|
on April 22, 2009 @ 6:02 am
Great Post!
The launch of Global Times English edition strike me as well.I still remember reading GT Chinese version when i was in high school. It was one of the most 'patriotic'papers in China, imagine how 'independent' its English version will be...
Well, the Chinese leadership has obviously recognized the importance and centrality of public diplomacy as an integral part of China's 'peaceful rise'. But i always doubted how they real understand what public diplomacy means. I couldn't find a better word than yours - 'Over confidence' - that's excatly what it is.
Chinese politburo member responsible for propaganda and information, Li Changchun, was here in Australia a couple of weeks ago meeting high level officals at the ABC and he made this comment : "Communication capacity determines influence. In the modern age, whichever nation's communication methods are most advanced , whichever nation's communication capacity is strongest, it is that nation whose culture and core values are able to spread far and wide, and that nation that has the most power to influence the world."
My guess is that he just started to read McLuhan's stuff from the 60s and truly believes 'the medium is the message'.......*.*6
With him in charge, i reckon we'll have to see China repeat its mistake over and over again. He's got 700 million yuan to squander anyway.
It's not all bad though. At least these new English-language media investments could help Local Chinese to learn English --- that is one of the primary functions for China Daily and CCTV 9 and (sadly)where the biggest share of audiences come from......
on April 22, 2009 @ 6:15 am
Oh, almost forgot, a question for you Rawnsley, i always think it might be interesting if China could utilize Phoneix TV as a platform to launch a English language PD effort. Phoneix TV's tie with the Chinese government is close but subtle. It's location in Hong Kong and private ownership could provide a slight different identity. It's quite possible, in my view, for China to create a 'Chinese AlJazeera' if it's handled smartly ~ What do you think?
on April 23, 2009 @ 8:10 pm
Hi guys, originally from China, I am currently a doctoral student of public diplomacy in the US. I agree that the Chinese governments may be over-confident regarding their propaganda. Based on what you wrote, however, I have to say that you are arrogant and naive too. You may know something about the U.S., but you know little about China and the Chinese communists. When you think of China, one thing is absolutely certain, that is, this country is growing smarter and stronger. Don't forget that thousands of Chinese came to the US each year and learn what you do for a long long time, and then go back to their country and use this knowledge to protect their country. But your knowledge about China always remain little and unchanged.
I really appreciate what the U.S. have taught me. I really admire what the U.S. have accomplished. But if you think you are smarter than the Chinese, I really want to remind you how arrogant and naive you are. At least I think I know China much more than you.
on April 23, 2009 @ 8:18 pm
I know I didn't give you any fact, say, how the Chiense could improve their skills. That is another issue, which I will discuss in my formal paper. I just wish you to get rid of your unfounded arrogance, especially when talking about a country which you actually know little. Also, you bet China will improve their PD skills in the near future since many Chinese have understood the importante of PD very well.
on April 23, 2009 @ 11:07 pm
To 'the doctoral student of PD', care to give some solid arguments why you think this blog entry's 'arrogant' ?
As a research student and practitioner of PD myself, i think Gary's made some candid and interesting points about China's PD.
And also,i've read quite a few Gary's papers and books, i highly doubt that you know China more than him,even if you are Chinese.....
on April 24, 2009 @ 10:45 am
A great post Gary. One manifestation of China's PD drive is its move to buy up air-time on FM stations in Africa. As Africa finally moves away from Shortwave there is a danger that the market leaders on that medium -- the BBC and VOA -- could find themselves stiff competition or perhaps more likely priced out of the emerging medium. This was an issue of real concern in US public diplomacy in the final months of last year. The correct response to the Chinese challenge is for the US, UK and other powers who beg to differ from the Chinese perspective to continue to invest in their international media and, where necessary, raise their game.
on April 24, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
To david, it is defnintely time-consuming to explain why I feel he is arrogant. I am not sure whether he can read and speak Chinese. If not, he may never understand the essentials of this country. you may not agree, but you can ask him whether he feel the (explicit or implicit) gap between the China in his mind and the China in the Chinese minds. I have stayed in the U.S. for many years, yet I still feel such kind of cultural difference, which definitely affect my judgement about the US.
By the way, I never intend to offend Gary. I just hope he can get rid of his arrogrance (if any). Then he may be able to publish better works.
on April 24, 2009 @ 1:59 pm
By the way, regarding the launching of English global times, it is not an issue of over-confidence at all. It is about how to improve the paper's effectiveness. Also, the Chinese officials definitely know they were lying, when stating, for example, CCTV9 "has an audience of 45 million all over the world." But why did they say so? Do you think they are totally blind and stupid? No, they have their own plans.
on April 25, 2009 @ 12:32 am
Interesting point Nick. In regard to Africa, you sure they are 'moving away'from shortwave? i am not familiar with what's happening over there but i do have a friend here who was a radio director in Kenya, he says Shortwave's still huge as far as kenya's concerned.
Btw, i've recently read your new book on VOA, great stuff! hope to see more of your work linking PD and Journalism
on April 26, 2009 @ 11:07 pm
I think Gary wrote a good post. He knows China and its public diplomacy well. As a Chinese overseas student, I think we should accept some criticism of the Chinese government instead of feeling offended. The criticism of the Chinese government is not equal to criticism of the Chinses people. In addition, Gary does not deny the great achievements by Chinese people.
on April 27, 2009 @ 4:58 am
Can't agree more with Jing Z.
I really feel puzzled why whenever there is some criticism of China or Chinese government, there must be some strong response from people like the above Mr/Ms Anon as if they were personally affended. It's time to stop representing the Chinese people even though you are Chinese. This is an academic blog, so be it.
Second, I have to say, it is truely naive to claim that one must necessarily know 'much more' about China, only because one is Chinese. Sometimes, it works just the opposite way (unfortunately). To be honest, I'm not confident about how many Chinese students now know how much about China, say, the Cultural Revolution, which surely has been affecting this country so much and so long.
Finally I'd say, as a former Chinese overseas student, the most valuable thing I've learned abroad is to be objective and critical. I would prefer Mr/Ms Anon give his/her judgement of Gary after reading more of his work.
on April 27, 2009 @ 5:22 am
David and Nick
Many thanks for your comments. I am interested in the suggested demise of shortwave radio broadcasting in Africa and would like to pursue this further. My interest in both international politics and communications stems from a happy childhood listening to shortwave and DX-ing myriad stations around the world. If you are correct, Nick, it seems that Africa is experiencing its own Great Leap Forward.
David, I agree that Phoenix has great potential as an instrument of PD if handled correctly. Most overseas Chinese I know watch and enjoy Phoenix and prefer it to CCTV. It does seem to have more credibility. Indeed, I know a fast-food Chinese restaurant in Sydney shows Phoenix to its diners. Interesting question: does Murdoch have more or less credibility than the Chinese Communist Party? I encourage you to read Rupert’s Adventures in China, a wonderful account of how Murdoch penetrated the Chinese media market and found a wife.
To Jing Z and Mandy, thanks for your comments. I know that most Chinese people are not blind, and I am delighted that your education overseas has been valuable. This is how China will progress.
I must confess to being disappointed with the response of the PD student. It seems that some Chinese students today benefit from an international education but do not take on board the fundamental aspect of that education, namely critical analysis. I am a critic of the Chinese government, but I also adore China and the Chinese people – yes, it is possible to do so. I do not attack the remarkable achievements of the Chinese people and its culture; nor do I overlook the progress made after 1949 and especially after 1979 (though the great man-made famine of the early 1960s, the Cultural Revolution and 1989 Tiananmen should not be overlooked). However, I do maintain it is possible to criticise the Chinese Communist Party without criticising China. I know that is heresy in the new fiercely nationalist China. If China wishes to progress further in PD it must do two things: (i) Accept that receiving criticism is part and parcel of being a world player. This will demonstrate maturity and responsibility, as well as accountability; and (ii) understand that a criticism of the Chinese political system, any of its institutions or policies is NOT an attack on 1.3 billion Chinese people.
on April 27, 2009 @ 11:47 am
Should I respond? I have written many lines, then decided to delete them. Since I understand I have no right to tell people how you should think of the Chinese communists, governments, and people. Also, there is always a disconnection between the academic and real worlds. That is my problem. But thanks for all of the above comments, which strongly remind me that many people disagree with you. That is fine. I get more incentives to be a convincing scholar, who can earn much more support than currently none:). Good luck to all of you.
on April 29, 2009 @ 6:28 am
Hi Gary, so glad you've read that book TOO! that book is one of the most interesting books about media i've ever read! and interestly enough, the author of that book is one of my bosses here and now he's trying to do what Murdoch has failed with far less resources! He's trying to get a vastly underresourced ABC international TV into China! To me that's like a 'mission impossible' but let's see how far can he go.....
I completely agree with you on what's lacking with some Chinese overseas students - critical analysis. This particular skill is not normally taught or encouraged throughout the Chinese education system and it takes years to develop. I can understand why some Chinese students would get very defensive when facing criticisms about China becasue I WAS ONE OF THEM. I still remember at my first media class here in Australia, i jumped up angrily and started lecturing my teacher when he talks about China's Internet censorship.He didn't laugh at me or dismiss my points as arrogant, instead, he said politely:' yes, i see your point, it's certainly vaild, but maybe you could see this issue in a different way.......'
That suprised me and taught me a valuable lesson: in the academic world, there's nothing personal, it's all about thinking critically and exchanging ideas and perspectives intellectually.
on May 19, 2009 @ 10:12 pm
I am PD student in China now, studying PD and international communications. Before that, I had worked in an influencial Chinese newspaper for 5 years. I think I might have a better understanding of Chinese media and CPC.
I cannot agree with Rawsley. I think it is not over-confidence, but a ridiculous trying. And this new international communication(CPC calls it as international propogada) policy transformed into a struggle between different interets such as Xinhua News Agency, CCTV, the People Daily, etc. They all wish to get a share from the ambitious but thoughtlessly scheme.
This scheme is directed by the CPC, it is the biggest problem. It is the CPC that hurt Chinese media's credibility the most. How can it be possible to image that CPC will free Chinese media?
CCP knows well that it has no Discourse power in the international areana. The influences of CCTV and other party controled media maybe even smaller than some blogger. CCP leader eager wish to improve their PD ability. So, CCP has made such a scheme to flatter their leader, and to show the existence and importance CCP itself.
on May 19, 2009 @ 11:58 pm
Sorry, the last two abbreviations is CPC, not CCP.
on May 20, 2009 @ 4:09 am
Hi Oliver ~nice post~ I guess every westerner or someone who has lived in western countries long enough would have the same perception that China's PD drive will ultimately fail because it's directed by the CPC. I had that feeling too. But recently I started to think otherwise, especially after seeing professor Cull's testimony about CHina's PD (It's in this site somewhere, may be you should check it out). Chinese leadership obviously knew their media outlet lack credibility but should they simply give up ? I reckon what they are trying to do is to generate maxium bang with maxium bucks. Under the condition of the global finacial crisis, i reckon that might work gradually... for instance CCTV9's getting into the US through one of the biggest satellite distributors and in some African countries, CCTV9 actually outplay CNN ..This PD (or propaganda if you like) offensive is evident everywhere in the world (just recently CRI brought yet another FM band in Australia). Ordinary citizens of western countries might not be interested in watching that but i think that worked very well with Chinese diasporas and many western intellectuals studying CHina. Coupled with some exchange programs (inviting foreign scholars to visit some most affluent places in CHina), this could have a subtle impact....one interesting fact is that five years ago, when i first came to Australia, there were very few China-friendly scholars appeared in the Australia media, but now they are everywhere.
Another point might be, during a time of decling resources allocated for foreign reporting, Western media will rely more on Xinhua or China daily for news about China, the image of CHina might change in the future because of this.
CPC is quite visionary in these aspects, they are aiming for the future if that's the right word.
on May 21, 2009 @ 2:59 pm
Over many years and numberless visits to China, I've developed some small understanding of the impression made on Chinese people by western comments about China's duty or responsibility or appropriate role.
In the intense sessions on Capitol Hill lately over redirecting America's economy toward use of renewable energy, there's a new buzz. The context is uncomfortable and two-fold: the enormous and growing consumption of dirty fossil fuels that contribute to atmospheric gas accumulations and global warming, and the startling fact that China leads the world in the design and manufacture of equipment for generating energy from renewable resources. This black/white profile means different things to different people here in Washington as they debate what should be done through negotiation, trade restriction and (by far the most useful action), stimulating/supporting major US investment in new technologies for exploiting renewable resources.
As if to illustrate the ambiguity inherent in the way the issues are discussed, this other awkward point has surfaced. While the US Dept of Energy continues to dither about approving a US engineered coal fired power plant design that is much less expensive than current ones as well as far more efficient and cleaner burning, China has adapted the design for new plants, approved its use and is now bringing these plants on stream. It puts into perspective the exchanges above on attitudes toward China, how Americans assess China's "progress" and its enormously capable citizens now returning there to build the country into the mega state of the future and of their fondest dreams.
Like the Chinese writer above, I too wonder at the depth of understanding behind comments from many "experts" opening their mouths here to bray about "what we must do" yet whose knowledge of China seems anecdotal, economically focused and culturally glib, who seem not to have lived there and who possess less command of Mandarin -- if any, than do I.
Moreover, the arguments that get fast traction (in DC), thanks to news media preference for controversy over comprehension, mainly focus on what China "must do" to accommodate our need of the moment: selling T bills to float our debt to fund our resurgence to regain our preeminence, ergo, to have our way. The wrenching changes we must make in our own interest are oddly muted. Too much easy chatter: too little serious analysis of what is happening and our responsibility for it.
As the facile formulations fly about what America should demand of China, Chinese citizens living in the US are saying in effect, we beg to differ. Meaning, we want a modicum of respect, face, if you like, while we go about pursuing our endeavors which comprise China's core agenda: building China.
We Americans have urgent, enduring national interests to protect -- even when we aren't protecting them through the strategic investments in renewable energy technology we should have begun decades ago: but it serves no purpose to condescend or to insist on language Chinese find demeaning.
Like it or not, despite our relative economic position, China's progress on almost every front suggests that already we have something to learn from its' successes. History will note that China's acceleration amounts to nothing less than moving the largest population, over the most varied/challenging topography, from the most reduced starting point, through the most dramatic changes, in the shortest period of time. In this sense, China's Olympic performance was the apt if pale analog to what it is achieving across the board. A little western modesty in the face of those incontrovertible achievements is both appropriate and productive.
Now, about those T bills....
on May 23, 2009 @ 10:06 pm
Nowadays, most westerners have so many misperceptions about China. Today's China is different with thirty years ago, even different with twenty years ago(1989). Historically, Chinese people are more pragmatic then westerners, now they are even more pragmatic. Communist ideology have little appealing to them, but many people, especially intellectuals and college students, also know that democracy will not come into reality overnight.
India's democracy is a big success to many westerners and some Indians. In fact, only non-westerners know the reality about India, and China.
I have not been to India, but I have many friends working or traveling in India. They see the different side with many westerners about India, which may reflect the same side of China neglected by westerners.
There have been much bribery, kidnappings and even murders occurred in India's democratic election. Local leaders and influential families can decide the ultimate results. Too many people in developing countries are accustomed to these events. China also has "democratic" elections. If you have opportunity to its procedures or institutions, you will admit that it is really democratic. But the result will surely disappoint you. Without long experiences living in these countries, westerners can hardly understand their reality.
I am living now with my wife and two-year-old son in a big city in China. I will get my PhD degree soon, and I have not yet find a job, it makes me very nervous. But the most things I concerned with China are peace and development. I hate CCP, and I hate the severe corruptions. Yet the most things I would not accept are China turning a "democratic" country overnight. It should be a very slow process.
There is an old Chinese saying: despite the rise and fall of the dynasties, it was the people who always suffered. If have no first hand experience in China or not familiar with Chinese history, it is hard for those people living in western democratic countries to understand why Chinese people always suffering. The recent thirty years is the best time for Chinese citizens in China's history, although it is cannot compare with western countries. We wish it can keep going onward.
Surely Chinese citizens are kidnapped by CCP, but it does not mean we have Stockholm syndrome. The will be the best result that we can slowly get rid of CCP. But what I am afraid is that China will repeat the history of late Qing Dynasty. Which mean the authority didn’t want to push a thorough reform, eventually it triggered a revolution. It is the last thing I wish to see.
on May 23, 2009 @ 10:23 pm
to david:
Traditionally, Western medias rely more on Xinhua or China daily. The language barrier maybe the main reason. Today there are many excellent medias in China, but they have no english version. Research shows that news about China transmited by AP and other western medias mostly come from Xinhua or China daily. But they are "mouthpiece" firstly. News reported by them cannot reflect the full view of China.
CCP's new PD effort is to enhance these shameless mouthpiece, not to help other admirable media. It is ridiculous.
|
