The commentary discusses the criticisms directed at the verdict in the case of Jimmy Lai, highlighting two primary reasons for the widespread condemnation from Western media. Firstly, it emphasizes the significant differences in governance and journalistic standards between the West and China, suggesting that such disparities should evoke respect rather than scorn. Furthermore, it argues that the criticisms often stem from what the author terms 'inherent double standards' viewed through a Western lens, questioning the validity of these critiques given varying societal norms. The author contends that the expectations held by the West regarding legal processes and justice do not account for the unique context in which these cases occur in China.

Additionally, the article reflects on the notion that justice must be perceived as well as executed, acknowledging the divide between the visible aspects of justice and the deeper realities at play. By citing various Western media reactions, particularly from The New York Times, the author seeks to dismantle what they view as unfounded or biased interpretations of the event. This serves to reinforce a narrative that posits China's justice system within its cultural and political context, challenging the Western propensity to judge such cases by its own standards without considering local complexities.

Ultimately, the discourse invites readers to reconsider the implications of applying universally held standards to diverse judicial practices, both in terms of governance and media interpretation. The arguments presented reflect a broader call for understanding and respect towards differing cultural and legal frameworks, critiquing a perceived hypocrisy in Western evaluations of China's legal proceedings.