Source: CGTN
Recently, CGTN's Liu Xin and a Western journalist launched a war of words on the topic of the new crown epidemic.
The incident was caused by two tweets about the coronavirus published by Jerry Dunleavy, a Washington Examiner correspondent for the U.S. Department of Justice, on January 3, 2021. He retweeted two articles in the Washington Observer and The Daily Mail in the United Kingdom, quoting Bo Ming, then deputy national security adviser, as saying that the "most credible" source of the coronavirus was the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where "most of the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies believe the virus or an accidental leak originated there."
After noticing these two tweets, Liu Xin felt the need to respond. She remembered that she had interviewed Dr. Shi Zhengli of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, so she intercepted the interview clip to refute it. Liu Xin wrote that the U.S. reporter said U.S. intelligence agencies believe the coronavirus may have originated from an accidental leak in a laboratory in Wuhan. What do scientists say? I interviewed Dr. Zhengli Shi, a virologist in this lab, in August last year (2020)." In the video, Shi Zhengli made it clear that the virus was not present in the Wuhan Institute of Virology before December 30, 2019, so there was no way to talk about "leakage". Liu Xin also added the hashtag "Science Matters"
The next day Deng Liwei replied to Liu Xin's tweet. However, he did not respond positively to Dr. Shi Zhengli's words, saying that the controversy that the virus may have leaked to a laboratory in Wuhan was shelved, saying that the new crown pneumonia "indisputably" originated in China. He also began to sneer at Liu Xin, as if to see the joke.
In this regard, Liu Xin did not flinch. She responded that you want a reply, dear Jerry, just give you one: you said that the new crown pneumonia originated in China "indisputably", where is your "indisputable" evidence? I guess you must value science as much as I do.
The next day, Dunllivi tweeted about it, listing what he called evidence. He forwarded links to remarks and articles by U.S. Senator Tom Cotton, "another Trump administration official, and a chemistry professor at Rutgers University in the United States, but does the statement of a politician or official make sense? Ironically, these also mention that "other sources, including natural transmission, are not excluded" and that "accidents in nature and laboratory accidents are possible".
For such an answer, Liu Xin of course expressed dissatisfaction. She left a message saying, please don't give me these clichéd politicized speculations. If you can, answer my question: Where is your "indisputable" evidence, rather than a plausible theory? Science is important, not politics.
In the face of Liu Xin's continued questioning, Deng Liwei simply avoided the question and began to resort to personal attacks: "This CCP propagandist is a reply girl..." (Note: Canadian teenage girl Alejandra Gaitan once opened a "Reply to Girls" channel in Youtu to comment on hot topics on the website.) In 2012, the channel was viewed more than 12 million times in six months. However, the high number of hits has also brought great controversy, and critics have organized the "Anti-Reply Girl Campaign" online, treating similar content as "video spam". )
Liu Xin is no stranger to such replies, and every time a similar debate occurs, opponents will always follow a similar routine. She replied, "You can't answer my question head-on and call me a reply girl, which reveals your true colors." You're trying to make a fuss about my identity. It's so sad. I feel sorry for your readers. ”
For this tweet, Deng Liwei's reply was an octave higher, and he simply jumped away from the topic of new crown and revived many groundless accusations against China in the West on human rights.
Liu Xin decided to forward the original words in two articles in the authoritative international scientific journals Nature Medicine and the New York Times to end the confrontation. She also called on speculation or squirting to be useless and let science give us the final answer. Stop there.
Fighting the epidemic requires a scientific spirit of seeking truth from facts. It is uncertain where the coronavirus originated, but the most common consensus in the international scientific community is that it originates from nature. But some Western politicians and media can't wait to link the virus to China, abandoning the professional standards that have always been flaunted, and even using politicians' subjective speculations as arguments to circulate citations to influence policy and public opinion. When someone questions him, they even resort to personal attacks to try to overthrow opponents and win debate by "character assassination." Whether in the trade war with China or in the response to the epidemic, such examples are not uncommon. That's why there was the 2019 debate between Liu Xin and Trish Regan, the former host of Fox Business Channel, and this online confrontation.
Sadly, the number of such "opinion leaders" fans is large, the influence can not be underestimated, and they are responsible for providing "real and reliable" information to the general public, can the United States not be chaotic?!
(Edited by Cheng Cheng)