I hope I don’t sound rude but it really sounds like you only consider WaPo trustworthy when it’s convenient for you.

Is it really that hard to consider context?

Thoughtexperiment: You have a neo-nazi outlet having two reports. One is citing high ranking fascists talking about problems in their organization spilling insider knowledge that no other outlet wrote about. A second report is on ethnic and sexual minorities. Would you consider these two reports to be of the same value or would you “consider one of them when convenient for you”? (Don’t actually read Nazi outlets obv)

Besides, the media in China are heavily controlled by the government. I don’t think a news outlet would survive if they dared to report such things.

I said for the source to be equivalent. Ofc you can cite a western source, but I’ll read it like its a neo-nazi rag writing about ethnic minorities aka it being heavily biased

Also just an fyi there are Chinese outlets reporting on Xinjiang…

Sorry, I don’t understand how that makes this any less trustworthy

Please read up on Adrian Zenz, read about the methodology and the report on Xinjiang itself and think if it’s not suspensious that every western outlet cites him (or military funded think Tanks like ASPI) and his very thin findings

Also here’s an QA with Zenz https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dwy7KE7WoNo (The non cringy edit is hard to find, I wonder why that is)