"Mouthpiece" has long been the way Chinese media have defined themselves -- and the way they have traditionally operated. The significance of this is that news serves the Chinese Communist Party, and since the party serves the people, the media actually serves the party and the people.
However, since China began its process of freeing its economy in the early 1990s, media have been affect by the growing market forces, resulting in a diversification of opinion. This is also why the era of President Jiang Zemin (江澤民) has led to the creation of a new phrase -- "guiding public opinion." This phrase has now become both a new media value and a phrase that has to be inserted in any statement made by official propaganda agencies.
So what does "guiding public opinion" mean? Basically, it means that, in a relatively open environment, opinions will tend to become diversified, even mutually contradictory. News reports, however, must meet the interests of overall social and national development.
"Build a well-off society in an all-round way" was the title of Jiang's speech at the party's 16th National Congress. The phrase has been defined as a main goal for national development. But what is the relationship between "guiding public opinion" and "a well-off society?"
The unbalanced development of the Chinese economy has brought with it a differentiation of social strata and a growing rich-poor imbalance. Chinese officialdom already has research units working to find out what kind of all-inclusive concept would encapsulate the organization of such complex and diverse social strata. At the same time, to position themselves amid intense market competition, media have taken to using concepts like middle class and petit bourgeoisie to describe some of the new strata. Between 2000 and last year, the media were involved in an intense debate about different imaginary social statuses.
Once the "well-off society" concept brought forward at the 16th National Congress was confirmed, the debate in the media about different social statuses ended. It is worth noticing, however, that the reason the media ended the debate -- and the classifying of strata -- is that they want to avoid violating the political rules. Even though Chinese media opinion is diversifying, officialdom still plays the role of a linesman who will blow the whistle when someone is offside.
This is also why, in the flow of Chinese media operations, the front page will be left empty each time a Chinese leader delivers an important speech -- in anticipation of the Xinhua news agency report, which will then be printed verbatim.
Things, however, are not that simple. As the Chinese saying goes, "the higher authorities have their policies and locals have their countermeasures." The media are thoroughly aware of the fact that they cannot violate the political rules, but that anything goes so long as they continue talking about the middle class and the petit bourgeoisie in indirect terms. The reason they have to continue using these terms is that only with clearly defined markets can they attract advertisers.
The media are of course also aware that anything goes so long as it is not being politicized. Politically speaking, the middle class and petit bourgeoisie concepts don't seem to contradict the "well-off society" concept. The former describe a lifestyle of certain social strata, and the latter is the overall goal of social development.
However, looking at the serious rich-poor gap that exists in China today, the concept of a "well-off society" is actually an attempt at offer the idea of future happiness to pacify the people and stop them from having doubts about the system. If the media keeps mentioning over and over again the superior lifestyles of some people, they will spoil the dream of a better tomorrow for a majority of the population.
So long as Chinese media avoid mentioning middle class and petit bourgeoisie, they can ignore politics and go on as before. Newspapers and magazines can continue to discuss what kind of house one should buy to match one's social status, what kind of garments would match one's style and taste, what books and films are most refined and so on. This is the current situation.
There are two things to be said about such a situation. First, the formulation of the phrase "guiding public opinion" implies that the Chinese government is leading in the direction away from the total control of the mouthpiece-era toward the era of "guiding public opinion." Freeing the economy is one key factor weakening the central government's control. We still have to wait and see, however, whether liberalizing the economy will bring about a peaceful revolution of Chinese officialdom.
Second, the methods by which Chinese media are positioning themselves in the marketplace and attracting advertisers are understandable. They are the result of market logic and also a miniature of Chinese society, where everyone is looking to make money. However, with the media completely geared toward making money, there is, instead, not even the slightest room for the voice of conscience (incisive criticism of the rich-poor gap or demands for political democracy). Doesn't this mean that media are degenerating?
Market and money are of course important, but once they completely engulf even the forces in civil society, we can only say that this is all a social ethics crisis with Chinese characteristics.
Hsu Tung-ming is a freelance writer based in Beijing.
Translated by Perry Svensson
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
RSS