Whenever I tell a Westerner what I do for a living, many are doubtful. "Is there such a thing as a free press in China?," they ask. "Are there really independent journalists?" The answer is yes and no.
Ever since the late Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) launched his reforms in 1978, China has been moving from a planned economy to the free market. Its media industry is undergoing a transition equally as wrenching. It is also a more complicated process, because the state, which embraces economic reform wholeheartedly, is not certain how much media reform to tolerate.
Yet the government's attitude to the press is not one of constant suspicion. After it (belatedly) recognized the importance of transparency in capital markets, journalists gained greater freedom to pursue investigative journalism. So, while the line between the permissible and the prohibited has shifted, it still exists. Some of us walk right up to the line, even nudging it every once in a while. Crossing it, however, remains another matter.
All the same, journalists and editors like myself are increasingly confident in our role as economic watchdogs. In its first issue in April 1998, the magazine that I edit, Caijing (Business and Finance Review), published a cover story on Qiong Min Yuan, a little-known real estate company whose share prices skyrocketed by 400 percent. The company's stock was suspended from trading in 1997, after it was charged with overstating profits. A few insiders were tipped off beforehand and unloaded their shares, while 50,000 individual investors lost millions of dollars.
Although everyone knew what happened, no one dared publish details of the inflated profits or the tip-off until we broke the silence. Our article -- "Who is Responsible for Qiong Min Yuan?" -- offered no investigative scoops or new information. By simply reporting the story and pointing out places where the system failed to protect small investors, we incited a stir. Government watchdogs immediately criticized Caijing.
Our recent focus has been on securities markets. In October 2000, we published a groundbreaking article called The Inside Story of Fund Management, which disclosed a previously suppressed Shanghai Stock Exchange analysis that showed that most of China's fledgling investment-fund-management companies were trading illegally and irregularly on the securities market. By publishing that article, our magazine became the first serious publication ever to report criticism of the fund-management sector and the stock market.
The 10 government-affiliated companies mentioned in the report threatened to sue us. But our readers came to our defense, while the prominent Chinese economist Wu Jinglian (
In many ways, the fund management story was a watershed moment for Caijing and for the Chinese press in general. The government left us entirely alone, neither banning nor criticizing our report. In a speech around that time, the chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, Zhou Xiaochuan (
Since then, China's financial media has become bolder. We've exposed cases involving price manipulation and falsified profits. Last August we reported that Yinguang Xia Holdings, the second-largest listed company in China's A share market in 2000, posted a falsified claim of 700 million yuan (US$87 million) in profits online. Within hours of publication, the company was suspended from trading, and within a week, security regulators had launched an investigation.
Despite these successes, establishing independent media in China remains a daunting task. In addition to criticism from people in the industry, we must overcome other obstacles. Official pressure remains enormous. Information that should be public is not available. Key officials reject requests to be interviewed without explanation. Some listed companies try to prevent us from publishing stories by appealing to government agencies.
Companies that don't like our reports can sue us for allegedly damaging their reputations. More often than not, they win.
There are also internal obstacles to a free, independent press. China boasts 7,000 newspapers and 8,000 magazines, but the government controls free access to the media market by issuing special licenses. Only high-ranking state-owned organizations are qualified to hold these licenses, which grant the ability to publish. Those outside the industry, including readers, are unaware of this closed market structure.
Despite these obstacles, I am optimistic. As the public becomes familiar with Caijing's brand of journalism, it is sure to raise demand for more tough-minded and scrupulous reporting in general, not only on markets, but also on developments in people's communities and governments. Thousands of important stories remain to be told in China. Caijing is but one voice struggling to tell them.
Hu Shuli is the founder and managing editor of China's premier business magazine, Caijing.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past