This guy is the researcher cited: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/seas/people/academic-staff/david-tobin

At first glance, he seems somewhat legit, but I’ve never heard of him before. What do we know about this guy, his research, and what’s the best way to understand these claims?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/863212

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/863209

Archived version: https://archive.ph/5Ok1c
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230731013125/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-66337328

  • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    an unspecified network of activists to distribute the anonymous written survey to the diaspora

    That in itself is propaganda and weak scholarship. It’s called begging the question—using the conclusion as a premise in the argument. Tobin is assuming (or pretending to assume) that his respondents will be threatened by the CPC if he goes out with a fully public call. There’s nothing wrong with snow balling in empirical research or of using existing networks to get appropriate participants. In this case it’s a methodological failing. It’s a suprise this got past the ethics committee.

    There’s also a question of how the researcher can be sure that:

    1. The people filling in the form were from China and had ever lived in China;
    2. That someone in the network didn’t misplace any responses on their way back to the researcher (assuming they didn’t just include a stamped envelope to the researcher); and
    3. The network wasn’t a network of anti-CPC activists like Falun Gong (it sounds like that’s exactly what it was).

    Maybe these are addressed in the paper. I wouldn’t build a project with these flaws in the first place. But then, I’d be concerned with the truth, not propaganda.

    As for the funding – lmao. Funders don’t give you money unless you’re project fits their goals. This is funding applications 101: write a proposal that the funder will want to fund. Not to mention that the funder tells you in advance what they want you to study; dissidents need not apply.

    A western government is hardly going to give money to someone who says in advance that they want to uncover the truth about how well Muslims in China are treated. It doesn’t matter whether the funder got involved afterwards (looks like they did, here, still).

    • Black AOC@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      It got past the ethics committee because no doubt, it’s still FIVE-EYES lackeys on the ethics committee, who ethics be damned, want to pillory China til the cows come home and the fat lady’s hitting her low notes.

      • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Seems like the easiest goddamn job in the world. You just find like, a dozen people willing to take a payment to agree with whatever you want, then pretend those things represent millions of people (and rake in millions of dollars yourself.)

        I’ve heard that ex-communists make the best capitalists, because they understand the best way to exploit the system.