News that 10 journalists were charged with covering up a mining accident in China’s Hebei Province is an intriguing development in a state wary of free media.
Reporters being charged for failing to cover a story involving corruption is a far cry from the usual news of them being browbeaten after publishing embarrassing material. But the journalists not only failed to report the story — they are accused of accepting US$380,000 in bribes from officials to stay quiet.
The accident took place on July 14 last year in Yuxian County — 80km from Beijing and just three weeks before the start of the Beijing Olympics. Dozens were killed, and it is likely that safety regulations were being flouted at the mine — as in most accidents in Chinese mines, the most lethal in the world.
For China, the Games were a chance to dazzle the world, but in the months leading to this moment of glory, Beijing was gripped by a fear of the foreign press “seizing on” negative news. Riots had erupted in Tibet in March, prompting Beijing to seal off the region. In the following months, everything from smog and subpar products to the deaths of enormous numbers of schoolchildren in the Sichuan Earthquake put pressure on China’s leaders — and then there was the controversy over underage Chinese gymnasts during the Olympics.
Only after the Olympics did it become clear that another scandal was covered up prior to the Games. Officials in Shijiazhuang and a company called Sanlu knew that infants were being sickened by milk powder tainted with the industrial chemical melamine.
Last week, China executed two people for selling tainted milk and protein powder. Now, it has charged journalists and officials in the Hebei accident, suggesting that the central government is trying to signal a change. The message is, at least superficially, that it is not afraid of confronting and dealing with scandals. Moreover, cover-ups are apparently no longer acceptable, no matter the circumstances. We are now led to understand that the public interest had always trumped the risk of embarrassing the government — even if, at the time, Beijing was busy preparing the best Olympics ever.
Is this message credible? Is the country that embarrassed itself again and again over its botched SARS cover-up finally appreciating the damage caused by punishment of journalists and whistleblowers?
Journalists in China are regularly intimidated into silence or punished for covering sensitive topics. Reporters without Borders has said that China has the highest number of imprisoned journalists in the world, while Xinhua’s staff are kept tightly in line to prevent unsanctioned reporting.
But there is another interesting aspect in the Hebei case. If these journalists were bribed not to report on Yuxian’s tragedy, this might indicate that no central government orders had been issued to cover up the incident. Such orders would not require bribing journalists, who defy media bans only at extreme risk to their careers and personal safety.
China has struggled for years in a globalized and wired world to contain news of its scandals. Yet, time and again, scandals are revealed. The fact that the authorities were able to contain news of the Yuxian mine accident for 85 days is a testament to the extent of their efforts. But in the end, there were too many loose ends — and too many angry victims.
Incidents that are covered up but which then become public knowledge are magnified in notoriety, damaging the reputation of every level of government. Given the new risks for those involved in hiding the truth, it will be interesting to see what extent China moves toward accountability, if only for the time being.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase