In the current run-up to next year's Summer Olympics in Beijing, the Communist Party media minders inside China have relaxed the rules a bit for foreign journalists, but many people remain skeptical about this new openness. Is it genuine, and more importantly, will it last longer than a year and a half?
From the New York Times to CNN, international reporters and their editors are wondering if China really means business, or if the apparent shift in policy is just a public relations charade for the sake of headlines.
For about 18 months, starting now, China's media minders say they will allow foreign journalists unprecedented freedom to work inside the country. But Agence France Presse, in a recent report from Beijing, wrote that while "foreign journalists in China began a new year of supposedly more open reporting, [there is] lingering skepticism over how faithfully local-level officials will implement relaxed media rules."
According to the new regulations, foreign reporters will be able to "travel freely and interview anyone with the interviewee's consent, dropping cumbersome official approvals which were often denied anyway by security-conscious authorities."
In theory, the changes should grant foreign reporters access to Chinese dissidents and other critics of the Chinese Communist Party -- and to those people inside China who recognize Taiwan as a separate country and who support Taiwan's nation-building process.
The Foreign Correspondents Club of China (which is composed of reporters from such publications as the New York Times, Newsweek, Time, the Guardian and from CNN) has encouraged its members to report any abuses of the new rules and plans to collect the data to show to Chinese officials later, said Melinda Liu, the club's president and the bureau chief for Newsweek magazine in Beijing.
One wonders if these new regulations will allow foreign reporters to call Taiwan a "country" when they send out their dispatches, especially during the Summer Olympics, when Taiwanese athletes participate in the Games in Beijing.
While AFP reported that a top Chinese official said that he hoped the new rules would be extended after the Olympics "if all goes well," such an outcome is highly unlikely.
Some international observers feel that the new rules for foreign journalists could have the same effect as China's entry into the WTO, which created greater openness in the country's economy. But others remain skeptical.
Liu told AFP that the new regulations were "a welcome development." But she added that "if grassroots officials are not well-briefed or actively drag their feet, there will still be problems."
And what if a reporter for the New York Times or Newsweek wants to interview Taiwanese athletes at the Summer Olympics about their feelings about Taiwan's sovereignty or the insulting "Chinese Taipei" moniker imposed on them by PRC pressure on the International Olympics Committee?
Will Beijing allow foreign journalists to report their real responses, in print and on air? While China is trying to show the world a new openness in the year-long run-up to the Summer Olympics, much of the world remains skeptical about how long this openness will last.
Expect some good official foot-dragging. And expect some significant problems when it comes to reporting the truth about Taiwan from inside China. If China still regards Taiwan as "a renegade province," as it loves to tell the world, how will it ever allow foreign media to report that Taiwan is not a renegade province, but a separate country, a free, independent, sovereign nation unto itself?
The answers will become apparent next year.
Dan Bloom is freelance writer in Taiwan.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS