Why does it seem like censorship is getting worse?

You are correct. Over the past decade, the rapid development of the Internet has led people to believe there will be more space for speech. But the constraints [on the press] have actually gotten tighter. Fortunately, journalists are resisting. Otherwise, it would be worse. Now, the government’s domestic strategy is to maintain stability. Hu Jintao once said China should learn from North Korea, and sent people to investigate the Eastern European system. Although this trend began in the Jiang Zemin era, the Hu and Wen administration furthered it, regardless of the cost. For example, they bought the most advanced Internet surveillance technology, say, from CISCO. Internet companies like Sina and Tencent have struck a deal with the authorities—or you might call it collusion. In order to secure their business interests, they spend huge amounts monitoring social media. The […] space society has carved out for free expression is being constricted. Moreover, the “stability maintenance” system is making social management crueler. For example, the way law enforcement handles petitioners and property demolition is becoming ever more gangster-like. Although the media tries to fight, it can’t be a counterweight to the giant “stability maintenance” machine.

[…] Do you think new media, such as social media, can further China’s freedom of speech?

New media by itself is a tool. What is more important is how it is used. The government definitely wants to use it to control and steer public opinion. And, indeed, they are spending hugely on it. People in society hope social media will expand the space for expression. It’s not clear how things will turn out. New media might become society’s tool if society uses it more aggressively. For instance, in the current Southern Weekend and Yanhuang Chunqiu cases, new media played an important role. Without new media, it would have been unimaginable for the propaganda department’s work to have been exposed.

See also Yu Jianrong’s recent critique of China’s rigid “stability maintenance” system via CDT.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, cisco, freedom of information, freedom of speech, Hu Jintao, Internet surveillance, journalists, media censorship, news media, petitioners, reform, sina, social media, Southern Weekly, southern weekly protest 2013, stability maintenance, tencent, Xi Jinping, Yanhuang Chunqiu
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Wang has become the poster boy for the reformist camp in the party and a darling of the media. His image as a reformer has endured even as the reputations of both Hu and Premier Wen Jiabao have taken a beating: over the past decade, Hu has shown himself willing to use repression to “maintain social stability”, no matter the damage to society and the political and legal systems, while Wen’s image as a clean and upright politician has suffered after the devastating media reports on his family’s wealth.

There’s no doubt Wang stands out among senior party officials for his quick mind and lack of affectation. He was expressive, and knew how to dress up bureaucratic rhetoric to make it more palatable. He should also be credited for creating some room for debate on reform with his call to “liberate people’s thinking” and his push to strengthen civil society.

But as a member of the Guangdong press, I saw how Wang set back the media during his five-year rule. Freedom of speech is the foundation of all political and democratic reform. From this perspective, we can hardly give his performance a good appraisal.

One of the strikes against Wang, Chang argues, is the appointment during his tenure of Tuo Zhen as provincial propaganda chief. Tuo’s alleged conservatism and inflexibility are said to have taken hold gradually during his thirty-year climb from a start as a “crusading” reporter documenting the plight of the poor. From Teddy Ng at South China Morning Post:

Tuo, 52, started his career as a reporter at the Economic Daily in 1982, and went on to become the newspaper’s chief editor in 2005. In 2011, he was made a vice-president of Xinhua, and he moved to Guangdong in May last year.

He gained early fame for an award-winning story he wrote in 1983 about an engineer who lived in a dilapidated home and worked for a boss who owned four apartments.

Tuo was named one of China’s 10 most outstanding young people in 1993 and was made a senior reporter for the Economic Daily in 1994.

During his time at the newspaper, Tuo was involved in a series of reports on reforms launched in Tongling , Anhui province, when former Guangdong Communist Party chief Wang Yang was the city’s mayor.

He once said the fairness and objectivity of journalists should not be challenged, and the trust bestowed upon journalists by ordinary citizens should be a strong motivation.

By the time he reached Guangdong last year, the transformation appeared complete. At South China Morning Post’s Locustland blog, John Kennedy translated a Weibo post from a purported employee of the Nanfang Media Group, owner of the wayward Nanfang Zhoumo (Southern Weekly, or Southern Weekend) newspaper:

Rumour has it when Tuo arrived in Guangdong, he called up the heads of each newspaper for one-on-one chats, saying the party has entrusted them to hold the line on permitted speech together, that any lost ground will be lost for good.

Then he came out with a series of mortal blows: forbidding Guangdong media from reporting on corruption in other provinces, banning any commentary on negative news in far-off locations, constantly requiring that only the People’s Daily or Xinhua version of news be allowed to run. Southern Weekly in particular has been ordered to get prior approval for every story from the provincial propaganda department, which won’t let each issue go to print until it’s seen all major reports.

This week, Tuo apparently vindicated Chang’s comments by rewriting Southern Weekly’s traditional New Year greeting, without so much as informing the newspaper’s editors. The original article, Dai Zhiyong’s strident call for fulfilling “the dream of constitutionalism in China”, was replaced with anodyne sentiments about how close to fulfilling its dreams China had come. From David Bandurski at China Media Project:

Only if constitutionalism is realized and power effectively checked can citizens voice their criticisms of power loudly and confidently, and only then can every person believe in their hearts that they are free to live their own lives. Only then can we build a truly free and strong nation. . .

According to chatter on Weibo, there were three versions of the letter. The first was the original by Dai Zhiyong, from which the above translation comes. The second was the draft from editors at the newspaper. The third, the version that eventually went to print, contains further changes now being attributed to Tuo Zhen (庹震), Guangdong’s provincial propaganda chief, as well as an introductory message from Tuo Zhen.

[…] The full story here is not yet clear. But it looks as though two egregious violations of propaganda protocol are involved here. First, Tuo Zhen seems to have single-handedly made changes to the second version of the “New Year’s Greeting” after editors responded to his objections to the original. The result is Tuo Zhen’s version three. Second, Tuo Zhen seems to have added his own separate text unilaterally to the paper by penning the “Pursuing Our Dreams” message.

While the original editorial is strongly worded, voicing the hope that China’s Constitution will “cut its teeth” and become the real foundation of freedom in the country, the final version is entirely toothless.

A reference to legendary ruler Yu the Great added insult to injury, suggesting that he tamed disastrous floods not 4,000 but 2,000 years ago. A group of former Southern Weekly journalists expressed their anger in an open letter, accusing Tuo of undermining the central government’s credibility and urging his forced resignation. From a translation at China Media Project:

It is our view that Minister Tuo Zhen’s actions overstep the bounds (越界之举), that they are dictatorial (擅权之举), that they are ignorant and excessive.

It is our view that in this era in which hope is necessary, he is obliterating hope; in this era in which equality is yearned for, his actions are haughty and condescending; in this era of growing open-mindedness, his actions are foolish and careless; in this era that cares for learning and refinement, his actions are crude and thoughtless.

In recent days, the general attitude at home and overseas following the 18th National Congress has been one of optimism over China’s prospects. This optimism is grounded in the outlook and policy direction of the new leadership. That policy direction includes: Unswervingly pushing ahead with reform and opening, persevering in exercising power under the sunlight [i.e., in an open manner], firmly insisting on the basic principles of the Constitution, and resolutely opposing corruption and bureaucratism (官僚主义).

The actions of Minister Tuo Zhen, in Guangzhou and on the very front lines of reform and opening, are entirely contrary to this policy orientation.

By Saturday, South China Morning Post’s Teddy Ng reported, similar letters and statements had come from Southern Weekly’s editorial staff, more than fifty former interns, and Nanjing University’s journalism school. From Keith Richburg at The Washington Post:

Media experts said the demands for Tuo’s ouster set up a challenge that will be difficult for the government to ignore. “There is little room for the two sides to negotiate,” Zhang Lifan, a political commentator, wrote on his weibo account Friday. “The incident will testify to the direction of political reform.”

[…] Asked about the Southern Weekly controversy Friday, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said she did not know the specifics of the situation, which she noted did not pertain to foreign affairs. But she added: “In China, no so-called news censorship system exists. The Chinese government protects journalistic freedom according to the law.”

Discussion of the case on Weibo has been suppressed by blocks on relevant search terms already documented at CDT. In addition, some current Southern Weekly staff have seen their Weibo accounts suspended, according to the former employees’ letter. Both central and local authorities have sought to rein in media coverage of the issue: a Central Propaganda Department directive obtained by CDT ordered:

Urgent notice: Upon receipt of this message, controlling departments in all locales must immediately inform all reporters and editors that they may not discuss the Southern Weekend New Year’s greeting on any public platforms. (January 3, 2013)

The Chinese-language Global Times did comment on Thursday, urging cool heads. From a translation at Fei Chang Dao:

The truth be told, many media outlets have had the experience of taking certain opinions from the government on important reports. Having the government provide certain specific instructions on important reports is one device that is woven into the fabric of China’s news management. Overall, China’s reporting is increasingly open, and the general trend is a gradual reduction in the specific instructions from the government, but at the same time, there has been no change in the larger structure of media management.

The Chinese-language editorial was swiftly deleted, but a similar one remains on the English edition’s site:

The reality is that old media regulatory policies cannot go on as they are now. The society is progressing, and the management should evolve. Traditional media is integrating intimately with new media in China, resulting in frequent migration of professionals and different ways for them to pursue their personal interests. All these means the traditional regulation mechanisms no longer fit the new environment

But no matter how the Chinese media is regulated, they will never become the same as their Western counterparts. This should be the basic judgment of Chinese media professionals. China’s political system differs from the West’s, and the media cannot separate itself from a country’s political reality. The only way that fits the development of Chinese media is one that can suit the country’s development path.

While the controversy continued to rage, The Economist’s James Miles commented on its Analects blog on the constitutionalist current to which the original New Year greeting was intended to contribute.

The appeals for the party to respect the constitution’s provisions are part of what appears to be a new tactic by Chinese liberals to push for faster political change. On November 16th, a day after the party’s new leadership was installed, Yanhuang Chunqiu and academics from Peking University jointly organised a meeting in Beijing of around 100 intellectuals as well as a sprinkling of retired officials to discuss the constitution and the importance of upholding it […]. At the meeting a draft was circulated of what was called a “Proposal for a Consensus on Reform”. The thrust of its message was that if only the constitution were to be respected, China would become far more democratic. The document was made public on December 25th, with the names of 72 academics and lawyers attached.

The liberals’ decision to appeal to the constitution is likely to gather wide support among intellectuals, many of whom fear that any more overt challenge to the party could provoke a backlash. A petition for radical political reform issued four years ago resulted in police harassment of many of the thousands of people who signed it, as well as the sentencing of its chief author, Liu Xiaobo, to 11 years in prison. This time the authorities will find it harder to crack down. Thanks to the rapid growth of social media, especially microblogs, in the last couple of years, the liberals’ message is likely to spread.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: 18th party congress, Chang Ping, constitution, Directives from the Ministry of Truth, Global Times, Guangdong, Guangdong Model, Liu Xiaobo, media censorship, media conditions, Peking University, political reform, Southern Media Group, Southern Weekly, southern weekly protest 2013, Tuo Zhen, Wang Yang, Xinhua, Yanhuang Chunqiu, Zhang Lifan
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

From Google Online Security:

We are constantly on the lookout for malicious activity on our systems, in particular attempts by third parties to log into users’ accounts unauthorized. When we have specific intelligence—either directly from users or from our own monitoring efforts—we show clear warning signs and put in place extra roadblocks to thwart these bad actors.

Today, we’re taking that a step further for a subset of our users, who we believe may be the target of state-sponsored attacks.

[…] If you see this warning it does not necessarily mean that your account has been hijacked. It just means that we believe you may be a target, of phishing or malware for example, and that you should take immediate steps to secure your account. Here are some things you should do immediately: create a unique password that has a good mix of capital and lowercase letters, as well punctuation marks and numbers; enable 2-step verification as additional security; and update your browser, operating system, plugins, and document editors.

[…] You might ask how we know this activity is state-sponsored. We can’t go into the details without giving away information that would be helpful to these bad actors, but our detailed analysis—as well as victim reports—strongly suggest the involvement of states or groups that are state-sponsored.

At Foreign Policy, Josh Rogin explained Google’s reasoning for the warnings’ vagueness:

Google insiders told The Cable that Google will not be giving out information on which governments it sees as the most egregious violators of web privacy.  For Google, the new initiative is not an effort against governments but a way to help its users help defend and protect themselves.

Users who click through the new warning message will be directed to a page that outlines commonly seen security threats and suggests ways users can immediately raise their level of security on Gmail.

“We’re constantly working to prevent harmful activity on our services, especially attempts to compromise our users’ information,” the insider said. “The primary message is: we believe that you’re a target so you should take immediate steps to protect your account.” 

As with the recent search changes, the new measure has met some scepticism, based in part on the lack of concrete information provided. Jeffrey Carr called it the company’s “worst security idea ever”:

There are so many things wrong with this new Google initiative that I hardly know where to begin.

First, it generates fear on the part of Google’s customers because regardless of the fine print, such a warning will most likely send the recipient into panic mode when there’s no reason to panic.

Second, it makes a claim which upon investigation is so vague that it’s meaningless. You may be the victim of a state or someone working on a state’s behalf? That’s pretty much the case for all targeted attacks.

Third, if you are a target of interest for a foreign intelligence service (FIS), one of the first things you should do is STOP USING GMAIL or any popular cloud-based service that cannot guarantee you where in the world on its many data farms your data resides. If the Mossad, the FSB, the MSS, or the NSA is interested in you, they’ll find a way to legally and covertly intercept your data without sending a spear phishing email to your Gmail account.

Google can, at least, guarantee that user data does not reside on the Chinese mainland. Even before the company withdrew from China in 2010, it kept Gmail servers elsewhere to avoid forced cooperation in political prosecutions.

On Twitter, a steady stream of Chinese or China-linked users reported the unsettling sight of the warning banner. These included McClatchy reporter Tom Lasseter:

Google says: “Warning: We believe state-sponsored attackers may be attempting to compromise your account or computer.Protect yourself now”

— Tom Lasseter (@TomLasseter) June 6, 2012

The Hindu’s Ananth Krishnan:

Not the nicest thing to wake up to this morning, I have to say, a warning about ‘state sponsored attackers’ twitter.com/ananthkrishnan…

— Ananth Krishnan (@ananthkrishnan) June 5, 2012

Tsinghua University business professor Patrick Chovanec:

@TomLasseter I got the same attention-grabbing message from Gmail bit.ly/KvUtfO

— Patrick Chovanec (@prchovanec) June 6, 2012

Ai Weiwei and associates, via ‘Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry’ director Alison Klayman:

呵 RT @aliklay: I love Google’s new transparency in China -> 4 ppl in @aiww‘s studio received this message from gmailgoogleonlinesecurity.blogspot.ca/2012/06/securi…

— 艾未未Ai Weiwei (@aiww) June 6, 2012

Journalist Chang Ping:

Warning: We believe state-sponsored attackers may be attempting to compromise your account or computer.

— Chang Ping 长平 (@chang_ping) June 6, 2012

Activists Zeng Jinyan and Hu Jia:

我也收到如下警示：“我们认为，由某个国家/地区支持的攻击者可能正在试图盗用您的帐户或 攻击您的计算机。” 而且我还收到一个疑似钓鱼的信件。RT @zengjinyan twitter.com/zengjinyan/sta… twitter.com/hu_jia/status/…

— Hu Jia 胡佳 (@hu_jia) June 6, 2012

@hu_jia: I also received this warning: “We believe state-sponsored attackers may be attempting to compromise your account or computer.” On top of that, I got what seems to be a phishing email.

Chinese-American physicist George Ge, who was detained and interrogated during a visit to Beijing early this year:

Google to me: Warning: We believe state-sponsored attackers may be attempting to compromise your account or computer.Protect yourself now

— George Ge (葛洵) (@gexun) June 6, 2012

Some laughed the message off:

@gexun I am also a lucky one to be hit at gmail. Will buy a lottery tomorrow.

— Perry Tang (@perrytang1) June 6, 2012

@gexun: I just asked a few friends and colleagues if any of them had received the same warning from Google as I did: none of them had. I’ll do my best to turn that pink warning red! : )

Others, including Wall Street Journal Chinese editor Li Yuan, felt left out:

didn’t get gmail’s state-sponsored-attacker warning. feeling bad about not doing my job right. what would make one qualify? lol

— Li Yuan (@LiYuan6) June 6, 2012

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Ai Weiwei, Chang Ping, digital security, email, gmail, Google, google china, hacking, Hu Jia, patrick chovanec, Zeng Jinyan
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Between April and June in 2009, I visited the University of Hong Kong three times and watched from the sidelines the heated debate on June 4 that unfolded on campus that year. The dramatic result of the controversy was the ousting of HKU student union president Ayo Chan Yi- ngok, but the fiercest argument was between the Hong Kong and mainland students on their different views about the 1989 protests.

Some upset mainland students came to me for answers. I realised that their understanding of the movement was largely based on the so- called “4/ 26 editorial” and its conclusion that “without firmly putting down this upheaval, our country would have no peace”, and we could not enjoy the economic development today. I patiently filled in some of the missing history, but never thought to go through the editorial together with them.

The editorial marked a turning point in the June 4 movement.

Read a translation of the full April 26 editorial, via the Gate of Heavenly Peace website. See also more about the 1989 protests via CDT, including a series of posts in 2009 which revisited original news reporting from each day throughout the spring of 1989. Read more by and about Chang Ping via CDT.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: 1989 protests, Chang Ping, June 4th
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

So you’re a pragmatist?

Actually, many people think I’m more of an idealist. I still think China needs democracy, that it needs to change. I really oppose several arguments [that are commonly made] about why China can’t have democracy, such as the argument that China is unique—that Chinese people need to wait because their “quality” [a Chinese term, suzhi, that implies everything from educational level to manners] isn’t high enough and other ridiculous things like that. Some people said that democracy wasn’t part of Chinese culture, and then Taiwan became democratic. Then they said that Taiwan was a special case. Now look at Wukan. They had their own elections. People say it’s special, but in fact Wukan is really typically Chinese. It’s a Chinese town but they organized everything. So what argument are you left with? If Wukan can have democracy so can other parts of China.

I’m not saying that China should have western-style democracy. In fact, there’s not a single western model. What do they mean? Germany didn’t copy America and America didn’t copy Britain. The issue isn’t copying. It’s do you or don’t you want democracy? Of course democracy has a lot of problems but it’s a way forward.

Since the 1980s, Chinese have been pragmatic. The question since the Cultural Revolution has been: can it work? This was Deng Xiaoping’s biggest influence on Chinese people. They ask if it’ll work or not. Now China has the world’s second-largest economy and could overtake the US. So in terms of market economics it’s been successful and I support this. What we lack is justice. There is no justice in the current system. It’s a practical issue. We need justice. Democracy is a way to bring justice. This is why democracy is necessary.

Read more by and about Chang Ping via CDT, including a translation of his blog post, “I Am Ashamed of Self-Censorship“. Read also about press freedom and media conditions in China.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, democracy, press freedom, Southern Weekly
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

In many of these cases, local governments respond by saying they have hired or appointed young political elites in “strict accordance with regulations.” Further scrutiny reveals, however, that these local “regulations” themselves were tailored to rationalize the hiring of this or that favored young candidate.

In our everyday lives, we see special treatment for China’s guan er’dai happening as a matter of course. This is something we’ve all just grown accustomed to. In some cases, we have even seen officials pulling strings to ensure they are succeeded in their posts by sons or daughters. Most often, though, these arrangements are a tit-for-tat process of exchange among officials holding positions in different corners of power — so that a police official, for example, arranges for the child of a court official to get a post inside the police department, while the opposite arrangement is made for his own child.

Why are these arrangements permitted at all? When our media do ask this question, the answer that comes back from government personnel departments is that there is a need to “ensure stability in the civil service.”

The real reason is much more basic than that. Given a routine and universal lack of real checks on the exercise of power in China, it’s foolish to imagine officials wouldn’t use the power at their disposal to ensure the path is smoothed for their children. China has a long and deep tradition placing great importance on family relationships. Why would government officials, whom we know to behave recklessly over such trifling matters as food and drink, refrain from doing their utmost for the welfare of their children?

Read more by and about Chang Ping via CDT.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2011. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, local power, Nepotism, princelings
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

In a recent blog post, prominent writer Mo Zhixu examined the political context behind the crackdown, specifically focusing on the Southern Media Group. The so-called Southern family of papers usually refers to papers under the group, which include the Southern Weekend, Southern Metropolis Daily, 21st Century Business Herald and Southern People Weekly. The group, which originates from Guangzhou, then at the forefront of reform, is known for its liberal stance even though it is an official Communist Party newspaper group. But apart from this core group of papers, Mo pointed to the wider significance of the Southern Media Group:

More broadly speaking, the Southern Media Group is the result of recent years of expansion. Because of Southern Media’s collaborations with Beijing News (新京报) and Yunnan’s Information Times (信息时报), these newspapers’ ideological missions are close to that of Southern Media. Perhaps there exists a more abstract ‘Southern family’. Because of the group’s success, its former professionals are targets of recruitment by other new media. These people are now widely scattered in various new ventures, and carry with them the same spiritual consensus.

It is difficult to define the spirits and values of the South Media Group and its professionals. But generally speaking, it includes: affirmation of market economy, globalization, rule of law, human rights and universal values, and the promotion of political reforms. In essence, there are two main points: political reforms, and responding to the demand of rights by the newly emerging social class.

His key thesis was that it was not the Southern Media Group becoming more aggressive, but the diminishing space of political reform which makes the group more conspicuous as a dissenting force within the system

Read more about Chang Ping via CDT.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2011. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, press freedom, Southern Media Group
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The columnist, Chang Ping, said he was forced out because his bosses were “under pressure” from government propaganda authorities.

The executive editor, Zhuang Shenzhi, said that the publisher had decided not to extend Mr. Chang’s contract. “The paper thought some of his work was inappropriate,” he explained said in a telephone interview late Thursday.

The authorities in China commonly dismiss reporters and editors who defy censors.

Mr. Chang, 42, has a reputation for writing about some of the most politically sensitive topics, including democracy, media censorship, the failures of government policy and Tibet. His commentaries appeared in Southern Weekend and Southern Metropolis Weekly, both of which are published by the Southern Daily Group.

Read more by and about Chang Ping and his recent troubles at the Southern News Group via CDT.

Update: See also a report from the Guardian:

Zhang has repeatedly been punished for tackling sensitive issues and was banned from writing columns for the Southern Weekend and Southern Metropolis Daily newspapers last July.

“Now I have ‘been resigned’. It is not just because of one particular article, it is because I have always written critical articles,” he told the Guardian today.

“Many times I have been told not to write and that if I agreed I would be able to get more benefits than now, but I refused. The reason the paper is giving is that ‘pressure from above is too great’.”

He added: “The whole media environment is changing. It has become tighter since the Nobel peace prize.”

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2011. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, journalists, press freedom, Southern Media Group, Zhang Ping
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Yan has now become something of a sensation on China’s internet. Web users have compiled the whole series of news reports she wrote using her own relatives as her chief news sources, and Yan has been dubbed China’s “greatest journalist,” a title obviously granted in jest.

Faking news stories is of course not altogether new, but Yan’s case is certainly an exceptional one. Her habitual use of her own family members as source material has been laid out, plain for all to see, by Internet users. The scandal, though comic in its overall effect, should really get us thinking.

As Xinhua News Agency and many web users have read this case, Yan Bingguang’s conduct stems from poor professional ethics and a lack of regard for media credibility. The work of the journalist is largely the work of conscience. Those who aren’t interested in the public’s right to know or in social justice would do best to stay clear of this profession. And yet, as it happens, our profession is full of the crooked and the shifty. It’s only that many journalists are more clever than Yan Bingguang in concealing their crimes.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2010. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, media conditions, Xinhua
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

For many Chinese, our “national image” is something sacred. But once sanctified, a concept hardens and become abstract. People start believing it can be created independent of all other factors, and they ignore larger social and political issues. So what if there are problems with China’s legal environment and its financial system? So what if authors are persecuted for their writing, citizens set fire to themselves to protest at the forced destruction of their homes, or rights petitioners are tossed into extralegal “black jails” simply for seeking justice? None of these things represent our national image. We suppose we can simply manufacture a “national image” independent of these facts, burying our heads in the sand and saying, “Look over here, everyone. This is the image approved by our government.”

It’s fine to film nice things and share them with people. You can film beautiful scenery to promote tourism. You can film life in the city and give people a taste of local culture. But these films convey only what you’ve chosen to film. They can’t possibly be representative.

The producer of the State Council publicity spots, Zhu Youguang, said recently that while “not every country has ‘national image publicity films’, all countries promote themselves in different ways”. The United States does not produce publicity films to promote its image, Zhu said, but this was simply because all of America’s feature films, animations and musical productions promoted its national image. It’s true that the so-called “American spirit” is constantly being promoted through popular culture. But Zhu has confused “image” and “concept”. American films are not produced with funding from the US government, and they are not in the business of manufacturing an American image. What they do is express ideas and concepts, which are intellectual and cultural aspirations. An image, by contrast, is something preconceived, a foregone conclusion.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2010. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, China's image, nationalism, propaganda
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Want: In recent years, we’ve seen quite a number of editorials talking about how controls on the media have tightened in China. Some people have even talked about the rise of a “new nationalism” in China [as something contributing to curbs on the press]. How do you view these trends?

Chang Ping: On the issue of press controls, you can say that things have become more technical in recent years. Media control is now more concrete (更具体) and more focused (更到位) than it once was. A decade ago, during the Jiang Zemin era, the authorities lacked robust technical controls on the Internet side, so print media would often receive orders [from propaganda authorities] saying things like: “Do not re-print such-and-such information from the web, or such-and-such information is rumor.” These days, we don’t often see bans of this kind. Rather, it’s the Internet [sites] receiving bans like, “Do not re-post news from Southern Metropolis Daily.” This is because web controls have now become more systematized (有序了) and effective. If there is something problematic at a website, it can now be deleted directly. There’s no need to send an order down to the newspapers [about Internet content]. Quite the contrary, it’s often the newspapers that are often now the problem. This is an interesting shift.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2010. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, media conditions, press freedom
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

According to the China Media Project, Chang has recently been barred from writing for Southern Weekend and Southern Metropolis Daily. Chang has previously served as editor of the Southern Metropolis Daily and the Bund Magazine. In 2008 he published a controversial article titled “Tibet: nationalist sentiment and the truth” for which he faced an online attack from netizens. In a document from the Southern Metropolis Daily editorial committee, which is being circulated online, Kuang is criticized, fined and demoted for his portrayal of Chang’s dilemma. [Translated by Don Weinland]:

Concerning the decision on Kuang Biao’s punishment

The Southern Metropolis Daily’s Visual Center cartoon editor Kuang Biao created a cartoon based solely on hearsay with an existing orientation bias and put it on his personal blog at Sina.com. The cartoon’s content involved sensitive matters and violated propaganda discipline and related newspaper office regulations and had a negative impact. After the newspaper office discovered [the cartoon], it hurriedly deleted and managed it, and furthermore asked Sina in a timely manner to assist in deleting and blocking the violating posts, making a concerted effort to reduce negative impact.

This publication’s editorial committee has stressed time and again that publication employees strictly abide by news propagation discipline and establish a high level of overall awareness. They are responsible for that awareness and political sensitivity. The cartoon that Kuang Biao took upon himself to create and propagate passed along fault and disfavor to the group and to the publication’s related employees, having a negative impact.

After research by the publication’s editorial committee, it has decided to give Kuang Biao a publication-wide censure, a 1,500 yuan fine and a demotion from mid-level editor to normal editor.

This publication’s editorial committee restates that all employees should take a serious lesson [from this] and strictly adhere to the discipline concerning news propagation and the newspapers’ regulations, prudently using their personal online tools and maintaining the reputation of the publication.

Read more by and about Chang Ping via CDT.

© Don Weinland for China Digital Times (CDT), 2010. | Permalink | 3 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, Internet censorship, Southern Metropolis Daily
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

A rather pure hearted colleague of mine, who has a great deal of respect for our profession, asked me how I viewed our work in light of these recent blow-ups. It was my view that even as we angrily defend ourselves against these attacks, we must seize this opportunity to ask ourselves tough questions.

Why can’t we garner even the most basic level of respect? Aside from the aggressiveness of those in positions of influence, are there reasons for how we are treated that lie with our own conduct? Aside from those honest, brave and professional top journalists who command respect, what is the situation for our media at large?

In modern societies, the press has a pivotal role, and has been called the “fourth estate” after the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government. The press serves three principal roles. First, to provide information for the convenience of citizens in their daily lives, seeking out the facts and helping them distinguish between truth and falsehood. Second, to monitor power, preventing its abuse by fulfilling the public’s right to know. Third, to serve as a platform for free opinion, so that differing views can be expressed.

The second of these tasks can easily turn journalists into heroes opposing power. And journalists who actually serve this role might be accorded great respect.

© Paulina Hartono for China Digital Times (CDT), 2010. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, journalists in china, Southern Metropolis Daily
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Chinese media analysts say the reaction was a sign of a slow boil in the media over tighter government restraints. While the authorities have effectively reined in the media in the last year, Chang Ping, a prominent media commentator, said the Internet had vastly complicated their task.

“When the government tries to contain something, it could achieve the opposite result, spurring people on instead of putting people off,” he said. Mr. Chang, who was forced out as deputy editor of Southern Metropolis Weekly in 2008 for challenging censorship, said the controversy had given journalists “a chance to vent all their anger and frustrations.”

The governor’s outburst happened at a moment when many journalists are chafing under the incessant orders and regulations of state censors. Some liberal members of the media are agitating for more freedom, even as the government bolsters state-controlled news agencies and expands its control over mass communication, from cellphone messages to individual Web sites.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2010. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chang Ping, Deng Yujiao, journalists, Liu Hongzhong, press freedom
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

China blogger conference 2009 in Lianzhou from Danwei on Vimeo.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2009. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: beifeng, blogger conference 2009, bloggers, Chang Ping, Hu Yong, Laohumiao, Ran Yunfei, Rebecca MacKinnon, Teng Biao, Twitter, Zhai Minglei, Zuola
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall