Controversy over Beijing municipal government allocating 47 million yuan (nearly $6.5 million U.S.) to fund the training of Eileen Gu, the Chinese-American Olympic freestyle skier, has triggered a wave of cross-platform censorship. A February 25 article on the sports budget by Caixin, a well-regarded business publication, was quickly deleted, and related discussions on Weibo and WeChat were censored. Since then, CDT Chinese editors have archived numerous netizen comments and four related articles, which appear to have been deleted across various Chinese social media platforms.

Public debate began when the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Sports released its 2025 budget, revealing that it had allocated 48.148 million yuan (over $6.6 million U.S.) to support the training expenses of Olympic freestyle skier Eileen Gu (Gu Ailing) and figure skater Beverly Zhu (Zhu Yi). The now-censored Caixin article noted that the bulk of those funds would go to Gu, and that Beijing’s sports bureau had provided a similar amount (47.379 million yuan) to Gu in 2023. Some bloggers and commenters expressed surprise at the large amount; suggested that taxpayers’ money might be better spent on education, health-care, or sports access for the general public; and questioned the wisdom of such exorbitant support for two Chinese-American athletes perceived to have “parachuted in from abroad” (外国空降, wàiguó kōngjiàng).

An article from the WeChat account Sports Talk included screenshots of the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Sports budget, photos of the athletes, and information on their past performances, injuries, upcoming competitions, and more. The Sports Talk article was later deleted across multiple platforms, including Tencent, NetEase, Caixin, Sohu, and China.com. A now-censored article by Ni Ren, published to the WeChat account Black Noise, discussed the phenomenon of sports stars “parachuting in from abroad” and noted that 47 million yuan sum spent annually on Gu Ailing is roughly equivalent to Zhejiang’s annual 50 million yuan investment to expand preschool education to the province’s rural and underdeveloped areas. Another censored WeChat article, from social-commentary and social-satire WeChat account Senior Professor Ye, half-jokingly posed the question: “Does Eileen Gu Need to Hand Over Her Business Income to China? If So, How Much?” The author mentioned Gu’s many lucrative commercial endorsements, and cited examples of Chinese athletes such as Yao Ming, Li Na, and Zhu Ting, who paid the Chinese government a percentage of their income after choosing to turn professional and work outside of the Chinese system. Lastly, an article from WeChat account Narwhal Studio focused on the fact that, after the public backlash, the Beijing municipal government altered its original statement by deleting Gu and Zhu’s names and replacing them with the vague formulation “for the training and support of our city’s outstanding athletes.” If the city believed in these two athletes enough to give them 100 million yuan over the course of two years, the author asked, why is it so embarrassed about it now? The author also expressed concern that the incident might result in government authorities being less forthcoming about budget details in the future.

CDT Chinese editors have archived a selection of comments from Weibo users about Beijing’s financial support of Eileen Gu, widespread online censorship of the subject, and debate about the expense of pursuing Olympic gold via athletes who just “parachute in.” “As soon as winter rolls around, Beijing becomes ‘Beiping,’ Xi’an becomes ‘Chang’an,’ and Eileen Gu becomes Chinese,” wrote one online wag, referencing the names of two ancient Chinese capitals and hinting at Beijing’s high hopes for an Olympic gold from Gu in the upcoming 2026 Winter Olympics to be held in Milan and Cortina d’Ampezzo, Italy. The Weibo comments are translated below:

风雨飘零任平生：They spent nearly 100 million yuan on two people. Why are they so afraid the taxpayers will find out?

清风不问流年Ta：If the ‘beasts of burden’ found out about this, they might not be willing to keep ‘pulling the millstone’ for them.

@飞呀飞_777：(responding to an image posted by another user) Smart! A link would have been harmonized, but an image will last longer. Only you forgot to include a name with the image.

风雨飘零任平生：(replying to @飞呀飞_777) Some names won’t make it past the censors, so the only way to mention her name is by using the hashtag #Gu Ailing (#谷爱玲)!

全球证券市场：From Caixin: Eileen Gu’s training expenses are 47.07 million yuan. Based on the total amount of funds invested in the Olympics, that works out to an average cost of $100 million U.S. dollars per Olympic gold medal.

粉龙星人：I’m not against spending money on athletes, but I wish that taxpayers’ money would be spent on athletes within the Chinese system. Has she become a naturalized Chinese citizen? Is she part of the Chinese athletic system?

User 7739243963：I’m waiting for this post to be deleted.

北冥小咸鱼 ：I wonder if this post will be deleted.

论衡1998：I am not against spending money on athletes, but the money should come from the free market. No one objects to or complains about Messi’s high income.

思想部队：Eileen Gu has a budget of 47 million yuan—how will she spend it? No wonder she’s willing to represent China in competition. Damn … for that price, who among us wouldn’t be?

大鼻子虎鲸：I always figured that the cooperation deal with Eileen Gu’s team was that the Chinese side would resolve the citizenship issue to facilitate her being able to compete for China, and that Gu’s team would be responsible for her training expenses and winning the gold, thus enhancing her reputation and gaining endorsements—a win-win for both sides. But I never expected that the Chinese side was footing the bill for Gu’s training. Is it right for a local government to spend 47 million yuan annually in taxpayers’ money, in exchange for a gold medal of dubious global importance? How can her team be so stingy, when they’ve got so much money and fame on their side?

九九渝：Are gold medals still … that important? [Chinese]