As news from China becomes increasingly common fare for media outlets around the world, reports from Xinhua news agency -- whose head is a top Chinese Communist Party official -- and other state-run media firms are proliferating, often as the only source, with little or no concern as to the trustworthiness of the content.
Beijing's announcement that it has reduced the application of the death penalty by 10 percent this year was widely regarded as newsworthy. But some journalists said little or nothing about compelling reasons to doubt the report.
Although the UN has called on countries that implement the death penalty to make public the details of all capital punishment cases as well as annual statistics, China continues to treat executions as a state secret. In the vast majority of cases, China does not publicly announce that a punishment has been handed down, let alone say why. Occasional comments by high-level officials, however, indicate the number of cases each year amount to thousands more than those the government makes public.
Likewise, in the wake of a visit by the UN rapporteur on torture, whose report was hardly flattering,Xinhua countered with a report that authorities had launched an anti-torture campaign and would install cameras in police interrogation rooms to discourage forced confessions -- a story that was covered in Western media.
It should come as little surprise that Beijing, in the face of mounting international pressure from non-governmental organizations and governments, is reporting sweeping improvements. But Beijing has offered not one shred of evidence to back its claims. This, combined with its continued belligerence toward journalists and independent bodies seeking to verify these claims, are ample cause for skepticism.
Reporters Without Borders, whose chief, Robert Menard, visited Taipei last week, has found in interviews with Xinhua journalists that the agency has been tasked by the government with manufacturing three versions of reality in its daily work.
News deemed too sensitive for public consumption is earmarked for circulation to government officials, while the public may, at most, hear a modified version of such reports (for example, casting demonstrators in a bad light). Meanwhile, the non-Chinese speaking world is served up a third version, in which some events -- such as natural disasters and protests -- may be reported on more extensively than at home, apparently to create the illusion of openness in the Chinese media.
Xinhua reports that seem to portray China as openly facing issues of political dissent, social unrest and corruption seem increasingly common. In the past few months, state media have variously said officials are aware of and dealing with any number of illegal land seizures, unsafe factories, corrupt officials and cases of "mass incidents."
But the content of many Xinhua reports -- including subjects that should not be political, such as death tolls and evacuation numbers in natural disasters, or the spread of diseases -- are rendered meaningless in the absence of evidence and the freedom to double-check official figures.
China's manipulation of the media reveals a government as bent on secrecy as it is on appearing open. Until Xinhua has earned credibility -- which will require broad reforms in the state and party apparatuses -- international media have a responsibility to their readers to make it clear when there is cause to doubt the source of a piece of news or when figures cannot be independently confirmed.
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