy on and even falsely accuse family and neighbors of being disloyal to authority. More than 50 years after that tumultuous era began, the slogan has been reincarnated in an ambitious and highly invasive surveillance program called Sharp Eyes” In this case the China Digital Times article reports negatively, focusing on how the Chinese government is spying on its citizens. In general, the news is reported mostly factual, however, they consistently report negatively on the Chinese Government.
Failed Fact Checks
- None to date
Overall, we rate China Digital Times Right-Center Biased based on one-sided editorial positions opposed to the Chinese Government. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to the promotion of anti-Chinese Government propaganda. (M. Huitsing 1/23/2021)