[CharlesW]

> We do the same thing in the west. Look at the people you see in ads and on TV, it's always an idealized look at what the people in power WANT society to look like.

The actual explanation is simpler and more crass: It's about what sells to the target audience. At least for large campaigns, these things are thoroughly vetted.

If you're uncomfortable with some aspect of an ad, you aren't the target audience.

[jbob2000]

And you don't think the CCP's promotion of Han is the same thing?

[slowmovintarget]

It is definitively not. CCP has zero interest in sales. It is interested in preserving the party by controlling the populace, with special emphasis on ideology.

The activist Left in the West is grass-roots censorship, which is a completely different problem from a top-down, military-backed authoritarian regime. Granted, the former seems hard at work trying to produce the latter.

[duxup]

Promotion?

They described simply cutting off a stream because of the language spoken.

[jbob2000]

Ok, and if my company's marketing team proposed an ad with a bunch of white people in it, they would also be cut off.

Same shit, different process.

[duxup]

I can't comment on what your marketing team is up to but I don't know of any state level limitation on the demographics of ads. I see plenty of ads with white only folks in it...

[dillondoyle]

Absolute not.

Even disregarding your false promotion comparison, what about the other side?

CCP 'promotes' (actually carries out) the brutal persecution of non-Han and specifically Uighurs in part facilitated propaganda ('ads')

US corporations are not forced by the government to include for instance only one community or exclude another in their communications.

Us corporations are not de facto owned by the government and do not have the same goal of consolidating power to maintain the CCP's (and increasingly just one man at the top's) grip over its own citizens.

In the US many spend lots of money lobbying to keep the government out of their business!