<p>
And this was National Geographic . **Why would any government want to censor such a normally uncontroversial magazine, even the Chinese government? **It was true, however, that when I tilted the page, I could just make out what was underneath the black ink: ‘…the Japanese invasion to the Cultural Revolution to the massacre around Tiananmen Square in 1989’. So this was an unusually provocative piece for National Geographic.
</p>
<p>First I assumed that the question is rhetoric because the author answers the question in the line right after. But then I noticed that he answers his question ONLY AFTER he discovers the answer himself. So he may have been genuinely curious when he asked … ugh help me out please.</p>
<p>If you want to read the full essay here’s the link- [Page</a> 1 | Censored | Granta 105: Lost and Found | Magazine | Granta Magazine](<a href=“http://www.granta.com/Magazine/105/Censored/Page-1]Page ”>http://www.granta.com/Magazine/105/Censored/Page-1 )</p>
<p>no its not rhetorical its like for what reason would they want to and then he later discovers the reason</p>
<p>No, it’s not a rhetorical question.</p>
<p>Yeah, I was wondering about the same logic aeoneill11, thanks.</p>