The Strawman Argument
And why it won't work with my articles
A couple of weeks ago, someone I follow on X, David Fishman, who goes under the handle of “@pretentiouswhat” made a great statement, it basically said this: Whenever he writes about China, which he does often and with great clarity, he finds that someone will come into the discussion afterwards with a “yeah but what about...” comment. It’s tiring and frustrating. I find the exact same thing and find myself writing footnotes, getting citations to support things which are not really what I wanted to say, just to , many of my paragraphs contain more themes than they need because I just know someone will enter the comment section with a short comment, usually completely unsupported and an allegation that I’ve neglected to mention something. A couple of days ago, Aaron Jenson 8455 did exactly that. It started with: “what Jerry isn’t telling you...”
It’s what’s known in academic circles as the “Strawman argument”
Here’s exactly how it works and to make it, I’m going to quote Aaron’s comment exactly:
What Jerry isn’t telling you is that for every claim that he has mentioned, media in democratic countries have also made the opposite arguments and claims. In effect, he’s making a straw man argument. He’s presenting Western/democratic media as if it’s one single entity. But of course, it is not. Jerry knows this, but he gets a lot of likes and views from nationalistic PRC citizens, and that puts money in his pocket.
In order to answer, I thought the best way to start would be to find out exactly what the definition of a strawman argument is.
According to the dictionary I used it’s “a bad way to debate where you change, twist, or exaggerate someone’s real point into a fake, weaker version so you can easily knock it down” If you want an example of what that looks like, it’s exactly here, in Aaron Jensen’s comment.
How is Aaron changing the argument?
The twist is that Aaron makes a comment that there is a positive story for every negative one in so called democratic countries - there is not, this is a clear and outright lie - if there were, some should have been provided as examples, they were not so this is a perfect example of how a strawman argument attempts to weaken the actual argument in order to knock it down. As far as I know, there is not one single mainstream media outlet in any “democratic country” which I can only assume means the US, the UK, Canada Australia, India, New Zealand or even most of the EU countries other than perhaps Hungary and Spain where there is a single positive story on China that doesn’t come with a “but at what cost?” caveat and, if Aaron was so sure there was, he should have posted links to some and then I couldn’t claim he was the strawman, he didn’t so he’s made an unsupported allegation that my argument is wrong, in order to knock it down. Having said that, I’m very happy if you can see any and there is not a “but at what cost...” caveat, please send it to me, I’d love to read it.
to demonstrate that my refute of his argument is not a Strawman, I’ll link an academic study which proves what I have said. Kings College in London, a prestigious university, linked up with the Chinese University of HK to analyse British media and established that is most certainly does report negatively. To quote the lead Author, Dr Tim Summers he said: “… it is fair to conclude from this data that a clear majority of the articles about China across different media outlets adopt a negative tone or frame China negatively for British readers.” It’s much easier to call me a liar than it is to refute Kings College, so the strawman will do exactly that.
My post that he was referring to was called,” What Western media isn’t telling you”: it had nothing at all to do with how well the “dreaded CCP” is doing, everything in it was supported by links to the articles I was referring to and every one of them is 100% true, proven to be true and cannot be refuted, so, the next claim that I am paid to support this is neither here nor there. I actually wish it were true, I wish I knew where that money was, it most certainly isn’t getting into my bank account and I don’t write or present information inside China, if I did, it would be blocked on Chinese social media because I’m not a political expert, not registered as one, qualified as one, or allowed to comment on social media as one - so the Chinese market pays me nothing, the YouTube monetisation rarely exceeds $200 a month - if I did this for a living, I’d be stealing and lying to make money. This is all a matter of public record so therefore not a strawman argument, a real comment would have offered truth and facts rather than a simple allegation that I’m paid to perform a job on behalf of someone else - I am not, Aaron could never prove that I am and therefore has weakened his argument into nothing more than an allegation.
Furthermore, the video this comment was posted onto was made in March of this year, it’s over 4 months old and has had 7,500 views, one of which might have included Aaron’s view but probably not as I’m certain he didn’t watch the video because, like all strawmen, he attacked me personally, not the content of the video - if there is a lie in there, if there is something he can refute or if there is another side to the story, then attacking me about being paid is not the way to approach this, attacking the content, stripping it down, showing where it is wrong and proving that, or at least offering some kind of support for the point of view would be useful to an audience wanting to form an opinion; none of that was done - one must wonder why?
Final point about monetisation, with only 7,400 views, how much did I make? Well, as of now, over the four month period it’s been there, that video made me $13:87 - if Aaron thinks I’m getting money in my pocket he must be very poor indeed. The video would have taken me several hours to write, probably an hour or so to make, a couple of hours to edit and at least 30 minutes to post - I’ve also spent half an hour on this response and at least an hour reading and commenting back to the 224 comments on the post. I’m earning about a dollar an hour with no tips - thanks Aaron for pointing that out.
As for these oft repeated allegations that I’m paid, so what if I am, if the message is true, there is no problem with me being paid to post it, if the message is untrue, then if I am paid that would not only be unethical, it would be illegal in the USA, the UK and Australia, despite me being in China when the offence happened, as each of those countries has some kind of foreign interference laws - so the allegation is extremely serious and should merit some kind of proof to accompany it, the fact that Aaron can’t find any, is exactly what straw men do. Allege, accuse and then hide in obscurity while others read and form opinions based on their biases, if this isn’t a strawman argument, I don’t know what is - well done Aaron for making this so obvious.
To avoid being a straw man in a debate there are some things you need to do: one is prove me wrong, another is prove yourself right and another is to offer an opinion based on experience that’s different from mine.
But to call me wrong when you’ve never been to China is pretty weak, to call me a liar when you offer no evidence of a lie, is deceitful and to accuse me of being paid when you have no evidence to support that is simply wasting your time. Either I’m paid, or I’m not and it’s none of your business but the fact alleging I am, doesn’t make it so.
If the article or video I made has some errors, if there’s a mistake in it, I’ll correct it, there won’t be a lie in it because I don’t do that but if the article is true then the Straw man has only twisted evidence, changed evidence or exaggerations only weakens their point, not mine.
Critics, like Aaron, really need to do better. So please, those of you who enjoy my videos and articles, please continue to do so, ask questions because you are my inspiration you’re what keeps me going.
I don’t know what or who motivates people like Aaron to criticise people like me but the fact is, it only makes me come back stronger. Also, in future, if you see anyone criticising me with this strawman argument, please feel free to link them to this video - it might actually make more than a few dollars if more people see it!!!
Racism, financial motivation, anti-China bias, I don’t know what it is that makes people think this but, until they can prove their own point, they are usually straw men arguers.
Jerry I read and watch everything you publish because it feels like an honest perspective about China, which is almost nonexistent in the US. The anti-China propaganda here is relentless and starts the day you're born. I talk to friends about it all the time and the things I hear are astounding. Ignorance + Arrogance. Certainty and conviction about topics that admittedly have never been studied. We have much work to do. Thank you for your efforts!
Oh and by the way, I'm planning my 2nd trip to China in 2027, probably to the south (Guanzhou, Shenzhen, HK). Let's grab a meal if you're around!
I watch your videos regularly. You do great work.