The massive size of the Chinese market is a fatal attraction for foreign capital, as every investor dreams of entering the Chinese market. Unfortunately, for many people, such as media mogul Rupert Murdoch, it remains nothing but a dream.
Not long ago, Murdoch’s company News Corp announced that it was selling a controlling stake in three Chinese television channels to China Media Capital (CMC), a private equity fund formed with government backing. Some analysts say this might be the crucial first step of the company’s withdrawal from the Chinese market, a tacit acknowledgement that the group’s efforts to expand into the Chinese media market in recent years have been in vain.
This failure comes at a cost, as the transaction price of the shares fell far below the actual value. In other words, Murdoch paid a considerable price for his misjudgment.
The mistake Murdoch made was his belief that China’s media market was a real market in which investors can invest, acquire other companies, expand their presence and earn a profit based on the rules of a market economy. Reality proved that he was wrong. He misjudged three crucial factors.
First, China’s liberalization is directed by policy concerns, which means that it is restricted. The control of freedom of expression is the Chinese government’s most fundamental concern. Total control of opinions is crucial for the continued rule of the totalitarian government. It is the untouchable lifeline on which its survival depends and this is something the Chinese regime is fully aware of.
Consequently, thought control is almost everywhere in China. In the fields of entertainment, fitness, beauty and other such sectors in which foreign investors and mass media think they can have a share, the Chinese Communist Party will not let go if it suspects that it may lose control. The so-called “anti-vulgarity campaign” recently launched in China serves as an example. Given this kind of logic, how could Beijing possibly be expected to allow foreign capital to break into its media market?
Murdoch’s company had spent a lot of time and energy on his endeavor after entering China 20 years ago, but he has now been forced to withdraw in disappointment. This is clear evidence that unless there are changes in the political environment, it will be impossible to enter the Chinese media market.
Second, even if we put aside political restrictions for now, foreign investors trying to enter the Chinese media market will encounter strong competition from local vested interests. The main founders and investors of CMC, which is buying Murdoch’s three TV channels, are all Chinese media groups with strong financial investment or cultural media background, such as Shanghai Media Group.
The media sector is very different from the infrastructure or financial sector, which can be completely dominated by capital, technology and management. As a kind of cultural industry in itself, the development of the media business is even further restricted by cultural background, wide contact networks and local conditions, and these are all aspects that make it difficult for foreign investors to compete with local media groups.
Third, many foreign investors seem to have misunderstood China’s reform and liberalization. As they saw China developing capitalist markets, they made the mistake of thinking they can judge this country using the same standards they apply to market economies. They failed to see that apart from market development, other aspects of China’s reform are still very underdeveloped.
Take policy stability for example. There is no guarantee of policy stability because the systemic foundations are missing. As a result, changes in policy direction and political atmosphere, as well as personnel adjustments, will have a significant influence on the media market, a market that is very easily affected by non-economic factors. The level of uncertainty is highly pronounced in the media market. I think this is something Murdoch and his group have experienced.
China is in great need of foreign investment — in other words, money. However, foreign investors, including investors from Hong Kong and Taiwan that have long dreamed about the Chinese media market, must understand clearly that power still outweighs money in today’s China.
This is the greatest difference between the Chinese and Western economies.
Wang Dan is a visiting assistant professor at National Tsing Hua University’s College of Humanities and Social Sciences.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS