Author: David Bandurski

Now Executive Director of the China Media Project, leading the project’s research and partnerships, David originally joined the project in Hong Kong in 2004. He is the author of Dragons in Diamond Village (Penguin), a book of reportage about urbanization and social activism in China, and co-editor of Investigative Journalism in China (HKU Press).

Homeless in China's brutal winter

This is a group of news reports that came unwelcome into the world. Organized by China’s greatest investigative reporter, Wang Keqin (王克勤), they investigate the lives of those living out in the bitter cold in different places in China. The reports were kicked around to many different media in China, but no one dared to print them. In the midst the spring sessions of the National People’s Congress and the People’s Political Consultative Congress, when all voices must sing of glory, they were all the more unwelcome.
Ultimately the reports made it to Yibao, this citizen media of mine. I am determined to run them.
In this country of ours, the wine flows indoors, but out on the streets cold chills to the bone.
There may be peace and prosperity, but there is suffering in the cold too. What is most tragic is that in a modern society such as ours, in a country that claims to be a great nation on the rise, there is neither the system or the wisdom to grapple with this problem. The wages of migrant workers here are lower than in many backwards African nations.
What most shocked me about the reports Wang Keqin organized is that the vast majority of those people living out on the streets are not homeless beggars, but rather migrants and others who cannot find work, as well as petitioners at the end of their rope.
People’s delegates, when you envision yourselves as representatives of the people, do you not see that right under your feet those you represent are freezing to death!
Meanwhile, Tiger Temple, [a blogger] who has truly helped the homeless, has been driven out of Beijing by the police.
Yibao runs this series of reports in the hope that more do not die of the cold on our streets.
The reports will be posted one each day, and we offer our deepest respect to the investigators!

2009年12月18日,南京《金陵晚报》报道民工老周冻死于南京市安德门地铁高架桥下。
记者层层核查并追踪到村庄,证实死者实为丁姓,全名丁文楼,江苏省淮安市洪泽县朱坝镇朱高村人。
逝者已去,寒风中,究竟还有多少人露宿街头?
“安得广厦千万间,大庇天下寒士俱欢颜。”这是生活在城市最底层的农民工们的愿望,但是上无寸瓦手无寸铁身无分文的冰冷现实让他们在生活边缘挣扎。
于是,有的奋起直追,抱团取暖,在城市里勉强扎下根来,对未来,他们还尚存希望;有的孤军奋战,在跌倒中摸索前行;还有的,索性破罐子破摔,得过且过,混混度日……这是大城市中农民工生存状态的真实写照,而丁文楼的惨淡结局,只是沧海一粟。
(一)民工丁文楼之死
调查记者 陈莉莉、白丽、王继亮
衣衫破旧,迷茫无助,几包行李,一张车票,怀揣最简单的梦想来到南京城里,在寒风里瑟瑟发抖,在就业市场找寻“能挣钱就行”的工作,和成千上万的进城农民一样,丁文楼就这样辗转到达了南京安德门,然而,生活的艰辛远远大于他的想象,残酷的现实让这个不到48岁的汉子倒下了,留下无数的疑问给读者。
记者采访了死者生前同住桥墩的民工,帮助过老丁的烤红薯小贩,和死者亲人,疑问被一个一个揭开。
“听人说他姓周……”
“我一直以为他就是六十多岁,后来才听说是48岁。”安德门地铁出口靠卖烤红薯姓朱的小伙子有点惊奇。
小伙子一直在安德门地铁附近卖红薯,总能看见丁文楼拄着一个木棍,“还以为是拐杖呢。”小朱回忆道,“看他可怜,我给了他两三次红薯吃。”
小朱说不知道他的姓名,只是后来听人说他姓周。而曾经与丁文楼同住在桥墩下的柳师傅也向记者指认了丁文楼最后睡觉的地点—-安德门地铁站高架桥4号桥墩下。“他没有工作,就是一直乞讨嘛。”柳师傅说。
死者的家乡在哪里?,老柳并不清楚。
没有工作和收入来源,丁文楼便选择了和许多民工一样,在安德门地铁站附近高架桥下露宿。那里离安德门劳动就业市场仅仅500米之遥,旁边有地铁站和肯德基,“我们早上都是去地铁站或者肯德基去洗脸,然后去就业市场等招工老板来。”
另一位老家黑龙江的都师傅告诉记者,“有时候地铁站旁边就有老板来领人,来晚了就没有机会了。”丁文楼为什么会找不到工作?他的家乡在哪里?只有找到他的家,才能知道他为什么会流落街头。
“他本不姓丁,姓朱”
向事发时接警的伍民警打听,记者多方求证,终于找到重要线索——死者是淮安市洪泽县朱坝镇人。记者立即奔赴朱坝朱高村,这座位于苏北的偏僻小村庄。
一片菜地里,记者见到丁文楼的前妻(双方离异)的姐夫,老人家已76岁,精神矍铄,尽管耳朵不好使,仍然竭力告诉我们他所知道的丁文楼。

[Read more from this series of reports at Yibao.]

Demolition, the fear that haunts us all

I believe that for anyone who personally experiences demolition and removal, this process is a nightmare. Even if the problem is eventually resolved — if the victim does not resort to self-immolation, suffer physical violence, or is not buried alive — the experience of constant resistance becomes a haunting nightmare.
There has been news recently that the Hangzhou home of the well-known writer Fu Guoyong (傅国涌) faces demolition. I called Mr. Fu up to ask him what the situation was, and it was clear his fate is identical to that of all others who have faced eviction. The developers seek to drive the original occupants away at the lowest possible price, and if you won’t budge, then you face removal and demolition by force.
Fu Guoyong’s term of residence at his home has clearly not expired, but he faces demolition because local authorities want to develop a large-scale commercial project along this stretch of the city center.
A recent report from Yangtze Commercial Daily made me break out into a cold sweat. It said that more than 400 villas in the Mahu District of the city of Wuhan, which had been occupied for less than five years, now faced a mass demolition. The purpose is apparently to build high rises so more apartments are available for city residents.
Just four years in a new development — that’s a younger residential district than the one I currently live in. And the buildings in my neighborhood aren’t tall either, just seven stories. Is it not conceivable that some day I too could be forced out of my home and see it demolished so they can put up high rises?
I am confident that the destruction of my own home is entirely within the realm of possibility. So long as real estate prices keep climbing up, China’s cities will continue to play this game of knock down and build back up. Younger and younger projects will go up one after the other. When those buildings that are 20 years old have all been wiped away, they’ll start on those that are just 10 years old.
Demolish the small and build them big. Demolish the short and build them tall. Demolish residential areas to build commercial properties. So long as there is profit to be had, the demolition will go on, until before long the storm of demolition will sweep everyone up into its arms.
Unless you have special powers and privileges as your disposal, this fate will be impossible to escape.
Sure, there is the Property Law. But all of those who have purchased commercial housing cannot guarantee the security of their property rights. After all, the land does not belong to you. You just live right on top of it.
The bricks and the tiles, those are yours, and the law is clear in this regard. But local governments don’t particularly care for all the laws and regulations concerning property rights. What they really care about are the demolition ordinances, those local codes that support the development of the real estate sector.
They don’t care about this law up there, or that law down there. As far as they are concerned, land-based finance is there lifeline, and the best decision they can make is to encourage the constant warming of the real estate market, progressively turning up the heat.
It goes without saying that where there is demolition there is dispute. Developers are all about going in low cost and coming out with high prices on the other end. They are very unlikely to satisfy the demands of residents, even if these are entirely within reason.
The backing for developers has always been strong, and now even large-scaled state enterprises have gotten into the business. They all say that violence is not necessary in the demolition and removal process. But when has the violence ever stopped?
There was once case of self-immolation in Chengdu in protest of a forced removal, but how many other cases are there that no one has ever heard about? In fact, right here in Beijing, not far from me, there have been quite a number of cases of self-immolation, all completely in vain.
The crooked real estate market we have in China today is a masterwork of collusion between property developers and local governments. The enforcement people who carry out these sentences against those who are removed and their homes destroyed, they are unlikely to consider the rights and interests of these victims. So what else can any of us expect?
But this game that singles everyone out as enemies, that does harm to us all — it’s inherent dangers are unimaginable. A home over one’s head is the most basic of hopes. If this hope is always gambled on the table, one can scarcely imagine the kind of opposition that would result.
While the current strategy and approach to demolition and removal is to tackle areas one by one, these actions will before long become more and more concentrated and frequent, and they will lead to much more unrest.
The profit-making impulse, this pair of magic shoes that cannot cease its stride, will ultimately carry the wearer off to a hell of their own making.
(The writer is a professor at Renmin University of China)
This editorial originally appeared in Chinese at Southern Metropolis Daily on March 19, 2010.
RELATED LINKS:
SOEs barred from realty,” Global Times, March 19, 2010

Hu Yong: A "Special Internet Zone" is a Frosty Joke

CMP fellow and Peking University professor Hu Yong (胡泳), one of China’s leading experts on the Internet and new media, pens his own response in Southern Metropolis Daily today to the recent suggestion by several top Internet executives that a “Special Internet Zone” should be created in the southern hub of Shenzhen.
Hu Yong is clearly opposed to the idea of “special zones” for China’s Internet sector, which some have suggested might be necessary to encourage competitiveness within the industry in an environment of rigorous Internet controls. This issue, obviously, is related to the extended Web crackdown in China through last year, and to Google’s recent departure from the mainland.

Sina.com founder and Dianji CEO Wang Zhidong responded: “All along, Shenzhen has had the special zone culture in its veins. In a national context it might be very difficult to resolve the contradiction between the current regulatory approach [to the Web] and [the needs of] Internet innovation, but as a special zone couldn’t Shenzhen become a test case?”
If I hadn’t seen this report on paper and in black ink with my very own eyes, I might have thought it was an April Fools Day joke — and a frosty joke at that.
. . . What we hope, and the most ideal situation, would be the creation of many competing [technology] enterprises overseen by a transparent supervisory mechanism. Supported by good critical citizens, these factors would constitute an optimal force capable of making China’s Internet flexible and responsive in service of the public interest. This work cannot be accomplished by the creation of one or two “special zones” . . .

Slogans do no honor to China's miners

China is undoubtedly one of the world’s most dangerous environments for miners, and news seems to crop up constantly about serious safety accidents in China’s mines. But unlike the vast majority of mining tragedies in China’s recent past, the flooding incident at Shanxi’s Wangjialing Mine took a positive turn this week, as 153 miners were successfully rescued. With this stroke of good fortune, China’s state media, which have been habituated to bad news in the mining sector, changed their tune entirely.
We had a wave of pro-government hurrahs and jubilation in China’s media this week, hearkening back to an earlier era of “red propaganda.”
“Thanks to our great Mother Nation, and to the great CCP!” “Ah, great Mother Nation! Ah, great Party!” “A song of victory for the CCP!”
On the heels of the good tidings from Shanxi, the Political Department of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) issued a news release instructing PLA and armed police divisions nationwide to appropriate the Wangjialing Mine story as an official teaching manual — not for relief and rescue, mind you, but for the pro-party spirit and the superiority of socialism.
The PLA notice read:

After flooding occurred at Shanxi’s Wangjialing Mine, the central party and the State Council gave top priority to rescue work. General Secretary Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao rapidly issued important instructions for action, demanding effective measures be taken and all available resources be mobilized for the rescue of miners trapped underground. Under the scientific decision-making and determined leadership of the central party and Chairman Hu, relevant agencies of the State Council and local party and government organizations carried out the rescue work scientifically.
Rescue workers did their upmost to rescue the trapped miners, who held on bravely, and the leaders of relevant departments advanced to the front lines. As of present, 115 workers have been successfully saved.

The Wangjialing case, said the PLA news release, “demonstrates the great superiority and cohesiveness of the socialist system.” It must, therefore, be used to instruct soldiers, “enhancing the awareness and determination of officers and soldiers in holding high the banner [of the CCP], heeding the Party’s commands, and fulfilling their missions.”
I urge everyone to please not forget that even as these “red slogans” were being plastered across state media, rescue workers were hauling up the dead from the mine, and many miners remained missing. Meanwhile, the family members of missing miners waited bitterly for any news of their loved ones.
Nor can we forget the traumatic nature of the ordeal surviving miners have been through, and the fact that they have not been freed from long-term dangers. Before long, they must return to work. And under what conditions?
During my career as a news reporter in China, I interviewed surviving miners on two different occasions. The first was after the earthquake at Tangshan in 1976, the second at Yixian (义县) twenty years later.
After the Tangshan Earthquake struck, five miners were trapped in a collapsed mine. They managed to use trowels to dig their way 800 meters toward the surface, inch by inch, by means of a transport tunnel. Suffering from thirst, they were forced to the extreme measure of drinking their own urine, and later filthy water seeping into the tunnel. They were finally rescued 15 days after the quake.
After a mine in Yixian, Liaoning Province, collapsed on December 15, 1996, four miners were trapped underground. They spent the first few days eating bark they managed to strip off of the wooden supports for the mineshaft. Before long, they considered taking their own lives put an end to their suffering. The local government organized a massive rescue effort, and even transferred an oil drilling crew to the scene hoping to open up a passageway to the survivors.
Once the drilling had reached the miners and communication had been established, there was some hope of survival. But progress in freeing them was gruelingly slow, and freezing water leaking into the tunnel presented a grave danger. I watched with my own eyes as the miners passed notes up to the waiting rescue team members, twelve in total. They were on the verge of psychological collapse, their spirits near breaking point. Just as in Tangshan, the Yixian miners were saved after 15 days.
Together these reporting assignments had a profound impact on me. And I realized only too clearly that the chief — indeed, the only — motivation and desire to go on living came from the miners’ concern over the welfare of their wives and parents.
When I first made contact with the miners from Yixian, they had no wish to speak with me. They were even less willing to re-live their experiences underground. As I sat in their sickroom, the door swung open and in marched a television reporter decked out in his armed police uniform. He wanted to talk to the miners about the armed police units who had pulled them to safety. In fact, given the chaos of the scene and the fact they had been wearing protective headgear, the miners had no way of knowing the identities of their rescuers. But the men relented and accepted the interview. They faced the camera and offered words of thanks to their official liberators, which they had no doubt done many times already.
In mainland China, red propaganda of this kind — about the glories of the CCP and the gracious concern of government leaders — has become an ingrained habit for journalists and the public alike. Having served for many years in the party media, I remember those red days only too well. Many leaders still turn to this tried-and-true tactic, transforming sorrow into joy, bad things into good, and using the miracle of rescue to gloss over the fact of human error and responsibility.
The rescue of more than a hundred miners at the Wangjialing Mine is certainly a stroke of good fortune in the midst of tragedy. The government spared no effort to free the miners, and this fact should be recognized. But they are under no obligation to utter words of thanks. Rescue, and all the resources it requires, is not a gift — it is a responsibility hundreds of millions of Chinese taxpayers expect of the government, and no more. And this is a capacity that can be naturally expected of the government given a highly nationalized system like China’s.
It goes without saying — but has not been said in China’s media — that the fact of the government’s negligence in properly monitoring safety in China’s mines precedes the “miracle” of this rescue.
The rescue effort itself is a cost incurred by our nation. Nor can we overlook the human cost — at least 17 miners have died at the latest count, and 21 are missing.
The blood of these miners, and the tears of joy shed by the survivors, both speak of a tragedy that must serve as a lesson for us, not about the glories of socialism but about our failings in protecting the lives of our workers, about the value of life and the need to protect it.
The miners themselves are the focus of this story. Naturally, their perseverance in the face of mortal danger is an inspiration. But once the curtain goes down on this grand drama of red propaganda, they will return quietly to lives of dangerous and grueling labor in the mines. And the trauma they have suffered will add to their burdens.
All of this should be cause for self-reflection by the government. How can you dare use the blood of our miners to paint your red graffiti, boasting about your greatness and achievements?
According to media reports, ChinaCoal CEO Wang An (王安) has apologized to the miners at Wangjialing. He has admitted that the blind expansion of output led to oversights in safety. But what about the State Administration of Work Safety? And the governor of Shanxi province? Higher-level state leaders?
Who will step up?
I am confident that the most effective means for the party and government to earn the trust and confidence of the people is to apologize publicly, and to thoroughly look into the question of responsibility for this tragedy. The singing of red praises will have precisely the opposite effect.

Chang Ping: Does China Need a Special Internet Zone?

At FT Chinese, CMP fellow Chang Ping writes about the impact inside China of Google’s departure from the mainland, focusing on recent comments made by key figures in China’s IT sector.

The signal fire of Google’s departure from mainland China is still burning strong, and there are now un-harmonious voices emerging from the mainland IT sector. At the IT Leaders Forum held recently in the city of Shenzhen, Ma Huateng (马化腾), Wang Zhidong (王志东), Ding Jian (丁健), Wang Weijia (王维嘉) and other industry leaders all expressed dissatisfaction with the government’s censorship of the Internet. Wang Zhidong and Ding Jian even proposed the creation in Shenzhen of a special Internet zone . . .

Read more at FT Chinese.

Jiangsu police official quote_April 2010

The police department in Huai’an has recently set up Internet Public Opinion Offices at all levels. All police divisions are now equipped with press spokesperson offices, so that when sudden-breaking incidents occur we can release information at the earliest moment, which means within two hours or so.

Why must our heroes sleep on stones?

When 115 miners trapped in Shanxi’s Wangjialing Mine were successfully rescued earlier this week, China’s state media went into propaganda overdrive [CCTV English], advertising this “miracle” as a victory for the Party and the government. The miners (“our brothers”) were lauded for their tenacious courage, and rescue workers were glorified as selfless “heroes.” But in the cracks of China’s Internet, you could uncover hints of a different story.
Here’s how the story played out at People’s Daily Online, the Internet portal operated by the official People’s Daily:

Countless Chinese have pointed to a miracle, their breasts filled with emotion. Beginning in the early morning hours of April 5, the first life that had been trapped in the Wangjialing mine disaster was brought up to safety after eight days and eight nights underground. The trapped workers, our brothers, were saved one after the other, and by the afternoon of April 5, 115 lives had been successfully saved! The rescue effort at the Wangjialing Mine established a miracle in the history of Chinese rescue efforts.
As they were glued to information about the rescue broadcast live from the scene, the masses of Internet users offered their real-time comments, giving cheers and praise for this miracle of life. Many shed warm tears for the tenacious wills of the trapped workers . . . With only a bit of effort, there is hope, and this embodies the spirit of our nation. Everyone believes that in this rescue effort, the party and government showed competence in their rescue measures, truly bringing out the spirit of people first (以人为本) and the sanctity of life. “Only with a strong state and care towards the people could we have such a miracle as this!” Internet users wish the best to those miners who were saved, offer their prayers to those awaiting rescue, and say “Go get ’em!” to the heroes of the rescue mission.

Many of postings from Internet users that trailed after the People’s Daily Online piece were so of-a-kind and so fawning of the leadership one has to wonder just how active Internet commentators have been on this story.
A Web user identified to as “lyr” wrote”: “I’m so moved. Oh, the miracle of life! Thanks to our great Mother Country, to our great Party! I hope that local governments and safety authorities act responsibly, and shoulder the burden of our nation!”
A Web user identified as “Contemplation” wrote: “The flooding incident at Shanxi’s Wangjialing Mine moved the hearts of the whole nation! When I saw the live news reports from the scene, and the saving of 115 lives, who could see the sunshine once again, my emotions were stirred, and I felt proud of the scientific and enlightened decision-making of the Party and the government! We offer our best wishes and prayers to those workers still trapped.”
An Internet user writing on the BBS at Tiexue.net read something very different from the real-time coverage being offered by state media.

The rescue effort following the flooding incident at Shanxi’s Wangjialing Mine is still going ahead. Mine rescue teams and mine workers are working night and day to accelerate the pumping out of water, and new drains are being added constantly to assist with the freeing of those workers trapped beneath. (April 4, Xinhua News Agency)
But after I read the news coming from Xinhua News Agency, I was furious.
These photos [from the rescue scene] were included:
1. There were several photos of exhausted rescue workers resting. As other personnel around them wear padded cotton coats, these workers have no mattresses beneath them and no covers over them. The fact that they still manage to sleep so sweetly indicates just how exhausted they are.

2. From April 1 on, the rescue workers were working in shifts of more than 10 hours, but all they had to eat were buns and clear soup. You can’t see any vegetables at all. Do they not have cabbage or meat in Shanxi? These men need hot meals. Do the officials handling the rescue effort not understand this?

3. A [state media] reporter revealed: “On April 1, these two rescue workers were eating a meal, having been on shift from 6am to 5pm. When I asked one of them what his name was, his eyes immediately filled with tears and he covered his face with his dumpling. I could not bear to press him further, so I simply walked behind him and patted him on the back to let him know I was sorry.”
Is it that supplies are insufficient [at the scene], or is it that no one wishes to provide them with proper food?
These men are involved in extremely difficult rescue work, and this work is very intense, and yet this is what they have to eat and drink. Even the journalists cannot stomach this, so how can our society stomach it? . . .
Every day our leaders are shouting about “putting the people first” (以人为本). But have they thought about what it means to treat rescue workers so inhumanely?
When we see that even the rescue workers are treated in this way, we can understand the underlying reasons why disasters like this occur again and again in Shanxi.

Why Google's departure is not cause for despair

Has Google left China? No. Google has left mainland China and moved its search engine operations to Hong Kong. What exactly will Google do? We will have to wait and see.
China’s government, which does not wish to see Sino-American relations continue down their present path, has emphasized that Google’s departure is purely a commercial matter, and that it should not be politicized. At the same time, however, many state media have gone on a political crusade, criticizing Google and defending Internet controls in China.
Information search technology is the pillar of Internet technology, upsetting the traditional relationship between the broadcaster and the receiver and creating a world in which users themselves are free to search, organize and derive information.
Google is cutting edge, one of the world’s most non-conformist companies. Google is not just a search engine but a new form of media, setting new standards. What Google wished to accomplish in Beijing was the creation of a media free of censorship, allowing mainland Chinese to access information freely.
Not long ago, the Washington Post ran a story by correspondent John Pomfret called, “In China, Google users worry they may lose an engine of progress.” One source interviewed for the story, an academic, said: “If Google is blocked, we will see nothing but darkness.”
The Washington Post story set off a firestorm of speculation in the media. Would China descend into darkness without Google? In my view, this is a pseudo question. The question of whether China grows dark or not does not hinge on any one factor. Google’s exit from mainland China is a certainly a loss for the people of China. But there are thousands of journalists in China fighting every day for freedom. They will continue to work, inching ahead, regardless of whether or not topics like June Fourth or Liu Xiaobo can be discussed. This is why the flame of professional media in China burns on, and why we see sparks like investigative reporter Wang Keqin’s expose last week on faulty vaccines in Shanxi. Light and dark dance around each other every day in China.
Google is keeping the future and its long term goals in sight. It wishes to be a thoroughly free and uncontrolled media, something that cannot exist in today’s China. Given the facts as they are known at present, I still cannot entirely understand Google’s true reasons for quitting mainland China. But I feel quite strongly that Google’s decision to shift to Hong Kong and develop Google.com.hk is a stroke of good news amid the bad.
Google has not exited China. It has sought shelter in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and the policy of “one country, two systems.” The SAR government stated at the earliest possible moment that it would not censor content at the site and would respect information freedom.
In this special place, somewhat paradoxically called “the domestic outside” (国内境外), Google can continue to provide their services to Chinese — including search services that will be limited for mainland users by censorship actions within China, but which cannot be entirely controlled.
“One country, two systems” is not an expedient policy, but rather a long-term state policy arranged by Deng Xiaoping himself. The “one country, two systems” policy shows great political wisdom, leaping out of the life and death ideological struggle between socialism and capitalism and the rigid thought so pervasive in Chinese politics. In spirit it was not unlike Khrushchev’s 1959 doctrine of “peaceful coexistence, peaceful transition and peaceful competition,” which allowed for the coexistence, comparison, competition and integration of differing systems.
Looking back now, the richness and imaginative possibility of the policy surpasses the original intentions of its framer.
As China moves into the future, Hong Kong will have important contributions to make to the nation’s development, not just economically, but socially and politically as well. Hong Kong is an incubator for democracy, freedom of expression and civil society in China. Everyone on the mainland with an active interest in China’s future and progress of China is watching Hong Kong’s development closely.
Freedom of expression must be fiercely protected in Hong Kong, and we must not grow complacent. Some are concerned that freedoms here are suffering. But there is another important aspect to this issue — do local Hong Kong media make sufficient use of the freedom they have? Do they work tirelessly to raise standards of media professionalism, serving as a model for mainland journalists in the two crucial areas of “freedom and responsibility”? As Internet technologies progress with each passing day, has Hong Kong stayed on top of the trends, accelerating the development of new media in the territory?
Hong Kong’s future is closely tied to the future of mainland China. I feel regret at Google’s departure from mainland China, but I do not feel sadness or despair.
The goal Chinese media are fighting for on a daily basis is not the ultimate goal Google was angling for. Chinese media are fighting a constant struggle for the right to expose, for example, the full facts in the Shanxi vaccine scandal. They are fighting for the right to criticize Hubei governor Li Hongzhong. Their reports are constantly censored, “harmonized” (prevented from being posted online) or subjected to “404 errors” (their articles deleted across the Web). In extreme cases, media may be purged or suspended. But they do not turn back. They gain modest victories again and again. And many small victories can add up to tremendous progress.
Hong Kong’s Google is still China’s Google. Words like “June Fourth” and “Liu Xiaobo” are sensitive words that must be filtered out inside China’s firewall today. But I would ask, what will the situation be in three years? Or in five years, or ten years? I don’t believe that China’s Great Firewall will stand unshaken in ten years time.
And perhaps history will change must faster than we anticipate, and we will not have to wait 10 years for Google’s return to mainland China.

Yang Jisheng Releases New Book on Reform

A new book by CMP fellow Yang Jisheng, published in February, compiles more than 100 articles by the veteran journalist reflecting on China’s reform journey over the past 30 years. The book is called “30 Years East of the River: the Plight of the Power Market Economy” (三十年河东:权力市场经济的困境).
Chinese news coverage of the book is available here and here.

Hu Yong on the Power of Microblogs

CMP fellow and Peking University professor Hu Yong spoke recently with The Beijing News about the impact of microblogging at this year’s “two meetings” of the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Congress. Hu Yong calls microblogs a “new form of broadcasting” and argues that the medium has four basic characteristics.

The Beijing News: You have observed the development of the Internet for a long time. How do you view microblogs, this new type of communication tool?
Hu Yong: Microblogs are a new form of broadcasting, and I think they have four basic characteristics. The first is speed. This represents the new direction of Web development. Traditional media all grapple with the issue of news cycles. Newspapers, for example, make news calculations on a daily cycle. But microblogs are not limited by this as they belong to the instantaneous medium of the Web . . .
Second, they are fragmented. This has a major impact on thinking. In the past, mass media distributed information from the center to the periphery. For example, when a news story breaks in a certain place, media must send journalists to the s scene to report. Those reports are then published [in the newspaper], and then they are subsequently run online. The media that break the story are the “center.” But today there might be microblog users at the scene of the story, and they can transmit information instantly. People who were unknown or insignificant might now become the center of the information [dissemination process], having a powerful influence.
Third, they are direct. There is no mediator, so they are very direct . . . For example, making statements through the traditional media has required going through layers of intermediaries. Now microblog users can go directly into their topics . . .
Fourth, is their micropower (微动力). In my view, micropower is nothing more than each individual taking responsibility. “Micro” is about every ordinary citizen. “Power” is about translating language into action. Through “micro-information” and “micro-conversation” we can together exercise “micropower” and influence the development of conscience in Chinese society.