By David Bandurski — Last Friday, Chinese President Hu Jintao made his first speech since taking office in 2002 to deal comprehensively with the news media and its role in a changing China. It was a big deal. But it was also a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, masked with enigmatic party jargon. And that, perhaps, is why no one outside China’s press seemed to take notice. [NOTE: We have included the full Chinese text of Hu’s speech at the end of this post.]
The speech — or, given the proper party gravitas, “important speech” (重要讲话) — sent propaganda underlings across China scurrying off to study and carry out (学习贯彻好) its meaning and “spirit” (讲话精神). It came, importantly, on the 60th anniversary of the official People’s Daily, to which Hu made a special inspection visit.
Hu said a lot of things that would make anyone but the hardest core terminology junky yawn. He said the media must play an “active role” in such tasks as “disseminating the socialist core value system” (社会主义核心价值体系) and “creating healthy, rich and lively mainstream public opinion” (健康向上、丰富生动的主流舆论).
Right. But what does all of this MEAN?
Fortunately, Hu has boiled it all down to five essential points for enhancing the [party’s] ability to guide public opinion (舆论引导能力).
The point to recognize first is that all five of Hu’s points are encompassed by “guidance,” a clear sign that media control remains the CCP’s unshakeable top priority (not exactly a surprise):

1. We must adhere to the principle of party spirit in journalism, holding firmly to correct guidance of public opinion (正确舆论导向).
2. We must adhere to people-based [journalism] (以人为本), increasing the affinity (亲和力), attractiveness (吸引力) and appeal (感染力) of news reports.
3. We must continue to reform and renew, enhancing the directedness and effectiveness of public opinion guidance (舆论引导的针对性和实效性).
4. We must strengthen the building of mainstream media and the building of new media (新兴媒体), creating a new pattern of public opinion guidance.
5. We must conscientiously take hold of the building of [propaganda/editorial] teams (队伍建设), enhancing our cohesiveness and fighting strength (凝聚力和战斗力).

Before we get down to each of these points, we would like to call attention to a possibly significant passage in graph three of the full text of Hu’s speech. That section reads:

News and public opinion are on the leading edge of the ideological domain, and they have a major influence on the mental life of society and on people’s mindsets. In contemporary society, along with economic and social development and continued scientific and technological progress, the transmission and obtaining of information has become faster and faster, and the role of news and public opinion have become more and more prominent. Doing the work of news and propaganda well concerns the overall work of the party and the nation, it concerns the overall condition of reforms, and the development of the economy and society, it concerns the long-term stability of the country.

What does this mean? While the news media has generally fallen under the category of “ideological work” encompassing myriad aspects of society — such as education, ideological training, indoctrination through government administered work units, etc — this passage suggests that the CCP is now training its focus more intensely on the management and control of the news media as a means of creating social cohesion and solidifying the party’s own position in society.
In other words, this is about doing “ideological work” in the information age.
Back to Point One of Hu’s Five Points, the policy here sits squarely in the Jiang Zemin tradition, emphasizing “correct guidance of public opinion,” a Jiang-era term that followed the June 4, 1989, crackdown on demonstrators in Beijing. Other familiar characters follow under Point One, including “emphasis on positive propaganda” “singing the main theme,” and “strict adherence to propaganda discipline.”
The only point of terminology departure from Jiang Zemin in Point One is the replacement of the old “theory of weal and woe” (福祸论) — basically, the idea the guided public opinion brings prosperity and chaotic public opinion brings calamity — with “three benefits and three wrongs” (三利, 三误). Hu says:

Correct guidance of public opinion benefits the party, benefits the nation, and benefits the people. Incorrect guidance of public opinion wrongs the party, wrongs the nation, and wrongs the people.

Point Two tempers the control policy somewhat with an appeal for media to make their content more relevant to the public. This is not exactly new. Under the vigilant watch of “guidance,” the media has essentially taken this path since the middle of the 1990s, seeking to produce attractive, engaging and commercially viable “media products.”
This development path was given its first official imprimatur by Hu Jintao in January 2003 through the policy of “Three Closenesses” — “closeness to the truth, life and the people.” Not surprisingly, we see the “Three Closenesses” reitereated in Point Two of Hu Jintao’s speech.
The “people-based” notion of Point Two is much more fully Hu Jintao. It recognizes, while relinquishing little or nothing in the way of control, that media are changing and must continue to change. Point Two says that media also have an obligation to reflect the will of the people (民意), but positive as that may seem, the CCP has typically seen its own will as indivisible from that of the people.
We do, however, have an interesting reiteration in Point Two of a Hu Jintao tweak from his political report to the 17th Party Congress last fall.
Those who watched Hu’s report for signals on the question of political reform noticed the appearance of the phrase “protecting the people’s right to know, participate, express and supervise” (保障人民的知情权、参与权、表达权、监督权). This was, in fact, a revision of Jiang Zemin’s 2002 political report, which said: “In the matter of cadre selection and appointment, Party members and ordinary people should have more right to know, participate, choose and supervise” (扩大党员和群众对干部选拔任用的知情权、参与权、选择权和监督权).
In Hu’s rendition the term “right to select”, or xuanze quan (选择权), is replaced with the “right to expression”, or biaoda quan (表达权). This language about the “right to expression” makes it into Point Two of Hu’s People’s Daily speech.
The language in Point Two is softer and a bit more fresh, but still shot through with the language of control. At the end of Point Two, for example, Hu says that as news media must observe “correct guidance” as they “report factual news stories.” He also says they should “speak with the truth, speak with news classics, speak with figures.”
This latter language, while still implying control (“news classics” are exemplary stories designed to embody “correct guidance”), is a slightly softer expression — suggesting the party and news media should convince rather than simply suppress. Obviously, one should not get overly excited about such miniscule semantic consolations.
Point Three is an interesting jumble of ideas, again a Gordian Knot of CONTROL and CHANGE. The basic idea seems to be that party leaders need to do a radical rethink on how they conduct the work of press control.
Hu says that “new propaganda work must adhere to emancipation of mind (解放思想), seeking the truth from facts (实事求是) and keeping pace with the times (与时俱进), accomodating new changes to the situation in and outside China, keeping in tune with the new expectations of the people and doing our work well with a spirit of reform and renewal.” Hu talks about renewing concepts, content, forms, methods and tactics, and “doing [propaganda] work according to news principles” (按照新闻传播规律办事).
In some sense, this sounds like it is as much about change as control. But we have to be careful here, and the meaning of these words will be borne out only in the handling of future news events.
One could argue that Hu is talking about news that is truer and more responsive to the demands of China’s public. But he is certainly also talking about a controlled and selective approach to information that creates the public perception of openness and an atmosphere of trust (much like the president’s recent exchange with Web users).
The March unrest in Tibet and the May 12 Sichuan earthquake offered party leaders very different lessons about information control, and we can see the fruits of this in Point Three.
China dealt with Tibet by sealing it off. But this created a vacuum in which international media took control of the agenda setting process, and China’s image suffered as a result. By contrast, coverage of the Sichuan quake was relatively open, particularly during the first week of the disaster. And this allowed China to largely set the agenda and project a favorable international image. Hu says in Point Three:

In the struggle that followed the recent earthquake disaster, we quickly released information about the disaster and the relief effort . . . earning high praise from cadres and the people, and also earning the esteem of the international community.

This is what Hu refers to when he says earlier in Point Three that the media needs to “actively set the agenda” (主动设置议题). This fits with what Hu Jintao said earlier this spring about the need for the media, particularly state media, to “keep a firm grasp” on initiative in reporting (报道的主动权) for disaster stories.
The idea is that, rather than simply suppress news, the party strikes first, defining the direction of coverage. As Hu says:

We must perfect our system of news release, and improve our system for news reports on sudden-breaking public events, releasing authoritative information at the earliest moment, raising timeliness, increasing transparency, and firmly grasping the initiative in news propaganda work.

Point Four of Hu Jintao’s remarks are a somewhat disturbing question mark. He talks about creating a “new pattern” (新格局) for opinion guidance. He seems to mean that party leaders should take a much more realistic and nuanced approach to press control, acknowledging the new social and market realities of the media. “With party newspapers, magazines, and television and radio stations in the lead,” he says, “[we must] integrate the metropolitan media (都市类媒体), the Internet media and other various propaganda resources.”
It is too early to scream, “The sky is falling!” But this is a worrying picture. Commercial media and the Internet as untapped “resources” of propaganda? Hu’s “new pattern of public opinion guidance” (舆论引导新格局) is something we will have to watch as it takes shape.
We can, however, infer hints of this “new pattern” from Point Five.
Point Five is about the building of “propaganda teams” (队伍建设). In a traditional Chinese media context, this means building up a solid network of directors at newspapers and television stations, and teams of editors and journalists, who work with the party to enforce propaganda discipline and achieve correct guidance of public opinion.
Given the challenges of the information age, however, we might suppose that Hu Jintao hopes to expand his “guidance” teams beyond these traditional boundaries. How, for example, can he better build “teams” by tapping into the “resources” of commercial media and the Internet?
Good examples of such team building might be the powerful and growing teams of online commentators (网络评论员) that have been dispatched onto the Web at all levels of the national bureaucracy, or the “professional associations” that are increasingly serving as agents of speech control.
For the moment, the reading of Hu’s speech depends very much on how optimistic or pessimistic one is prepared to be. But the overall dynamics have not changed. This is still about CONTROL and about CHANGE, about changing media and changing approaches to control. Readers should not focus narrowly on CONTROL, overlooking real changes in Chinese media and society. Nor should they read too much CHANGE into Hu Jintao’s words, lest they be disappointed.
—————

胡锦涛在人民日报社考察工作时的讲话(全文)
同志们：
在人民日报创刊60周年之际，我们来到人民日报社，看望大家。首先，我代表党中央，向人民日报创刊60周年表示热烈的祝贺！向报社全体工作人员和离退休老同志致以诚挚的问候！向全国新闻宣传战线的同志们致以崇高的敬意！
人民日报是党中央机关报，党中央对人民日报始终非常重视和关心。60年来，人民日报坚持正确办报方向，积极宣传党的理论和路线方针政策，积极宣传中央的 重大决策部署，及时传播国内外各领域的信息，讴歌真善美，鞭挞假恶丑，为我们党团结带领人民夺取革命、建设、改革的重大胜利作出了重要贡献。特别是改革开放以来，人民日报深入宣传中国特色社会主义理论体系，深入宣传改革开放和社会主义现代化建设的巨大成就，深入宣传广大干部群众团结奋进的先进事迹，高唱奋 进凯歌，弘扬民族精神，为激励全党全国各族人民积极投身改革开放的伟大事业作出了积极贡献。今年以来，人民日报在宣传党的十七大精神，特别是在抗击低温雨雪冰冻灾害、维护西藏社会稳定、筹办北京奥运会、抗震救灾等重大报道中发挥了很好的舆论引导作用。中央对人民日报的工作是充分肯定的。
新闻舆论处在意识形态领域的前沿，对社会精神生活和人们思想意识有着重大影响。当今社会，随着经济社会快速发展和科技不断进步，信息传递和获取越来越快捷，新闻舆论的作用越来越突出。做好新闻宣传工作，关系党和国家工作全局，关系改革和经济社会发展大局，关系国家长治久安。我们要充分认识新闻宣传工作的重大意义，更好地发挥新闻宣传工作在推动经济发展、引导人民思想、培育社会风尚、促进社会和谐等方面的重要作用。
当前，全党全国各族人民正在为实现党的十七大提出的各项任务而奋斗。在前进道路上，我们面临着难得的机遇，也面临着严峻的挑战。我们既要抓住机遇、乘势而上，不断推动经济社会又好又快发展，又要迎接挑战、居安思危，时刻准备应对各方面的困难和风险。特别值得注意的是，当前，世界范围内各种思想文化交流、交融、交锋更加频繁，“西强我弱”的国际舆论格局还没有根本改变，新闻舆论领域的斗争更趋激烈、更趋复杂。在这样的情况下，新闻宣传工作任务更为 艰巨、责任更加重大。
全面贯彻党的十七大精神，高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜，以邓小平理论和“三个代表”重要思想为指导，深入贯彻落实科学发展观，继续解放思想， 坚持改革开放，推动科学发展，促进社会和谐，夺取全面建设小康社会新胜利，开创中国特色社会主义事业新局面，需要新闻宣传工作在打牢全党全国各族人民团结 奋斗的共同思想基础方面发挥积极作用，在传播社会主义核心价值体系方面发挥积极作用，在为推进党和国家事业发展凝聚强大精神力量方面发挥积极作用，在营造健康向上、丰富生动的主流舆论方面发挥积极作用，在促进社会和谐方面发挥积极作用。新闻战线的同志一定要充分认识肩负的重大责任，保持奋发有为的精神状态，发扬认真负责的工作作风，兢兢业业做好新闻宣传工作，进一步引导广大干部群众把思想统一到党的十七大精神上来，把力量凝聚到实现党的十七大提出的各项任务上来。当前，新闻宣传工作尤其要为做好抗震救灾和恢复重建、推动经济社会又好又快发展、筹办北京奥运会等工作作出积极贡献。
新形势下，新闻宣传工作要高举旗帜、围绕大局、服务人民、改革创新，坚持正确舆论导向，提高舆论引导能力，营造良好舆论环境，更好地发挥宣传党的主张、弘扬社会正气、通达社情民意、引导社会热点、疏导公众情绪、搞好舆论监督的重要作用。要把提高舆论引导能力放在突出位置，进行深入研究，拿出切实措施，取得新的成效。
第一，必须坚持党性原则，牢牢把握正确舆论导向。舆论引导正确，利党利国利民；舆论引导错误，误党误国误民。要牢固树立政治意识、大局意识、责任意识、阵地意识，把坚持正确导向放在新闻宣传工作的首位，坚持团结稳定鼓劲、正面宣传为主，唱响主旋律，打好主动仗，更加自觉主动地为人民服务、为社会主义服务、为党和国家工作大局服务。要增强政治敏锐性和政治鉴别力，严格宣传纪律，做到守土有责，在重大问题、敏感问题、热点问题上把好关、把好度。
第二，必须坚持以人为本，增强新闻报道的亲和力、吸引力、感染力。坚持以人为本，是做好新闻宣传工作的根本要求。要坚持把实现好、维护好、发展 好最广大人民的根本利益作为新闻宣传工作的出发点和落脚点，坚持贴近实际、贴近生活、贴近群众，把体现党的主张和反映人民心声统一起来，把坚持正确导向和通达社情民意统一起来，尊重人民主体地位，发挥人民首创精神，保证人民的知情权、参与权、表达权、监督权。要面向基层、服务群众、深入实际，多报道人民群 众的工作生活，多反映人民群众的利益要求，多宣传人民群众中涌现的先进典型，激励全体人民信心百倍地创造美好生活。同时，要注重在报道新闻事实中体现正确导向，在同群众交流互动中形成社会共识，在加强信息服务中开展思想教育，用事实说话、用典型说话、用数字说话，化解矛盾，理顺情绪，引导各方面群众共同前进。
第三，必须不断改革创新，增强舆论引导的针对性和实效性。新闻宣传工作必须坚持解放思想、实事求是、与时俱进，适应国内外形势的新变化，顺应人民群众的新期待，以改革创新精神做好工作。要坚持用时代要求审视新闻宣传工作，按照新闻传播规律办事，创新观念、创新内容、创新形式、创新方法、创新手段，努力使新闻宣传工作体现时代性、把握规律性、富于创造性，不断提高舆论引导的权威性、公信力、影响力。要认真研究新闻传播的现状和趋势，深入研究各类 受众群体的心理特点和接受习惯，加强舆情分析，主动设置议题，善于因势利导。要完善新闻发布制度，健全突发公共事件新闻报道机制，第一时间发布权威信息， 提高时效性，增加透明度，牢牢掌握新闻宣传工作的主动权。在这次抗震救灾斗争中，我们及时公布震情灾情和抗震救灾情况，深入宣传抗震救灾中涌现出来的先进 集体和模范人物，大力弘扬抗震救灾的伟大精神，为鼓舞广大干部群众坚定信心、团结一致做好抗震救灾各项工作发挥了重要作用，赢得了广大干部群众高度评价， 也得到了国际社会好评。其中的成功经验值得认真总结，并要形成制度长期坚持。
第四，必须加强主流媒体建设和新兴媒体建设，形成舆论引导新格局。要从社会舆论多层次的实际出发，把握媒体分众化、对象化的新趋势，以党报党刊、电台电视台为主，整合都市类媒体、网络媒体等多种宣传资源，努力构建定位明确、特色鲜明、功能互补、覆盖广泛的舆论引导新格局。要把发展主流媒体作为 战略重点，加大支持力度，扩大覆盖面和影响力。互联网已成为思想文化信息的集散地和社会舆论的放大器，我们要充分认识以互联网为代表的新兴媒体的社会影响力，高度重视互联网的建设、运用、管理，努力使互联网成为传播社会主义先进文化的前沿阵地、提供公共文化服务的有效平台、促进人们精神生活健康发展的广阔 空间。
第五，必须切实抓好队伍建设，增强凝聚力和战斗力。做好新闻宣传工作，关键在班子、在队伍、在人才。要大力加强新闻宣传战线领导班子建设，把思想政治坚定、组织能力突出、熟悉新闻宣传工作、富有改革创新精神的优秀干部选拔到领导岗位上来，确保新闻宣传工作的领导权牢牢掌握在忠于马克思主义、忠于党、忠于人民的人手里。要坚持马克思主义新闻观，深化“三项学习教育”活动，引导广大新闻宣传工作者不断提高思想政治水平、增强业务本领，努力建设一支政治强、业务精、作风正、纪律严的新闻宣传队伍。要加强对中青年骨干的培养锻炼，采取多种措施培养造就更多人民群众喜爱的名记者、名编辑、名评论员、名主持 人。广大新闻宣传工作者要加强自身思想道德修养，带头实践社会公德，恪守职业道德，做积极实践社会主义荣辱观的表率。
人民日报具有辉煌的历史、优良的传统，一代又一代人为党的新闻宣传事业付出了大量心血、作出了重要贡献，是一支党和人民信赖的队伍。希望人民日 报的同志认真贯彻中央精神，加倍努力工作，求真务实，开拓创新，勤奋敬业，团结和谐，进一步把人民日报办好，让党放心，让人民满意。

(Posted by David Bandurski, June 25, 2008, 11:10am HK)

By David Bandurski — In the immediate aftermath of the Sichuan earthquake, one line you could expect to hear from many Chinese, including journalists, was: now is not the time for the serious questions, but the time to act. One month on, as the media spotlight turns slowly away from Sichuan, the tough questions still hang in the air. Why did all of those schools collapse? What impact might dam projects have had on the quake?
But now, many are saying, it is time for the nation to nurse its wounds and move on. Now it is time to sing the “main theme.” Now it is time for the people to rise for the opening of the Beijing Olympic Games and China’s glorious moment.
And what about those questions?
This is the theme of one of today’s stronger editorials in China’s media, a second one from columnist and Phoenix TV host Leung Man-Tao (梁文道). The editorial appeared on the Nanfang Daily Group website as well as Phoenix Online and QQ.
Leung raises a number of interesting points, including the idea that over-emotional earthquake coverage owed as much to the “irrepressible urge of media in the commercial age” to find emotive selling points as to a party propaganda campaign.

“Disaster in the Age of Multi-Dimensional Media”
This was a disaster that received all-around coverage by China’s media. And as it was the first such time, there are naturally many areas we can turn our attention to and view carefully. We do not do this as an assault on morale, or because we want to dab salt on open wounds. We do it so that we can walk out onto a broader road, where we can see farther into the distance.
Owing to the government’s unprecedented openness early on, it was not only reporters from Xinhua News Agency and other central party media that went to the scene, but media from all over the country and the world. In a single night, a flood of multi-dimensional media – text, sound, video – surrounded audiences 24 hours a day. People hungered for information, and media scrambled to provide it. In such a situation, a little rule that has weathered and dominated countless disaster reports was transplanted to China.
This little rule was to rush out in the early stages with a huge volume of stories about the realities of the disaster situation, and then to gradually shift the focus to moving deeds in the relief effort. This little rule was not something deliberate on the media’s part, but came out of interaction between media and audiences. In the immediate aftermath, everyone naturally wanted to know the newest and most accurate information. But as the cruel reality of death and dying was repeated before everyone’s eyes, there was no way for them to entirely bear it. And so, just like a stage drama, the well-tried norms of storytelling came into play. Stories of heroic rescue and other stories “radiating humanity” steadily cropped up, until they became the focus — because audiences really needed emotional relief.
On top of this unwritten rule, which routinely emerges in disaster reporting overseas, China’s longstanding tradition that holds that “fighting the disaster is more important than the facts of the disaster” (抗灾大于灾况) worsened this tendency to dramatize. After the dead become numbers and we begin to feel numb to the scenes of devastation, everyone needs stories that can console our pain and move our hearts. When we feel despair we need to renew our faith in those values we believe in, and we particularly yearn for release from our troubles. So all of this is natural.
Just as “natural” is the irrepressible urge of media in the commercial age to take pain and transform it into limelight. They seek exclusive scenes, and use techniques like music to stir emotions up again and again — and more, in our national circumstances, they follow on the coattails of officials, holding them up as examples. This means that the in-depth analysis and long-term thinking we should have are delayed or non-existent.
Let’s just say that all of this is forgivable. Can we all expect a time when we’ve cooled off enough to start the process of review and reassessment? What I’m most afraid of is that the attention of the audience will begin to shift. I’m afraid that once everyone has shed their tears, parted with their donations and made peace with their own humanity, they’ll think it is time to bid this matter farewell – time for us to dress our wounds and move on, starting from the top by celebrating the Olympic Games.
Our own pains are an easy matter to resolve, but the hurt in the disaster area will take at least 10 years to make better . . . If you think about it, have the lives of those who suffered from SARS returned to normal? Have we found all of those child slaves in Shanxi? Rebuilding still is not done in those areas affected by the Asian Tsunami, which brought the biggest tide of donation pledges in world history, and many of those pledges have still not materialized.
When tours of leaders to the disaster area, donations by major commercial enterprises, and even disaster relief workers talking about their own experiences begin to override stories of mothers still searching for their children and survivors still scrambling to rebuild their lives, then this ruthless media process has already begun . . .
But how many questions do we still need to ask? Why did those schools collapse? Where did all of these dams come from? (The complicated cause and effect relationship between reservoirs and earthquakes has been hotly debated by experts). What kinds of hiccups were there in the management of the relief effort? Yes, we have to go on with our lives. But where will the survivors live? How will they live? Will loans have to by repayed for those homes that collapsed? In these television programs that go to absurd lengths to stir emotions . . . these questions are growing cold and are in danger of being pushed into insignificance. Of course a lot of people angrily condemn the problem of “tofu suds” engineering, and they want to go after those without conscience, “giving them death.” But I’m afraid they are too busy, and there are too many “death sentences” to carry out.
These may seem like rough words, because they do not fit with the main theme (主旋律), not with the main theme set by the government but the main theme hummed out of the hearts and minds of every media consumer. In the immediate aftermath [of the disaster], words like these are empty distractions from the urgent work of rescue. Later, words like these disrupt everyone’s atmosphere of personal healing.

[Posted by David Bandurski, June 12, 2008, 9:53pm HK]

By David Bandurski — As I was browsing through the news page at QQ.com today, I noticed something interesting about one of the photos popping up on their usual slideshow of featured stories. The image showed a booster from the multistage rocket that launched the Chinasat-9 direct-broadcast television satellite into orbit on June 9. It sat, a hulk of burned out technology, with the mountains of Guizhou rising in the distance. But close behind the booster — way too close for comfort — you could see the shingled tops of a pair of homes. “Woah!” I thought.
The accompanying news caption from the official China News Service took this all very much in stride:

On June 10, the wreckage of a booster rocket is seen in Jianggu Village, Zhenyuan County, of the Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Minority Autonomous Prefecture of Guizhou Province. On June 9 at 8:15 p.m. our country’s Xichang Satellite Launch Center successfully sent our first direct broadcast satellite, the Zhongxing-9, into orbit with a Long March-3B rocket carrier. Several minutes after liftoff, four boosters successfully disengaged and landed safely in Zhenyuan, Qiandongnan.

Wait a minute. Is this the entire story? Can we have some responses from villagers, please? And perhaps a few comments from the good folks at the Xichang Satellite Launch Center? I mean, just look at this picture!

From: not specified
“It looks like it’s right next to houses. Lucky it didn’t land right on the roofs!”
From: Dongguan
“How dangerous! If it had landed just a bit to one side it would have hit those houses. Can’t we think of a way to control where it comes down? Shouldn’t we avoid unfortunate accidents?”
From: Yongzhou
“That first picture looks really dangerous . . . ”
From: not specified
“I feel faint. It landed right next to that house!”
From: Zhejiang
“I feel really awful about this somehow.”

UPDATE (4:58pm):
There are now 253 responses to this news item on QQ. Here are a few more:

From: Dehongzhou
“Landing no more than 10 meters from a private residence — is that what you call success?”
From: Shenzhen
“Even if it didn’t land on anyone, it’s not good to destroy the ecology either!”
From: Shanghai
“My heart felt cold when I saw that picture. What if it had hit someone? Did no one think of this before? If there’s a danger of injuring people in launching satellites, I’d rather they not do it. Human life is the most important thing. I hope this is a lesson to us. The lives of our brothers and sisters in the mountains are precious too.”
From: Nanchang
“That is so eco- unfriendly!”
From: Shanghai
“What are all of you fussing about? This is a good thing.”
From: Changsha
“Is that really where they planned for it to land? How can it be so close to people’s homes?”
From: Lishui City
“Oh, Big Brother is really ingenious! I can’t stop laughing!”
From: Chongqing
“Oh, this is classic!”

UPDATE (1:09pm HK, June 12):
There are now 2,308 comments to this news item on QQ.
[Posted by David Bandurski, June 11, 2008, 2:53pm HK]

By David Bandurski — China’s latest case of the “human flesh search engine” (人肉引掣) at work has landed a 17-year-old girl in police detention, and that has some Chinese asking: is this really a matter of broad social concern, and is there any legal basis for police intervention? [Frontpage Image: Screenshot of controversial video in yet another Internet mob case back on May 20, 2008]
This time, the “engine” has turned against a girl from the city of Xinyi in Jiangsu Province, who, according to news reports that give her month and year of birth, should not be a legal adult until next November. While many people — and certainly millions of Web users — found her insensitive comments on the Sichuan earthquake unacceptable, a few columnists have stepped out in the last two days to question the handling of the case by authorities.
The following editorial from RedNet, which appeared yesterday on QQ and other major web portals, questions the legal basis for the administrative detention of the Jiangsu girl, and argues for a clearer understanding of the differences between the public and private domains.

On What Basis is the Girl Who Cursed the Disaster Victims Being Detained?
By Yu Lisheng (于立生)
Finding herself at odds with a web user from Sichuan, a girl from the city of Xinyi in Jiangsu Province wrote a post called “Thank Goodness for the Earthquake in Sichuan” on her personal QQ space, in which she mocked the victims of the Wenchuan earthquake. On June 5 police administratively detained this girl.
When I heard this news I was really shocked. I was shocked first of all by this girl’s remarks, which were truly ignorant and lacking in conscience. Secondly, I was shocked by the fact that – though what she said was doubtlessly wrong – she could be found guilty on the basis of her words and detained by police for three days, which seemed to me a bit uncalled for.
I believe that our freedom of thought (思想自由) is absolute, not subject to any restrictions, as this is purely our personal domain. Freedom of expression and freedom of movement, on the other hand, which can potentially impact larger society, should be correspondingly restricted, subject to greater limitations arising from law or from moral codes. And so we should be responsible for speech and actions exercised in the public domain.
This girl, because she spoke incorrectly, has been administratively detained by police for three days; and the reason the police cite is “danger to society.” Article 2 of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Penalties for Administration of Public Security (中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法) states that: “Whoever disturbs social order, endangers public safety, infringes upon a citizen’s rights of the person and encroaches upon public or private property, if such acts constitute a crime according to the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, shall be investigated for criminal responsibility; if such acts are not serious enough for criminal punishment but should be given administrative penalties for public security, penalties shall be given according to these Regulations.”
But we must be clear that this girl’s wrong remarks were expressed in a QQ.com space, which is to say in a space where the lines between the private and public domains are a matter of some controversy. Let’s say someone is standing on his own doorstep – not quite inside, but not on the street either – and they shout out something vile. How damaging is this to society? If Internet users had not issued an “online wanted poster” (网络通缉) and started up the “human flesh search engine” (人肉引掣) how much attention would have been paid to this ordinary girl in her personal QQ space? What kind of effect does this really have on society?
If we go by this way of thinking, then we can say that this sort of behavior is wrong, just like cursing on the streets — but should it result in administrative detention?
Secondly, according to news reports, this girl was born in November 1990, so she is not yet 18 years old. But Article 21 of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Penalties for Administration of Public Security stipulates that: “Under one of the following circumstances, the penalty of administrative detention shall not be executed against the person who has committed an act against the administration of public security, although such a penalty should be imposed on him/ her according to the provisions of this Law: (1) The person has attained to the age of 14 but not to the age of 16; (2) The person has attained to the age of 16 but not to the age of 18, and such act is committed for the first time.”
So we must ask: what is the legal basis for the police imposition on this girl of three days of administrative detention?
This girl definitely said the wrong thing. But morals are morals, and laws are laws. We can criticize her and educate her. We can call her morals into question. But we must not confuse the lines here, overstepping the law. Voltaire once said: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” What I mean to say is: “I firmly disapprove of this girl’s ignorance and her rash words lacking conscience, but I must defend the legal rights of this girl who “has attained to the age of 16 but not to the age of 18” not to be administratively detained.
When dealing with underaged children, I’m afraid, “Learning from past mistakes to avoid future ones, and curing an illness to cure the patient,” are much more valuable methods than, “Beating them to death with a single swing of the club.”

[Posted by David Bandurski, June 10, 2008, 2:35pm HK]

———————
As of 2:36pm, June 10, 2008, the above editorial on QQ had drawn more than 20,000 comments from Web users. We include a few below, in the original:

评论首页 >> 新闻 >> 综合新闻
123456下一页最末页
来自：117.23.96.* 2008-06-09 08:49:45[热帖]腾讯网友：
[对你发表的的文章表示不满]
四川发生大地震，牵动全中国人民的心，在这种情况下我们要团结要爱护自己的同胞，而不是吃里爬外，如果，你的家人失去了，别人诅咒你的家人，你会高兴吗？？？我想你不会，那个女人的做法已经说明他不配做中国人，我个人感觉拘留的对。如果，我们不及时采取措施我想骂人的会接二连三的出现！你要不满你可以告执法单位啊，在这说有什么？？？最看不起就是你们这种动笔不做事情的人。
回复 支持(1978)反对(1310) 参与辩论(75)
来自：十堰市 2008-06-09 08:53:31[热帖]杰 [等级一]：
看到被拘留的消息.感觉是还法制社会呢?悲哀啊!看来离法制社会还远的很啊,就因为惹了众怒就能拘留.赞同楼主所说的拘留的理由就是依据是什么?没依据就只能口头教育,不能拘留.一个孩子而已没必要一棒子打死.年少无知能有几多人年少时候没无知荒唐过?对那些想叫人家死坐牢的人,别以为你叫嚣几句你就爱国,国家不是你这种爱法,我们可以批评教育小女孩,但不能做过了毕竟她是个孩子
回复 支持(1751)反对(886) 参与辩论(53)
来自：杭州市 2008-06-09 08:39:53[热帖]腾讯网友：
[你是中国人吗,什么是法,法是立在什么之上的?]
好像很有材一样的,搞的多大学问一样,不懂就不要乱叫,像这样的情节我觉得3天太少,最少拘留也要15天,你这样的人我看也该拘留个15天. 能拘留她还找不到法律条文吗,哎!有这个精力去多支持一下灾区人民,在这儿打什么抱不平,你以为你是谁呀,想成名也别这样叫,实在没事做,买几本法律书看一下!
回复 支持(1074)反对(900) 参与辩论(27)
来自：黑河市 2008-06-09 08:41:20[热帖]津搏 [等级一]：
作者先生，中国就你一个人懂法吗，在这卖弄啥！
回复 支持(437)反对(555) 参与辩论(15)
来自：江苏省 2008-06-09 08:37:38[热帖]腾讯网友：
道德、法律不应混为一谈。
回复 支持(700)反对(27) 参与辩论(10)
来自：59.111.32.* 2008-06-10 13:53:40腾讯网友：
[本案现在影响危害更大！]
小女人和该公安局都犯了不计后果的严重错误!都该逮捕！！
回复 支持(0)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：北京市 2008-06-10 13:48:48苦咖啡 [等级一]：
不同意作者的观点。个人认为，该抓！
回复 支持(0)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：123.190.131.* 2008-06-10 13:48:18腾讯网友：
无论她在家里还是在家外，还是在自己的空间里，只要她做了危害社会的事，不道德的事，都应受到惩罚，骂天天惩，骂人人罚，法律是为道德护航的，我认为我国的法律在有些方面还欠缺，就应该把骂人者，割掉舌头。
回复 支持(0)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：59.111.32.* 2008-06-10 13:46:00腾讯网友：
内外一样美的女人!教育宽容才能社会和谐啊！！！
回复 支持(1)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：125.71.99.* 2008-06-10 13:39:26腾讯网友：
[情理就是法]
拘留它是有依据的，伤害全国人民的感情，侮辱灾区人民，判它50年也有依据，法不外乎情理，请那些装神弄鬼、哀叹中国无法治的假道学们搞清楚，法制的基本精神就是大众的感情和道德，没文化不是你们的错，没文化还要乱发帖子就是你们的错了
回复 支持(0)反对(1) 查看回帖(0)
来自：深圳市 2008-06-10 13:36:46腾讯网友：
[又一个为出名而显摆的人]
请问作者对法律又了解多少,不要显摆自己了.
愚蠢
回复 支持(0)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：成都市 2008-06-10 13:35:36无心 [等级一]：
敢问公安机关对这名女孩施以治安拘留3日的处罚，法律依据何在呢？
你懂不懂什么是“依照本法应当给予行政拘留处罚的，不执行行政拘留处罚”
我给你解释，不执行行政拘留并不是说不给予行政拘留处罚了，这句话的意思是如果行为人已满十六周岁未满十八周岁，初次违反治安管理处罚法，应当给予行政拘留处罚的，行政拘留处罚要给，只是不送到拘留所执行罢了。
… [查看全文]
回复 支持(1)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：222.210.180.* 2008-06-10 13:28:04风雨消歇 [等级一]：
拘留三天太少了!让她学会做人我觉得至少得一辈子
回复 支持(0)反对(2) 查看回帖(0)
来自：金华市 2008-06-10 13:26:17腾讯网友 [等级一]：
[依据]
于老大:你要依据么?这世界有多少事情是没有依据的?!这世界有多少事情是有依据的?!说的清或说不清重要与否本身就是个问题.所以不要用这个话题来哗众取宠、博取名利，大家都只是凭着一点血性、一点人性、一点品性说话办事就OK了！
回复 支持(0)反对(1) 查看回帖(0)
天涯浪子 [等级一]：
拘留3天不为过
回复 支持(2)反对(0) 查看回帖(1)
来自：景德镇市 2008-06-10 09:52:57腾讯网友：
执法者应依法办事,不能为所欲为,否则 被拘人有权提出申请国家赔偿,
回复 支持(3)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：天津市 2008-06-10 09:50:56腾讯网友：
教育的悲哀。在目前法律还不健全，人的道德水准还没有达到一定层次时候，非常时期就应如此对待，拘留的对。十七岁已不是孩子了，和那些救灾的解放军年龄差不多，她又在做什么！（可耻）战士们在用生命救人，可她在亵渎生命。作者先生你可能已为人父母，教育孩子是应该的，但要看多大的孩子，在灾区和这个女孩同龄的孩子有的在念书，有的已经担起了一个家的责任。在法律的案例中也有骂人致死的，难道骂人无罪吗？作为中国人作… [查看全文]
回复 支持(1)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：河北省 2008-06-10 09:47:10腾讯网友：
想当初，N多人辱骂河南人民，现在都颤抖了吧！个个拘你们三天！哼哼！
回复 支持(0)反对(0) 查看回帖(1)
来自：自贡市 2008-06-10 09:48:31腾讯网友：
[打个比方]
同样是贪污，为什么贪污救灾款会被处罚的更重。同样是骂人，为什么在这个时候辱骂灾区人民会被拘留的原因了。楼猪稍稍动动你的猪脑子就明白了。真希望中国少出现这样的楼猪。
回复 支持(1)反对(2) 查看回帖(0)
来自：福州市 2008-06-10 09:48:06孑立 [等级一]：
不给点教训以后不会明白的
让她长点见识
回复 支持(1)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：吉林市 2008-06-10 09:46:20管教员 [等级一]：
[不正常的人]
不正常的人无论何时何地都是存在的，不要大惊小怪。
回复 支持(0)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：长春市 2008-06-10 09:46:07腾讯网友：
[完善法律吧]
我们的国家需要彻底地完善法律制度，她毕竟是个未成年女孩，不满18，其行为没有犯法，应说服教育，她也是祖国的未来呀~
[引用] 117.23.96.* 的腾讯网友发表于 2008-06-09 08:49:45
四川发生大地震，牵动全中国人民的心，在这种情况下我们要团结要爱护自己的同胞，而不是吃里爬外，如果，你的家人失… [查看全文]
回复 支持(2)反对(2) 查看回帖(0)
来自：镇江市 2008-06-10 09:39:33腾讯网友：
作者太天真了,那些执法的人有几个守法的.我们国家的法律还要健全啊,有太多的人凌驾与法律之上啊
回复 支持(2)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)
来自：222.210.215.* 2008-06-10 09:37:30[热帖]大立广告制作 [等级一]：
我认为这不是一棍子打死，只不过是三天而已，作者也不至于就戴这么大顶帽子。我个人认为不能只是口头教育就能了事，我相信作者和我一样对法律都不精通，但事实上，她的言论是放在全世界都能看到的地方，她的言论是伤害到了所有善良人的心，他的言论已经从事实上造成了危害，不仅仅是一个“错”字就能敷衍的。对她的处罚是让她能明是非、知良耻，以后不能任性枉为。处罚力度也合适，不能太轻，仅口头教育不足以让其有切肤之痛… [查看全文]
回复 支持(5)反对(0) 查看回帖(0)

By David Bandurski — A lot has been written about China’s response to the May 12 earthquake as a test of the leadership’s commitment to openness. But the flood of quake-related news and information over the last few weeks has also tested the Chinese public’s commitment to the truth. [Frontpage Image: Screenshot of QQ.com coverage of policewoman Jiang Xiaojuan, one of several heroes of the Sichuan quake relief effort].
Chinese are increasingly savvy media consumers, and there is no doubting their growing appetite for information. It is probably safe to assume, too, that most Chinese share a basic expectation that the information they read is reliable. Don’t we all?
But when it comes to emotionally charged issues like the disastrous earthquake in Sichuan (or unrest in Tibet, or the Beijing Olympics), views about the relative importance of reliable information over more intangible things like national glory or motherly love can grow very contentious.
This became clear at QQ.com over the weekend, when a special topics page on the “tide of emotion” generated by one fake news story in particular drew hundreds of impassioned responses.
The fake story in question was about a mother who left an SMS text message for her baby as they were trapped in the rubble of the quake (“Sweet child, should you survive, you must remember that I love you.”) The widely discredited story first appeared in a Tianya chatroom and was subsequently reported by mainstream media without verification.

[Above: Screenshot of QQ.com feature page on the fake story that moved China to tears. The characters read: “A bit of fake news.”]

A number of the comments on the QQ feature page, clearly the minority, spoke out against fake news:

“As soon as I saw this I thought it was fake, because it was so much like a novel,” wrote a user from the city of Taiyuan. “We need news that is true.”
“News seeks the truth. Once news departs from the truth it loses all necessity. This information might be well-meant, but it reflects an awful trend toward exaggeration of the news,” said a user from Xi’an.

But the vast majority of respondents were indignant that QQ should turn the truth of this particular SMS message into an issue at all.

“There are always those few who just have to sing the opposite tune from the people, thinking this is the only way you can set yourself apart,” one user wrote, an apparent reference to the need to sing the party’s “main theme” (主旋律). “Get lost! Is there any point to you doing this!”
“Who can doubt a mother’s love,” wrote another Web user in a clearly emotional post trailed with a forest of exclamation points.
“It doesn’t matter whether this information is true or not. What matters is whether the feelings are true,” said yet another.

The problem of fake and exaggerated news underscores two important factors in Chinese society. The first is the legacy of state propaganda, which emphasizes emotion at the expense of reason; party leaders turn the public eye from critical issues of public interest with narratives of public, party, government and military heroism.
The second is growing commercialization, which has led media outfits to seek out stories that “attract eyeballs” but which is also plagued by lack of professionalism and, again, the legacy of state propaganda.
It is encouraging, however, that the question of fake versus factual news has become an important highlight of media coverage following the Sichuan quake.
Just two days after the quake, CMP noted an editorial by Tao Duanfang (陶短房) that urged media against the official news style, in which news stories focus narrowly on the deeds of government leaders:

At this time, of course people are willing to listen to this or that government office talking about what they have already or are planning to do for the disaster victims and the disaster area. But they want more to hear those affected speak for themselves and say what they need the world outside to do for them. At this time, the disaster area and the disaster victims are the only true main characters. Only by listening more to the voices of these characters, by looking at their images, can those of us thousands or tens of thousands of miles distant truly understand what we can do to help, and what we should do.

On May 15, CMP Director Qian Gang similarly emphasized the need to focus on facts and practical measures, and to tone down the party rhetoric:

Big words and empty speeches, gaudy, showy and useless old habits, documents that parade their achievements to those on top, posing and dramatizing for the camera lens . . . At this moment, let this all pass away! Science and expertise is what our brothers and sisters in need hope for most.

The debate has played out again and again in scores of editorials.
Just before the weekend, an editorial in the Yangtse Evening News voiced frustration and concern about the possible longer-term impacts of media exaggeration on public confidence.
The editorial, by Le Yi (乐毅), addressed another controversial bit of news, the story of Jiangyou City policewoman Jiang Xiaojuan (蒋晓娟), who is said to have breast-fed orphans of the Sichuan quake. Le’s editorial began:

At night, as I was watching a disaster relief benefit on television, the male anchor used the emotive strains of a poetic recitation as he introduced the story of the Jiangyou City policewoman Jiang Xiaojuan, who was charged with breast-feeding orphans in the Beichuan earthquake and has been called online the “most beautiful cop mom.” “She set her own six month-old son aside . . . ” [said the anchor] to raucous applause, and a flash of concern crossed my mind — are we going to create yet another “Liu Jigui”? Because I seem to remember that the earliest reports said that Jiang Xiaojuan put her son into the care of her relatives in the countryside, as the disaster situation was tense and she couldn’t shirk her responsibilities to the department. How is it that we now have her making such an unnatural action as “setting [her son] aside.”

The story of Liu Jigui, which the writer references above, was a bone of contention following the disastrous snowstorms that hit China earlier this year. After Liu, a simple farmer, helped 44 travelers stranded by the storms, state media painted him as a selfless hero and he made several very dramatized television appearances.
Le Yi continues, talking about the dangers of exaggerated and constantly embellished news:

Nevertheless, this sort of elevated reporting carries with it major risk. For one thing, if it is found that a report is manufactured, this can make people distrustful of all publicity-style reports, like the mouse that ruins the whole pot of soup. In addition, the unnatural details of these exaggerated reports can lead people to think something’s wrong.
When you put these two things together, they will often cause people to have serious feelings of doubt about the credibility of media, and this lack of confidence can ultimately lead them to lose confidence in the government. Just as in the recent scandal over the misuse of disaster relief tents, the local Youth League secretary in Mianzhu, Fan Xiaohua (范晓华), was verbally abused just because his name was similar to the ‘Fan Xiaohua’ (范小华) being tossed around in rumors. Even after the truth was out, many Web users stubbornly believed it was Fan Xiaohua who had maliciously misused tents and harmed others. Clearly, this lack of confidence owes in large part to the poor influence of this kind of Liu Jigui reporting style.
I sincerely hope that in reports about quake heroes after this disaster we can avoid the reappearance of “Liu Jigui.” Only truth can lead to confidence, and only confidence can make society full of strength.

[Posted by David Bandurski, June 9, 2008, 1:28am HK]
FURTHER READING:
For another great look at this issue, see Alice Poon’s translation of a Southern Weekend commentary by Xin Lijian.

By David Bandurski — There is now much less coverage in China’s traditional media of shoddy school construction and its devastating effects during the Sichuan quake. Media have, however, turned to more general coverage of a series of related issues, including inadequate government oversight of the construction industry (leading to the problem of “tofu construction”) and poor disaster preparedness. ” [Frontpage Image: John R. Chapin sketch of the Great Chicago Fire, from Harper’s Weekly, 1871.]
When open criticism of the powers is a sensitive matter, allegory can prove a powerful tool. And one of the most interesting pieces to appear today, a rehashing by the official China News Service of an article in Hong Kong’s Wen Hui Bao (文汇报), compares the May 12 Sichuan earthquake to the Great Chicago Fire of 1871.

If Chicago had not had only 185 firefighters at the time, and only 17 fire engines, had its safety and warning system been more systematic and scientific, and had the government and city residents had a stronger sense of prevention, then the losses that year would have been much less significant. In the same way, if buildings in Sichuan, particularly school buildings in the disaster area, had been built with more care to quake resistance, and had city residents and students received better and more effective earthquake preparedness education, then the costs of the earthquake would have been much lower.

On the problem of poor-quality construction and its systemic causes, one of the best examples today comes from The Beijing News, which has a lengthy report on page B12 called, “Construction quality issues point to ‘unspoken rules’ in the industry.
The report outlines a series of problems and scenarios, using specific cases to illustrate each point. It begins:

For years now, construction quality has been a problem concerning both home buyers and industry experts. And although, according to this reporter’s investigation, few severe cases owing to problems with principal building structures have occurred in Beijing, bad plumbing, detached walls and other structural quality issues routinely crop up, so that instances of rights defense among homeowners have not slackened. In order to once again draw attention to the issue of construction quality, we hope to bring out the unspoken rules that exist in the construction industry by writing about how various quality issues emerge at various points in the real-estate development process, so that we can reflect on the abnormalities that still exist in the real-estate sector.

The report points out, for example, that there is an urgent need to strengthen government oversight of construction projects, and that the present inspection system lacks the proper personnel and resources. In addition, the deterrents to illegal behavior are not sufficient, according to industry insiders:

Only a small portion of developers who initiate projects against regulations act with impunity, but there are a large number of violators who approach the Commission of Urban Planning directly to ‘admit their errors’ (承认错误), and those who show sufficient remorse can fudge their way through by paying only a minimal fines and earn their check and acceptance permits (竣工验收表).
We can see from the disciplinary actions undertaken by the Municipal Commission of Urban Planning that fines are the most common form of disciplinary action. But fines are actually a limited deterrent for real-estate developers. Some industry insiders believe that in cases where developers defy regulations, hearings should be held, and other disciplinary measures should be considered in addition to fines, including return of the site to its original state, in order to exercise more pressure [on developers to comply].

For an interesting look at officially registered violations of construction code, readers might explore this portion of the Beijing Municipal Commission of Urban Planning website, which provides company names, registration numbers and specific code violations.
[Posted by David Bandurski, June 6, 2008, 6:15pm HK]