Logic behind foreign news coverage in China

• Source: The Global Times
• [22:07 April 22 2009]
• Comments

By Jeremiah Jenne

Even though I teach history here in Beijing, I do my best to stay informed about current events as well. I find for my classes it's always interesting if I can add a contemporary angle when discussing history with my students. As such, I've been fascinated by the ongoing debate over media coverage of China in the overseas press.

Recently The Guardian published a piece by Timothy Garton Ash titled "We are getting less foreign news at the very moment we need more," which I thought rather neatly encapsulated the disconnection between how the foreign media operates and how it is perceived by Chinese readers.

Ash argues that the problem with China coverage is not necessarily that it's too negative, but that there is too little of it: the limited number of stories that do get published in the European and American press cannot possibly do justice to the complexities and breadth of this country and its rapid transformation.

He also suggests, as I have in the past, that part of the problem is a perception gap about the role of media in society. He points to a recent statement by China's ambassador to the EU Song Zhe, who said European and Chinese correspondents "should be more aware of their responsibility for promoting China-EU relations," and that they should "make their news reporting and commentary conducive to consensus, trust and co-operation" and "respect the other's theory of development, policy choice and cultural values."

Ash bluntly responds: "No. That may be the business of ambassadors. It is not the business of journalists – and especially not of reporters. Their job is to report accurately, fairly and vividly what they see, hear, smell and read. To tell it as it is. And thus, to recall a Chinese maxim favored by Deng Xiaoping, to "seek truth through facts."

There's a lot of good coverage of China in the foreign media and too much bad coverage of China as well, but the idea that the "Western Media" operates as a giant cabal with the editors and producers of CNN, BBC, New York Times, Der Spiegel, and the Lichtenstein Daily Bugler all gathering once a month in a secret underground bunker listening as a clone of Henry Luce strokes a white Persian cat and dispenses marching orders on how to destroy the Chinese nation is obviously ludicrous.

And while accusations of professional journalists coming here to blatantly push an agenda is (mostly) paranoid hogwash, I do think that there is a tendency to let preconceived notions dictate how certain stories are covered, and this is obviously a problem. It would also be naive not to also discuss the role market forces play in the decision to run articles on certain topics at the expense of others.

Ash notes perceptively, "As they compete fiercely for readers and viewers, mainstream Western media tend to stick with a few stories that are familiar and interesting to them. They report so much about Tibet not because they are ideological China-bashers but because their consumers are fascinated by and care about Tibet.
Yes, their news stories on China's domestic politics tend to the sensational and the negative – so do their stories about the domestic politics of their own countries.

Those who edit and select these stories are just following the market-oriented rules of their trade. If it bleeds, it leads. "Many Chinese city dwellers moderately content with rising standard of living is not a headline that would sell many papers."

This is obviously an issue that will continue to be debated and discussed, but I see progress being made. I think foreign correspondents in China are taking pains to include the "official" view whenever possible. (The fact is, however, that many Chinese officials refuse to be quoted on the record, even when doing so would help to provide a more balanced perspective on a particular controversy or issue.)

The criticism leveled at the foreign press last year – and there were some solid and reasonable critiques amid the blather and shouting – has had an effect. Journalists in China seem less likely to jump into "stories which write themselves" without first doing the necessary legwork.

At the same time, many thoughtful Chinese commentators are beginning to understand that there really is no such thing as a monolithic "Western Media," and that there exists considerable differentiation in terms of quality, perspective, ideological leanings, and topical focus among the media organizations covering China.
Even more promising, many journalists and editors inside China working for mainland publications realize the value of the media in bringing social problems to the attention of the public and to provide multiple perspectives on complex issues.

Currently, Chinese nationals working for foreign media organizations are prohibited from doing independent interviews or publishing by-lined articles.

If the government genuinely believes that "foreign journalists don't understand China," then why not allow, nay actually encourage, foreign media organizations to hire more Chinese journalists (who presumably do know a thing or three about the country) to do actual reporting?

The author is a PhD candidate teaching and doing research in Beijing. He writes the Chinese history website Jottings from the Granite Studio (granitestudio.org)