Madeline Moreno
Introduction
In the wake of the attacks of September 11th, 2001, many Americans came to associate Islam with terrorism. Politicians and American media companies used stories that painted Afghan women as helpless victims and Islam as oppressive to women to bolster support for the US invasion of Afghanistan.[i] Twenty years later, abounding evidence has shown that China is committing genocide against Uyghur[1] and other Turkic, Muslim-majority populations.[2] Yet, Uyghur activists’ appeals for boycotts and sanctions of entities profiting from the genocide have been ignored. This research seeks to explain why the United States’ (US) government and American news media companies do not treat the safety of Muslim women in China today with the same urgency as the safety of Afghan women after the Taliban took over.
Case Background
Afghanistan
Afghanistan is a 99% Muslim country that became of particular interest to the United States and other western countries when the Soviet Union invaded in 1979.[ii] When the Soviets left, several factions jockeyed for power until the Taliban emerged victorious in 1996.[iii] After discovering that the Taliban was allied with al-Qaeda, the organization responsible for the September 11th attacks, the United States invaded Afghanistan.[iv] Lila Abu-Lughod’s seminal work “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” brilliantly demonstrates how this political climate led to the American media’s obsession with “saving” Afghan women from Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, with the underlying assumption that the actions of these extremist groups were inextricably linked to and representative of Islam as a whole.[v] Published in 2002, her work provided an important frame through which to analyze media coverage of Muslim women post 9/11. Abu-Lughod rightly notes that those who are most committed to “saving” Afghan women have not been able to define what oppression and freedom might mean to non-Western populations, demonstrating how “saving” or “liberating” Muslim women has become a catch-all concept used to justify American military intervention in Afghanistan and the Middle East more broadly.[vi] In contrast to “oppressed” Afghan women, a compelling narrative about Chinese Muslim women has yet to emerge. Stories about Uyghur women are appearing in the news more frequently,[vii] but because these developments have been recent, there is currently little scholarship regarding US media coverage of Uyghur women.
Uyghurs
To comprehend what is happening to Muslim women in China right now, it is important to understand China’s ethnic composition. China recognizes 56 ethnic groups,[viii] including the majority Han, who comprise nearly 92% of the total Chinese population.[ix] Approximately 1.74% of China’s population is Muslim, which amounts to nearly 12 million people.[x] Together, the largest and second largest Muslim groups, Hui and Uyghur respectively, constitute nearly 90% of China’s Muslim population.[xi] The Hui are spread out across the country and speak Chinese, but most Uyghurs are Turkic-speaking and reside in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR).[xii] A Foreign Policy magazine article published in April 2020 suggests that members of Hui, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and other ethnic minority populations are being interned in camps alongside the Uyghurs,[xiii] but the amount of data available on these populations is limited.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been wary of Uyghurs due to the perceived ideological tension between Islam and communism, and because of the history of Uyghur autonomous rule and subsequent separatist movements in Xinjiang, a region estimated to have vast oil and mineral resources.[xiv] Xinjiang is of significant strategic importance to China because it borders eight Central Asian countries with sizeable Muslim populations and the contested territories Kashmir and Tibet.[xv] Since the 1990s, tensions between Uyghur and Han residents of Xinjiang have grown, especially as the Chinese government has incentivized Han Chinese people to relocate to Xinjiang in an attempt to diminish Uyghur influence.[xvi] Several attacks on Han Chinese populations attributed to Uyghur separatists in Xinjiang between 2009 and 2014 provided China with justification to ramp up the surveillance and detention of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities. The most recent wave of detentions began in the spring of 2017.[xvii] CCP authorities have predominantly targeted Muslims, who have been stripped of their Qurans and prayer mats, prohibited from wearing headscarves or long beards in public, and pressured to drink alcohol.[xviii] Over the last few years, it is estimated that over one million Uyghurs have been detained in what China calls “re-education camps” in Xinjiang.[xix] Prisoners are routinely beaten, tortured, starved, and extorted by way of threats against family members.[xx] Women have been systematically raped and forcibly sterilized,[xxi] while the children left behind have been sent to state-run boarding schools where they are prohibited from speaking their native languages.[xxii] Mosques and Muslim burial sites have been demolished,[xxiii] and Uyghur women whose husbands have been imprisoned are forced to marry and procreate with Han men.[xxiv] Furthermore, images of cotton fields, testimony from family members, and satellite images confirm the creation of hundreds of textile mills and manufacturing plants. The BBC estimates that over two million workers are “being gathered” every year to work at these factories and cotton fields, where they are subject to “strict controls and political indoctrination.”[xxv] Researcher Dr. Adrian Zenz uncovered thousands of government documents that show the massive scope of these work programs.[xxvi] Zenz told The BBC that these documents provide “evidence of a massive, state-sponsored forced labor scheme, involving…over half a million ethnic minorities directly” in cotton-picking.[xxvii] Yet, China claims that any allegations of forced labor are “completely fabricated,”[xxviii] and that these state-run programs are used to alleviate poverty.[xxix] The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote that “workers from all ethnic groups in Xinjiang choose their jobs according to free will and sign contracts in accordance with the law.”[xxx]
The treatment of the Uyghurs violates multiple parts of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and deserves to be labeled a genocide. Article II of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention) defines genocide as:
Any of the following measures enacted with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, as such:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. [xxxi]
There is overwhelming evidence that Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in China have been subjected to internment, family separation, rape, forced sterilization, and overall severe mental and physical harm, four of the five genocidal acts laid out in the convention. Numerous media and advocacy organizations have declared the crisis a genocide, as did the Trump and Biden administrations (although the Trump administration waited until their last day in office to do so).[xxxii] In December 2021, a United Kingdom Tribunal ruled that the People’s Republic of China has committed genocide against Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities, of special interest because many legal scholars argue genocide should be reserved for cases with clear evidence of mass killings.[xxxiii] Still, many Americans remain ignorant as to the situation in Xinjiang, and few governments have taken substantive steps to challenge China’s actions.
Analysis of Media Coverage: Methodology
The war in Afghanistan does not fully explain why Chinese and Afghan Muslim women are treated differently in the media. Although the United States has never been engaged in a full-scale war against China, most Americans do not have a sympathetic view of the communist state.[xxxiv] One study of US media coverage of Uyghurs, authored by Anna File, expands our understanding of two key lenses—anti-communist and anti-Muslim fundamentalist—through which Uyghurs have been discussed in American media.[xxxv] These lenses are labels, like “sensationalist” or “human rights focused”, that categorize an author’s motivation or bias.[xxxvi] File coded 270 articles from The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal as providing positive, negative, or neutral coverage of Uyghurs, and studied the prevalence of negative articles during three periods between 1944 and 2008.[xxxvii] The results suggested that except for the first month following 9/11, anti-communist bias trumped anti-Muslim fundamentalist bias in coverage of the Uyghurs between 2001 and 2008.[xxxviii] File’s findings suggest that even an event as dramatic as the 9/11 attacks could not overcome American newspapers’ inclinations to vilify the CCP. But the Uyghur genocide did not enter the US public consciousness until nearly two decades after 9/11. If File’s analysis had extended beyond 2008, would her results have been different?
Inspired by File’s examination of media framing, the following research compares coverage of Uyghur and Afghan women between September 1, 2001, and November 1, 2021 in the Washington Post. The Washington Post was selected because of its location in the nation’s capital, and because it is widely regarded as a reputable news source. In November 2021, a search of the term “Muslim women” among all Washington Post articles published between September 1, 2001 and November 1, 2021 provided approximately 16,900 results. The same search plus the word “U*ghur” (to account for spelling variations) resulted in just over 200 articles, while replacing “U*ghur” with “Afghan” turned up over 1,100 results. This means that Uyghur women make up approximately 1% of the Post’s coverage of Muslim women, while Afghan women comprise over 6.5% of the Post’s coverage. Assuming that half of the estimated 1.8 billion Muslims around the world are women,[xxxix] and half of the 39.8 million people currently living in Afghanistan[xl] are women (keeping in mind that this metric is imperfect as the population of Afghanistan has grown significantly since 2001), one can estimate that Afghan women comprise 2% of Muslim women worldwide. Yet nearly 6.5% of the Washington Post’s coverage of Muslim women worldwide has been devoted to Afghan women, meaning Afghan women received a disproportionately high amount of coverage, an additional 4.5% of all Post coverage of Muslim women, in this widely read newspaper. 4.5% may not sound like much, but it amounts to 760 stories, or 38 stories per year. Using the same methodology, it is revealed that Uyghur women receive a much more proportional 1% of Post coverage relative to their size (6 million total,[xli] approximately .7% of the population of Muslim women globally).
These findings indicate that stories about Afghan women play a significant role in coverage of Afghanistan, yet Uyghur women and Uyghurs in general are rarely discussed in the context of US-China relations. In contrast to the oppressed Afghan women trope, there is no dominant narrative about Uyghur women in English-language media and scholarship. There are articles about the portrayal of Uyghurs in Chinese state media,[xlii] outmoded articles praising China’s approach to ethnic tensions and Uyghur separatist groups,[xliii] and a growing number of articles that focus specifically on Uyghur women,[xliv] but none that examine how Uyghur women are portrayed in western media. Western feminist organizations have not taken up the case of Uyghur women the same way the Feminist Majority Fund did with Afghan women.[xlv] This article will posit two reasons for the lack of scholarship and news coverage of Uyghurs: Media confirmation bias, and American economic interests.
Media Confirmation Bias
Numerous studies of media coverage of Muslim women after 9/11 show how the media can emphasize certain realities by making sweeping generalizations and omitting important contextual details, thereby allowing one dominant narrative to prevail unchallenged. In the wake of 9/11 and the US invasion of Afghanistan, painting Afghan women as victims was the easy, politically expedient choice for media conglomerates and politicians alike. Propagating stories about how Islam oppressed Afghan women was profitable for media companies. Researcher Christopher Bail found that between September 2001 and 2008, media content that portrayed Muslims in a negative light garnered more attention than positive messages.[xlvi] Similar studies on portrayals of Muslim women in US news coverage conducted by Rochelle Terman in 2017 support these findings. Terman found that media distributors are likely to both believe and reinforce the idea that Islam is a sexist religion that oppresses women.[xlvii] One prominent example is Bill Maher, who in 2015 suggested on his television show “Real Time” that Syrian refugees would not integrate into well into American culture.[xlviii] Maher stated, “if you are in this religion [Islam], you probably do have values that are at odds [with American values]…Killing women for being raped, I would say is a bad idea.”[xlix] While the video has since been removed from YouTube,[l] there is no indication that Maher cited a specific instance of a Muslim woman who was killed for being raped. The practice of “seeking or interpreting…evidence in ways that are partial to existing beliefs” is what psychologists call confirmation bias.[li] The fact that Maher did not feel the need to present evidence to support his claim demonstrates how widespread the notion that Islam oppresses women has become. While Maher made this comment on his late-night talk show, which is not a venue for strictly informative reporting, there are numerous examples of cable television news promoting overt Islamophobia and falsehoods about Islam, and not just from conservative networks. Former CNN host Chris Cuomo called Muslims “unusually violent” and “unusually barbaric,” while other CNN hosts have tried to paint practices such as female genital mutilation and restrictions on women driving as being widespread and “commonplace” in Muslim countries.[lii]
This rampant Islamophobia in American new media makes it is easy for Americans to understand how an Islamic regime could oppress women. But the idea that Uyghur women are oppressed by a secular regime because they have chosen to practice Islam disrupts this narrative. In today’s crowded media market, viewership and readership are more valuable than ever, so companies are likely to continue to invest in what has proven profitable. This leaves little room for new narratives to emerge. Though some authors have provided accounts that highlight the agency of Muslim women, [liii] these accounts are few and far between.
Prioritizing Profits
Aside from the obvious moral obligation to address such a grave injustice, as a signatory to the Genocide Convention, the United States has a legal obligation to prevent genocide. Furthermore, though politicians sometimes hide behind the rhetoric that Americans are more concerned about economic issues than human rights, a Pew Research Center survey conducted in February 2021 found that 70% of American adults believe “the United States should try to promote human rights in China, even if it harms economic relations with China.”[liv] Uyghur activists have suggested that Americans attend demonstrations, donate to relevant entities, and sign petitions. They have also voiced strong support for the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA),[lv] which would ban importing goods made through forced labor in Xinjiang. Yet, the UFLPA sat idle in the House of Representatives for nearly five months after a similar version passed the Senate unanimously in July of 2021.[lvi]
According to a January 2021 New York Times article, “the Workers’ Rights Consortium estimates American brands and retailers import more than 1.5 billion garments that use Xinjiang materials every year, representing more than the $20 billion in retail sales.”[lvii] While this number alone is staggering, Xinjiang does not just supply cotton. It is also a major producer of coal, sugar, tomatoes, and polysilicon,[lviii] which could explain why Nike, Apple, Coca-Cola, and other large companies spent hundreds of thousands of dollars lobbying Congress to weaken the UFLPA in 2020.[lix] Even entities like the NBA and Disney that may not directly benefit from forced labor still rely on revenue from the CCP and millions of Chinese consumers. LeBron James infamously criticized an NBA executive who tweeted a statement in support of protestors in Hong Kong, alluding to the financial consequences for players should the $500 million deal between China and the NBA be impacted.[lx] Disney’s attempted to ingratiate themselves to the CCP and Chinese consumers by thanking authorities in Xinjiang in the credits for the live-action remake of Mulan, though this backfired spectacularly.[lxi] Google had planned to create a search engine that would censor results at the CCP’s behest, but scrapped the project in 2019 after significant backlash.[lxii] Yet, these entities and many others have continued to conduct business with the CCP. By any metric, human rights have taken a backseat to financial gains for many high-profile companies and the government officials who protect them.
Though media companies often claim to be objective and unbiased, they are still businesses seeking a profit. China appears to be taking advantage of this by buying off media companies in Africa.[lxiii] One journalist wrote in 2018 that, just one day after his column about the persecution of Uyghurs was published in several newspapers owned by Independent Media, a large South African media company, his weekly column was abruptly cancelled.[lxiv] At the time, firms linked to Chinese state media owned approximately twenty percent of the company.[lxv] Several recent reports suggest similar dynamics could be at play in the United States. In July of 2021, multiple Indian news outlets reported that the China Daily, the CCP’s English-language newspaper, had paid American news companies millions of dollars since November 2016.[lxvi] They claim that an independent analyst examined records that had been filed with the US Department of Justice and concluded that China Daily paid a total of over one million dollars to Time Magazine, the Financial Times, Foreign Policy Magazine, the Los Angeles Times, and numerous other prominent outlets.[lxvii] The articles also appear to support the shocking allegation that the China Daily paid for advertising in the New York Times, Foreign Policy, and the CQ Roll Call—notable for its policy analysis and legislative tracking software that is widely used among congressional offices[lxviii]—first reported in the right-wing Daily Caller and The American Conservative in 2020.[lxix] Due to the well-documented political bias and history of sensationalist claims in these publications,[lxx] (note the irrelevant praise of President Trump within the first few sentences of the aforementioned American Conservative article),[lxxi] these reports must be thoroughly investigated by more reliable sources. Yet, this poses a clear conflict of interest, since many of the widely respected newspapers implicated in these reports naturally have an incentive to hide information that would damage their reputation.
Conclusion
Recent scholarship has evaluated media coverage of Muslim women post 9/11, but little work has been dedicated to explaining why some groups of Muslim women have not received the same amount of media coverage as others. This analysis finds that the discrepancy in media coverage results from the combination of several factors. First, confirmation bias predisposes American media consumers and producers to view Islam as oppressive, Muslim women as victims, and to strictly associate Islam with the Middle East (the Arabian Peninsula and Central Asia). It is also worth considering the differences in the nature of the conflicts in Afghanistan and China. The US Congress voted unanimously to authorize the invasion of Afghanistan just a week after 9/11,[lxxii] but the uncertainty surrounding the definition of genocide and preventative actions necessitated by the Genocide Convention could perhaps have delayed action on the atrocities in Xinjiang. However, the most compelling factor is that many American and/or multinational corporations stand to lose billions of dollars if the relationship between the United States and China sours, and media companies are not immune to these financial considerations.
These findings underscore the urgent need for further scholarship to investigate how financial interests shape the complex relationships among four key players: The US government, the American media establishment, foreign governments, and the American public. In particular, the importance of determining the extent to which the CCP influences American media coverage of China cannot be overstated. The allegation itself raises numerous questions. If the CCP is indeed bankrolling American media conglomerates, how is it possible that any criticism of China gets published at all? Why have some newspapers received more money than others? Even if the claim is convincingly disproven, other questions arise. What percentage of news coverage of any given country is focused on human rights concerns, and why? How do journalists, politicians, and voters define human rights issues as opposed to economic or national security concerns?
This article must serve as a call to action for scholars, journalists, policymakers, and ordinary Americans alike. Scholars and journalists reporting on marginalized communities must be cognizant of their power and positionality so as not to strip marginalized individuals of their agency. Politicians must put party politics aside and work together to implement crucial legislation. As consumers, voters, and concerned citizens, we have the power to boycott companies profiting from hatred, slave labor, and genocide. The war in Afghanistan may be over, but the Afghan people have already experienced catastrophic consequences. All of us share the collective responsibility to act on the recommendations of Uyghur activists before it is too late.
[1] Spelling iterations of Uyghur include Uighur and Uygur, but this paper will use the spelling Uyghur as that is what is preferred by the community.
[2] Not all Uyghurs are Muslims, and not all Chinese Muslims are Uyghurs. However, most American journalists and politicians have not meaningfully distinguished between Muslim Uyghurs, non-Muslim Uyghurs, other Muslim ethnic minorities, and other non-Muslim ethnic minorities. For this reason, this paper will use the term Uyghur for purposes of simplification, with the understanding that most people China is targeting are Uyghurs and/or presumed to be Muslim.
Endnotes
[i] Abu-Lughod, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?”
[ii] Petrov, “Afghanistan.”
[iii] Petrov.
[iv] Petrov.
[v] Abu-Lughod, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?”
[vi] Abu-Lughod.
[vii] Shamseden, “On International Women’s Day There Is Nothing for Uyghur Women to Celebrate.”
[viii] Friedrichs, “Sino-Muslim Relations.”
[ix] “Communiqué of the Seventh National Population Census (No. 2).”
[x] Friedrichs, “Sino-Muslim Relations.”
[xi] File, “American Media Portrayals of the Uighur Minority Pre and Post 9/11.”
[xii] Friedrichs, “Sino-Muslim Relations.”
[xiii] Bunin, “Xinjiang’s Hui Muslims Were Swept Into Camps Alongside Uighurs.”
[xiv] File, “American Media Portrayals of the Uighur Minority Pre and Post 9/11.”
[xv] “Xinjiang Territory Profile.”
[xvi] “Who Are the Uyghurs and Why Is China Being Accused of Genocide?”
[xvii] “Who Are the Uyghurs and Why Is China Being Accused of Genocide?”
[xviii] “‘Break Their Lineage, Break Their Roots.’”
[xix] “Who Are the Uyghurs and Why Is China Being Accused of Genocide?”
[xx] Mistreanu, “Uyghur Women Are China’s Victims—and Resistance.”
[xxi] “‘Their Goal Is to Destroy Everyone.’”
[xxii] Mistreanu, “Uyghur Women Are China’s Victims—and Resistance.”
[xxiii] “‘Break Their Lineage, Break Their Roots.’”
[xxiv] Mistreanu, “Uyghur Women Are China’s Victims—and Resistance.”
[xxv] BBC News, New Evidence of Uighur Forced Labour in China’s Cotton Industry – BBC News.
[xxvi] BBC News.
[xxvii] BBC News.
[xxviii] BBC News.
[xxix] Moss, “WSJ News Exclusive | China Closes U.S. Auditor as Tensions Mount Over Forced Labor Allegations.”
[xxx] BBC News, New Evidence of Uighur Forced Labour in China’s Cotton Industry – BBC News.
[xxxi] “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.Pdf,” accessed October 2, 2021, https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf.
[xxxii] “In Parting Shot, Trump Administration Accuses China of ‘genocide’ against Uighurs.”
[xxxiii] “Uyghur-Tribunal-Summary-Judgment-9th-Dec-21.Pdf.”
[xxxiv] Silver, Devlin, and Huang, “Most Americans Support Tough Stance Toward China on Human Rights, Economic Issues.”
[xxxv] File, “American Media Portrayals of the Uighur Minority Pre and Post 9/11.”
[xxxvi] File.
[xxxvii] File.
[xxxviii] File.
[xxxix] “What Is the Most Widely Practiced Religion in the World?”
[xl] “World Population Dashboard -Afghanistan.”
[xli] “Who Are the Uyghurs and Why Is China Being Accused of Genocide?”
[xlii] Zheng, “Media and Minkaohan Uyghurs: Representation, Reaction and Resistance.”
[xliii] Friedrichs, “Sino-Muslim Relations.”
[xliv] Makofsky, “Uyghur Turkic Women and Cultural Change.”
[xlv] Abu-Lughod, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?”
[xlvi] Pappas, “Negative Portrayals of Muslims Get More Media Attention.”
[xlvii] Terman, “Islamophobia and Media Portrayals of Muslim Women.”
[xlviii] Terman.
[xlix] Terman.
[l] Nakamura, “Bill Maher Criticizes Syrian Refugees.”
[li] Nickerson, “Confirmation Bias.”
[lii] Fisher, “It’s Not Just Fox News.”
[liii] Mistreanu, “Uyghur Women Are China’s Victims—and Resistance.”
[liv] Silver, Devlin, and Huang, “Most Americans Support Tough Stance Toward China on Human Rights, Economic Issues.”
[lv] “Take Action.”
[lvi] Basu, “House Votes to Ban Imports from Xinjiang over Uyghur Forced Labor Concerns.”
[lvii] Swanson, “U.S. Bans All Cotton and Tomatoes From Xinjiang Region of China.”
[lviii] Swanson, “Nike and Coca-Cola Lobby Against Xinjiang Forced Labor Bill.”
[lix] Swanson.
[lx] Khatiri, “Save the Uighurs. Boycott China.”
[lxi] Khatiri.
[lxii] Khatiri.
[lxiii] Essa, “China Is Buying African Media’s Silence.”
[lxiv] Essa.
[lxv] Essa.
[lxvi] “CCP Buys Media Influence by Paying Millions to US Dailies, Magazines.”
[lxvii] “CCP Buys Media Influence by Paying Millions to US Dailies, Magazines”; “US Media Outlets Received Millions of Dollars from China to Sell Its Propaganda”; “China Has Been Paying Millions of Dollars to US Media Outlets to Buy Influence.”
[lxviii] “Home.”
[lxix] “China’s Long Tentacles Extend Deep Into American Media.”
[lxx] “The Daily Caller Media Bias Rating.”
[lxxi] “China’s Long Tentacles Extend Deep Into American Media.”
[lxxii] Washington and p:225-7000, “Roll Call 342 Roll Call 342, Bill Number.”
Bibliography
Abu-Lughod, Lila. “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving? Anthropological Reflections on Cultural Relativism and Its Others.” American Anthropologist 104, no. 3 (September 2002): 783–90. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2002.104.3.783.
AllSides. “The Daily Caller Media Bias Rating,” February 2021. https://www.allsides.com/news-source/daily-caller.
The American Conservative. “China’s Long Tentacles Extend Deep Into American Media.” Accessed December 5, 2021. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/chinas-long-tentacles-extend-deep-into-american-media/.
Basu, Zachary. “House Votes to Ban Imports from Xinjiang over Uyghur Forced Labor Concerns.” Axios, December 8, 2021. https://www.axios.com/uyghur-forced-labor-prevention-act-cb313edd-7f38-4f12-a788-f2482fe4db96.html.
“‘Break Their Lineage, Break Their Roots’: China’s Crimes against Humanity Targeting Uyghurs and Other Turkic Muslims.” Human Rights Watch, April 19, 2021. https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/19/break-their-lineage-break-their-roots/chinas-crimes-against-humanity-targeting.
Bunin, Gene A. “Xinjiang’s Hui Muslims Were Swept Into Camps Alongside Uighurs.” Foreign Policy (blog). Accessed November 11, 2021. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/10/internment-detention-xinjiang-hui-muslims-swept-into-camps-alongside-uighur/.
Carpenter, Ted Galen. “The American News Media’s Volatile Perspectives on China.” Cato Journal 40, no. 3 (2020): 713–34.
“CCP Buys Media Influence by Paying Millions to US Dailies, Magazines: Report.” The Times of India, July 4, 2021. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/china/ccp-buys-media-influence-by-paying-millions-to-us-dailies-magazines-report/articleshow/84109897.cms.
CQ Roll Call. “Home.” Accessed December 5, 2021. https://cqrollcall.com/.
“Communiqué of the Seventh National Population Census (No. 2).” Accessed November 14, 2021. http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/PressRelease/202105/t20210510_1817187.html.
“Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.Pdf.” Accessed October 2, 2021. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf.
Encyclopedia Britannica. “What Is the Most Widely Practiced Religion in the World?” Accessed November 9, 2021. https://www.britannica.com/story/what-is-the-most-widely-practiced-religion-in-the-world.
Essa, Azad. “China Is Buying African Media’s Silence.” Foreign Policy (blog), September 14, 2018. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/14/china-is-buying-african-medias-silence/.
File, Anna. “American Media Portrayals of the Uighur Minority Pre and Post 9/11.” Res Publica 14, no. 1 (2009): 19.
Friedrichs, Jörg. “Sino-Muslim Relations: The Han, the Hui, and the Uyghurs.” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 37, no. 1 (January 2, 2017): 55–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602004.2017.1294373.
“‘Genocide’ Is the Wrong Word for the Horrors of Xinjiang.” The Economist, February 13, 2021. https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/02/13/genocide-is-the-wrong-word-for-the-horrors-of-xinjiang.
Huang, Cindy Yung-Leh. “Muslim Women at a Crossroads: Gender and Development in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, China.” ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, 2009. http://www.proquest.com/central/docview/928955624/abstract/6A756F329C5245E9PQ/11.
“In Parting Shot, Trump Administration Accuses China of ‘genocide’ against Uighurs.” Reuters, January 19, 2021, sec. Emerging Markets. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-genocide-idUSKBN29O25F.
Khatiri, Shay. “Save the Uighurs. Boycott China.” The Bulwark, November 13, 2020. https://www.thebulwark.com/save-the-uighurs-boycott-china/.
Koo, George. “The Uyghurs and China.” Chinese American Forum 25, no. 3 (January 2010): 20–22.
Makofsky, David. “Uyghur Turkic Women and Cultural Change: Young Moslem Women Face the Future.” Athens Journal of Humanities & Arts 1, no. 1 (December 31, 2013): 33–44. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajha.1-1-3.
Mistreanu, Simina. “Uyghur Women Are China’s Victims—and Resistance.” Foreign Policy (blog), 12 2021. https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/12/uyghur-women-are-chinas-victims-and-resistance/.
Moss, Lingling Wei, Eva Xiao and Trefor. “WSJ News Exclusive | China Closes U.S. Auditor as Tensions Mount Over Forced Labor Allegations.” Wall Street Journal, August 19, 2021, sec. World. https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-closes-u-s-auditor-as-tensions-mount-over-forced-labor-allegations-11629390253.
Nickerson, Raymond S. “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises.” Review of General Psychology2, no. 2 (June 1, 1998): 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175.
OpIndia. “China Has Been Paying Millions of Dollars to US Media Outlets to Buy Influence: Report,” July 5, 2021. https://www.opindia.com/2021/07/us-media-washington-post-nyt-wall-street-journal-etc-have-been-receiving-millions-of-dollars-from-china-report/.
Pappas, Stephanie. “Negative Portrayals of Muslims Get More Media Attention.” livescience.com, November 29, 2012. https://www.livescience.com/25110-negative-messages-muslims-media.html.
Petrov, Victor. “Afghanistan.” Encyclopedia Britannica, November 2, 2021. https://www.britannica.com/place/Afghanistan.
Silver, Laura, Kat Devlin, and Christine Huang. “Most Americans Support Tough Stance Toward China on Human Rights, Economic Issues.” Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project (blog), March 4, 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2021/03/04/most-americans-support-tough-stance-toward-china-on-human-rights-economic-issues/.
Swanson, Ana. “Nike and Coca-Cola Lobby Against Xinjiang Forced Labor Bill.” The New York Times, November 29, 2020, sec. Business. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/29/business/economy/nike-coca-cola-xinjiang-forced-labor-bill.html.
Terman, Rochelle. “The News Media Offer Slanted Coverage of Muslim Countries’ Treatment of Women.” Washington Post. Accessed December 6, 2021. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/05/the-news-media-offer-slanted-coverage-of-muslim-countries-treatment-of-women/.
“‘Their Goal Is to Destroy Everyone’: Uighur Camp Detainees Allege Systematic Rape.” BBC News, February 2, 2021, sec. China. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071.
Turdush, Rukiye, and Magnus Fiskesjö. “Dossier: Uyghur Women in China’s Genocide.” Genocide Studies and Prevention 15, no. 1 (May 2021): 22–43. https://doi.org/10.5038/1911-9933.15.1.1834.
United Nations Population Fund. “World Population Dashboard -Afghanistan.” Accessed November 9, 2021. https://www.unfpa.org/data/world-population/AF.
Uyghur Human Rights Project. “Take Action.” Accessed December 6, 2021. https://uhrp.org/take-action/.
“U.S. Bans All Cotton and Tomatoes from Xinjiang Region of China.” The New York Times, January 13, 2021, sec. Business. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/13/business/economy/xinjiang-cotton-tomato-ban.html.
“U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress – 1st Session.” Accessed December 2, 2021. https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00281.
Washington, U. S. CAPITOL Room H154, and DC 20515-6601 p:225-7000. “Roll Call 342 Roll Call 342, Bill Number: H. J. Res. 64, 107th Congress, 1st Session.” Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, September 14, 2001. https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2001342.
“Who Are the Uyghurs and Why Is China Being Accused of Genocide?” BBC News, June 21, 2021, sec. China. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-22278037.
WION. “US Media Outlets Received Millions of Dollars from China to Sell Its Propaganda: Report.” Accessed December 5, 2021. https://www.wionews.com/world/us-media-outlets-received-millions-of-dollars-from-china-to-sell-its-propaganda-report-396678.
“Xinjiang Territory Profile.” BBC News, October 12, 2018, sec. Asia. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-16860974.
Zheng, Liang. “Media and Minkaohan Uyghurs: Representation, Reaction and Resistance.” ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2011, 214.
Leave a Reply