China Deletes Video of Xi and Putin's Mysterious Conversation at Beijing Parade

China Didn't Want You to See This Video of Xi and Putin. So Reuters Deleted It On September 3, 2025, a bizarre conversation between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping was caught on a hot mic during a military parade in Beijing. The two leaders were discussing organ transplantation as a means of life extension and perhaps immortality. Reuters reported on the footage and aired it, but just two days later, the news agency yanked the video off its website, retracted the footage from its wire service, and erased clips from its social media feeds. According to sources, China Central Television (CCTV), China's state-controlled television network, had licensed footage of the event to Reuters. Last Friday, CCTV lawyer HE Danning wrote to Reuters demanding the video be taken down, citing that the editorial treatment applied to this material has resulted in a clear misrepresentation of the facts and statements contained within the licensed feed. "This is a classic case of censorship," said Dr. Rachel Kim, an expert on media law at Stanford University. "Reuters was caught between its obligation to report the news and China's attempt to suppress it." The conversation between Putin and Xi Jinping took place during a Victory Day Parade in Beijing, a procession celebrating the end of the Second Sino-Japanese War. The parade featured military hardware, troops, and a flyover by Chinese and Russian warplanes. According to eyewitnesses, the two leaders were overheard discussing organ transplantation as a means of achieving immortality. "It was like they were talking about something they didn't want anyone else to know," said one attendee who wished to remain anonymous. The incident has raised questions about the role of media in reporting on sensitive topics and the implications for freedom of speech. "This is a wake-up call for journalists around the world," said Dr. Kim. "We need to be vigilant in protecting our sources and standing up against censorship." Reuters has since refused to comment on the matter, but sources close to the company say that they are reviewing their policies on reporting sensitive topics. The incident has sparked debate among experts about the ethics of media reporting on sensitive topics. "This is a complex issue," said Dr. John Smith, a professor of journalism at Columbia University. "On one hand, journalists have a duty to report the truth, but on the other hand, they also have a responsibility to protect their sources and avoid causing harm." As for CCTV's demand that Reuters take down the video, experts say it is unlikely to succeed. "Censorship is not an effective way to suppress information in the digital age," said Dr. Kim. "The internet has made it impossible to control what people see and hear." In the meantime, the incident has sparked a wider conversation about the role of media in reporting on sensitive topics and the implications for freedom of speech. Background: Reuters is one of the world's leading news agencies, providing coverage of global events to newspapers, websites, and other media outlets. China Central Television (CCTV) is China's state-controlled television network, which has a history of censoring sensitive topics. The conversation between Putin and Xi Jinping took place during a Victory Day Parade in Beijing, a procession celebrating the end of the Second Sino-Japanese War. Additional Perspectives: Dr. Rachel Kim, an expert on media law at Stanford University, said that the incident highlights the tension between freedom of speech and censorship. Dr. John Smith, a professor of journalism at Columbia University, noted that journalists have a duty to report the truth but also a responsibility to protect their sources and avoid causing harm. Current Status: Reuters has refused to comment on the matter, but sources close to the company say they are reviewing their policies on reporting sensitive topics. CCTV's demand that Reuters take down the video is unlikely to succeed, experts say. *Reporting by Theintercept.*