Check your Biases at the Door: Elitism and Subtle Racism

A personal story. I've never said out loud before.

It's a non-AI-related piece. I published it six months ago, deleted it, got scared, wanted to tell the story, and am now thinking I could maybe republish it.

Jasmine Sun

, I really enjoy reading your nuanced takes on China coverage; this might be of interest to you. FYI. If it could even help one person feel more heard, it’s a win for me.

---

In the wake of the recent election results in the U.S., a debate has emerged regarding Kamala Harris's campaign strategies. Some argue that her failure to appear on Joe Rogan's show was a critical misstep. In contrast, others, like internet/ pop-culture reporter/ commentator Taylor Lorenz, suggested that the left simply did not cultivate an independent platform for its candidate and is still living in an elitist echo chamber with legacy media.

However, voices like tech mogul Chamath Palihapitiya on his All-In Podcast have hit the nail. Mainstream legacy media has long adopted a condescending tone, often trying to dictate what is morally right and underestimating the public's ability to think for themselves.

This is how I feel about the China-hating narrative as well. Fair competition, fine. Political and ideological differences are nuanced to acknowledge. But blatant fear-mongering is going out of style.

I want to share a personal story that I’ve been very nervous about sharing. I’m not naming names and don’t wish for any action on anyone at this point. This happened more than six years ago, but I think it’s a tale to share now as we all reflect on the issue we are raising here—is legacy media unbiased, and more importantly, are any of us unbiased?

---

I grew up dreaming of becoming a news presenter for a cable TV channel. I studied finance for my undergraduate degree and then went to journalism school. Everything I did between the ages of 18-25 was to prepare for that dream. For a brief period, I lived that dream, and I touched it with my fingers. Six months before graduating from Columbia Journalism School, I secured a position with CNBC, America’s largest business news channel. I was glowing. I was so proud and excited. I was set to be a multimedia reporter in CNBC’s Singapore office, covering China and emerging Asian markets.

Unfortunately, my dream was cut short. For over six years, I have contemplated whether to share my experience publicly, but it may be the right time now. I joined CNBC with gratitude towards the editor who recognized my potential and the TV executive who offered me guidance throughout my time there. However, the newsroom environment was self-righteous, to say the least.

I was fresh out of graduate school and eager to learn. I was told I could cover business and tech. Yet upon arrival, a new editor insisted that I cover geopolitics despite my repeated objections; it felt dangerous for me as someone of Chinese descent with family living in Mainland China - I did not want to draw unnecessary attention - and it wasn’t what I was interested in, I wanted to cover tech and business.

This conflict escalated when I was forced to write about the Chinese Communist Party's military parade that happens every October First. I said repeatedly I didn’t want to do the story because I didn’t think it was a business-related story/ relevant to our audience, but I was told that I had to because “I’m the boss.” The editor then inserted commentaries into my reports, claiming that the absence of doves on that day showcased human rights abuses. But what about the practical concern of preventing doves from flying into the engines of aircraft during an airshow? What about the fact that the military parade was a grand show that was put on every year, and frankly, no one even paid attention to it much anymore? What about how that event was just so irrelevant to markets, which is what the news organization was supposed to focus on?

I faced similar challenges when questioned about the legitimacy of footage showing an elderly man being set on fire during pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong. My intention was to report on how a peaceful pro-democracy movement had turned violent with time, never to downplay the legitimacy of any asks. Instead of supporting me in finding the newest on-the-ground happenings, my political loyalty was questioned when all I wanted was to do my job. [In fact, I’ve seen another former CNBC (Singapore) anchor saying on social media years after she left the channel that she felt targeted as well for being “soft” on China. She’s Chinese-American, and she said she was made to question her political loyalty even though she was just doing her job of reporting on Chinese innovation and businesses.]

During casual conversations, a senior reporter (who’s good friends with the editor) expressed her desire to explore a new city for a weekend to get away from her young baby and her husband. She wanted to check out some cocktail bars maybe and definitely visit some art galleries. While we were having this seemingly harmless small talk, I suggested Bangkok, to which she nodded, “Mhmm, maybe,” but then said she’s been many times now. So, I suggested Shanghai—home to renowned cocktail bars, glamorous wine bars, and some of the most beautiful art galleries—and she asked if the food would be clean and if there were good hotels. Unsure how to respond, I jokingly mentioned there are two Ritz-Carltons in the city, she could take her pick.

The ignorance, but also the pride, in being ignorant of a country that was so important to the newsroom was astonishing. Everyday, probably 80% of the stories that came out of that newsroom were about China, yet it seemed like no one wanted to know more about it or cared.

How can we be reporting on people we’ve never met and countries we’ve never visited? How do we not have the maturity to recognize we ALL have biases shaped by our upbringings, experiences, people around us, and the literature we consume?

These microaggressions accumulated over time.

The two editors I am thinking of now no longer work there, and the team seems to have dissipated over the years. I’ve been SOOOO frightened to even bring this experience up in any negative way as I feared they would somehow blacklist me in the industry. But now is the time to have this discussion and think about why these people are in the power of editorial direction.

These two editors had never been to China but frequently labeled it as “authoritarian” or “dictatorship” in almost every headline related to Chinese coverage. I was too young and too naïve to recognize that this was my first encounter with racism from someone in power—hostility directed at me and my work because of my heritage. In hindsight, it became clear how ethnicity, culture, history, nationality, and governance were all conflated in their perceptions.

In the end, I decided to leave. I wasn’t performing well at all, and I admitted that. I wasn’t eating or sleeping well, and I was so disheveled. I was in fear every day at work. My mother came and picked me up, and I paid back every cent of my relocation package. I did my exit interview with HR and told her about some uncomfortable interactions. She acknowledged it, and that was that.

When the big boss visited from London, I told him about some of these encounters, and he immediately asked the editor to remove me from the geopolitical beat, knowing the potential implications it may have on me and my family if I were to travel to the Mainland regularly. I asked why I was put under these circumstances when someone without any family ties could easily cover these more “sensitive topics.”

He seemed perplexed at the decision as much as I was. He worked his way up from a page boy to the head of international businesses, and I genuinely respected him so much. When he heard that I was quitting, he called me into his office and said he had high hopes for me to join and stay with the channel, but at that time, my mind was made up. After months of crying myself to sleep, fearing to go to the office, and fearing to even speak up… I knew for my own mental health, I had to go.

---

I then left journalism, and it wasn’t due to a lack of passion for learning about new things or writing but because I felt devastated. I blamed myself for a long time; was I too weak? Was I not trying hard enough? Was I not good enough? Now in my thirties, I can confidently say I did everything I could. Still, the environment/ situation was not healthy for me, and it was brave of me to quit and resourceful of me to be able to pivot quickly into a new career. My passion is what keeps me working and writing until 1 in the morning on substack here often, and I would never doubt my passion or tenacity again.

Back then, anxiety attacks plagued me at work after these discussions; I would have to calm myself down in the hallways to ensure I didn’t cry at my desk. I’d shake and cry alone at night or sometimes to my mother over the phone, who lived on the other side of the world. I graduated from grad school and moved across the world alone from New York to Singapore to pursue my dream of becoming a respected newscaster—a woman of intelligence tasked with bridging gaps in knowledge. I was so eager to learn from my editor, who unfortunately told me he was leaving for grad school soon after my arrival, and to this day, I feel grateful for him offering me the opportunity.

Years later, as an independent analyst and writer reflecting on that experience, I realized that nothing about it was “unbiased.” Those controlling editorial directions were deeply biased; the two editors had never set foot in China yet held prejudiced views. In any normal conversation, would we feel comfortable pointing fingers or making accusations about people or countries we have never encountered?

Ultimately, this brings me back to some legacy media. While I admire (worship) good reporting and relish quality writing, which is what MOST journalists at legacy media produce, we must ask: Are some individuals—perhaps just a few bad apples—too full of themselves? I, myself, have benefited from prestigious academic institutions, but are these schools teaching us to be too elitist? Are we actually putting ourselves on a pedestal and forgetting to learn by living and seeing rather than reading what other Ivy League graduates have written in research papers? Are some legacy media talking down to their audiences for too long? It’s time for them to reflect on how they perceive their audiences because they are not idiots, nor are their junior staff reporters

Is The Influence of Legacy Media Declining?

Anyway, today, I do everything I can to check my biases and disclose my position when covering companies or new technology. I give the readers a full view of who I am so they can check my biases. I am grateful for platforms like Substack that allow us to reach a wide audience and have the informality to bring our personalities and opinions into our writing. Our readers can be the judge of how much they want to trust, not because we tell them we’re trustworthy but by proving to them through repeated thoughtful and insightful writings.

I just want to keep writing stories and reports that can be insightful for you all. I genuinely hope more editors will be open-minded in learning about the nuances of the countries, companies, cultures, and people they cover or at least be patient enough to listen to their reporters assigned the beat and living in the said country before making overgeneralized judgments.