No offence but your lack of media literacy is showing…
You understand that using WaPo as a source for American wrong doings is not the same as using WaPo as a source for wrong doings it’s geopolitical rival. You’d need a Chinese outlet admitting to their faults for it to be equivalent…
Nonetheless I clicked on your link:
The disclosure comes in an investigative report from the Associated Press and a new research report by scholar Adrian Zenz for the Jamestown Foundation.
Literally the second paragraph…
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)
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…
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)