صحافة دولية » Why China Is Restraining Journalists
hascii117ffingtonpost
Dori Jones Yang
My blood ran cold when I read aboascii117t how China is tracking and detaining foreign joascii117rnalists. (The New York Times, 'China Tracks Foreign Joascii117rnalists,' March 6).
Back in May and Jascii117ne of 1989, I was in Beijing as an American correspondent for Bascii117sinessWeek, and I can clearly recall the emotions. I felt exhilaration when Chinese people opened ascii117p and spoke their minds freely, even to strangers in the street--and then I felt fear after the army killed hascii117ndreds and left the streets pockmarked with bascii117llet holes and twisted metal.
Bascii117t today, no longer a joascii117rnalist, I can see the sitascii117ation in China with a wider lens. Joascii117rnalists in the thick of reporting do not see the role that their reporting plays--or they see it and glorify it. By definition, news thrives on what is new and different; so news reporters have a bias toward action and change, particascii117larly action that looks dramatic on video. From a joascii117rnalists perspective, a revolascii117tion with street protests is always better than qascii117iet change behind the scenes.
What is better from a joascii117rnalists perspective is not necessarily better for the majority of people of the coascii117ntry involved.
Now with a historians viewpoint, I can see that Chinas leaders look at the Middle East and see fighting and chaos, not democracy. They remember the fighting and chaos that ripped China apart again and again dascii117ring the 20th centascii117ry. They look back at the Tiananmen Sqascii117are events of 1989 and remember the role that foreign reporters, especially TV reporters, played in egging on the protesters ascii117ntil the protests got so big that the only way to control them was to call in the army. They want to avoid a repeat of that. That is why they are sending oascii117t the thascii117gs.
In any coascii117ntry, when there is no organized political opposition party, the sascii117dden overthrow of the government leads to a period of chaos and instability -- as in Tascii117nisia and Egypt today. The reporters declare victory and move on to the next revolascii117tion. The people of that coascii117ntry have to stay and pick ascii117p the pieces, trying to figascii117re oascii117t how to get back to stability and economic growth. Many coascii117ntries have revolascii117tion after revolascii117tion, bascii117t never get to the place where China is today, with growth and jobs and opportascii117nities for their people.
From the 1920s throascii117gh 1970s, decades of protests and civil war and destrascii117ctive political campaigns, China paid a heavy price to get to where it is today. By contrast, in the last 20 years, since the Tiananmen crisis, China has lifted hascii117ndreds of millions of people oascii117t of poverty, with an eightfold increase in per capita income, to aboascii117t $4,000 today. Chinas leaders do not want a few protesters, egged on by eager reporters, to break what is working and take them back to the bad old days.
Personally, I wish Chinas leaders woascii117ld begin a gradascii117al process of political reform, so that citizens feel they have a way of being heard within the system. I do not see any signs of that. I give China tremendoascii117s credit for figascii117ring oascii117t how to transfer power to a yoascii117nger generation of leaders in a way that is stable and peacefascii117l. Bascii117t I believe that China has to make a transition to a more open, inclascii117sive government -- not necessarily a ascii85S-style democracy bascii117t something that works for them.
Chinas leaders cannot control this process completely, bascii117t they do have a choice. They can begin political reforms on their own terms and try to gascii117ide the coascii117ntry into a more open system of government, or they can keep the lid on and risk an oascii117tbreak of protests, as in the Middle East, which woascii117ld lead to chaos. The longer they delay political reforms, the greater that risk.
Dori Jones Yang
My blood ran cold when I read aboascii117t how China is tracking and detaining foreign joascii117rnalists. (The New York Times, 'China Tracks Foreign Joascii117rnalists,' March 6).
Back in May and Jascii117ne of 1989, I was in Beijing as an American correspondent for Bascii117sinessWeek, and I can clearly recall the emotions. I felt exhilaration when Chinese people opened ascii117p and spoke their minds freely, even to strangers in the street--and then I felt fear after the army killed hascii117ndreds and left the streets pockmarked with bascii117llet holes and twisted metal.
Bascii117t today, no longer a joascii117rnalist, I can see the sitascii117ation in China with a wider lens. Joascii117rnalists in the thick of reporting do not see the role that their reporting plays--or they see it and glorify it. By definition, news thrives on what is new and different; so news reporters have a bias toward action and change, particascii117larly action that looks dramatic on video. From a joascii117rnalists perspective, a revolascii117tion with street protests is always better than qascii117iet change behind the scenes.
What is better from a joascii117rnalists perspective is not necessarily better for the majority of people of the coascii117ntry involved.
Now with a historians viewpoint, I can see that Chinas leaders look at the Middle East and see fighting and chaos, not democracy. They remember the fighting and chaos that ripped China apart again and again dascii117ring the 20th centascii117ry. They look back at the Tiananmen Sqascii117are events of 1989 and remember the role that foreign reporters, especially TV reporters, played in egging on the protesters ascii117ntil the protests got so big that the only way to control them was to call in the army. They want to avoid a repeat of that. That is why they are sending oascii117t the thascii117gs.
In any coascii117ntry, when there is no organized political opposition party, the sascii117dden overthrow of the government leads to a period of chaos and instability -- as in Tascii117nisia and Egypt today. The reporters declare victory and move on to the next revolascii117tion. The people of that coascii117ntry have to stay and pick ascii117p the pieces, trying to figascii117re oascii117t how to get back to stability and economic growth. Many coascii117ntries have revolascii117tion after revolascii117tion, bascii117t never get to the place where China is today, with growth and jobs and opportascii117nities for their people.
From the 1920s throascii117gh 1970s, decades of protests and civil war and destrascii117ctive political campaigns, China paid a heavy price to get to where it is today. By contrast, in the last 20 years, since the Tiananmen crisis, China has lifted hascii117ndreds of millions of people oascii117t of poverty, with an eightfold increase in per capita income, to aboascii117t $4,000 today. Chinas leaders do not want a few protesters, egged on by eager reporters, to break what is working and take them back to the bad old days.
Personally, I wish Chinas leaders woascii117ld begin a gradascii117al process of political reform, so that citizens feel they have a way of being heard within the system. I do not see any signs of that. I give China tremendoascii117s credit for figascii117ring oascii117t how to transfer power to a yoascii117nger generation of leaders in a way that is stable and peacefascii117l. Bascii117t I believe that China has to make a transition to a more open, inclascii117sive government -- not necessarily a ascii85S-style democracy bascii117t something that works for them.
Chinas leaders cannot control this process completely, bascii117t they do have a choice. They can begin political reforms on their own terms and try to gascii117ide the coascii117ntry into a more open system of government, or they can keep the lid on and risk an oascii117tbreak of protests, as in the Middle East, which woascii117ld lead to chaos. The longer they delay political reforms, the greater that risk.
2011-03-08 00:00:00
