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).

No Smooth Sailing for Comments on China-US Trade

The headlines on Sunday declared that China and the United States had agreed to pull back from a trade war and call an end to a round of escalating tariffs. The announcement followed a mission to Washington by Chinese vice-premier Liu He (刘鹤), a seasoned politician who is also known in China as one of the country’s top economists.
Details of the negotiations and the agreed-upon measures were as yet unclear, but there were reports that China had pledged to purchase more American goods and services, including agriculture and energy, in order to offset the trade imbalance.
As the news trickled back to China, comments on social media were mixed, with some users claiming that China got the upper hand and others suggesting President Trump — “the madman,” as some called him — managed to gain the advantage.
For reasons not entirely clear, quite a number of such posts offering speculation as to which side came out on top were deleted by censors from the popular Weibo platform. One reason might be that the authorities are keen to tone down any suggestion of having been forced into concessions. Another reason might be the impulse to offset language that seems to suggest bi-lateral trade is not, as China now likes to say, “win-win.”
In any case, the following is a selection of deleted Weibo posts. The last one deals with an obvious point of sensitivity, speculating (perhaps tongue in cheek) about whether or not it is possible that Google might “return” to China:

2018-05-20 04:23:55 | [Second round of China-US trade negotiations concluded, Premier He returns home] This round of China-US trade negotiations has ended, and He has returned to Beijing today. The Chinese side has concluded that “negotiations were positive, constructive and produced results.” The US gave no official assessment. Various information sources suggest: 1) China has agreed to increase imports of American products. The US side demanded that the Chinese side provide trade goals, tariff and non-tariff reforms, and new measures and results on the protection of intellectual property. 2) China’s concerted push for the US to let ZTE off the hook was unsuccessful.
2018-05-20 04:23:55 | 【中美贸易第二轮谈判结束,鹤总回国】这轮中美贸易谈判结束,鹤今天返京。中方结论是“谈判是积极的、有建设性的和富有成果的”。美方没有官方评价。从各种信息显示:1)中国承诺增加美国商品进口。美方要求中方提供贸易目标、关税和非关税改革和知识产权保护措施未果。2)中国极力让美国放行中兴未果。 ​
2018-05-20 02:50:05 | [Ceasefire in China-US trade war! China-US issue joint statement on trade negotiations] the two sides agreed: 1) to make a substantive decrease in the gap in trade between China and the US; 2) to significantly increase US exports of agricultural and energy products to China; 3) to discuss trade in industrial products and services; 4) to increase cooperation on intellectual property protection. http://t.cn/R38fYnw ​
2018-05-20 02:50:05 | 【中美贸易战停火!中美就经贸磋商发表联合声明】双方同意:1、实质性减少美对华货物贸易逆差。2、有意义地增加美国农产品和能源出口。3、就扩大制造业产品和服务贸易进行讨论。4、加强知识产权保护合作。http://t.cn/R38fYnw ​
2018-05-20 07:28:16 | Judging from the content released, the madman won. How is that? After all, you can’t enforce protections forever [on China’s side], and domestic consumers [in China] have received real benefit. Besides, when other things are discussed later on, it’s hard to say things won’t take a wrong turn. 
2018-05-20 07:28:16 | 从公布的内容看,疯子赢了。又如何呢?反正不可能永远护着,国内消费者也得到了实质利好。另外后续还有东西谈,说不准还会出岔子
2018-05-20 09:00:23 | The crux of China-US trade negotiations: the attempts by the American Empire to throttle the China 2025 plan have dematerialized. This is the most fundamental. The other points of compromise — or kneeling, to put it more sharply — are small matters. Of course, given Trump’s erratic character, and the fact that there is now already an anti-China consensus in America, this will not be the last we hear of this. I personally think that it’s far from over, especially with respect to the midterm elections. Friction between China and the US will get more and more severe. In order to satisfy the growing consumption of the Chinese people . . . . [Full text]
2018-05-20 09:00:23 | 中美协议的关键在于:美帝扼杀中国制造2025的内容已经消失了 这才是最根本的 其他暂时的妥协,乃至说难听点,跪,都是小节 不过按床铺反复的性格,以及美国内已经形成反华共识 这次不是是一张一弛,个人认为远未结束,特别是中期选举后,中美之间的交锋只会越演越烈 为满足中国人民不断增长的消费…全文: http://m.weibo.cn/1365426941/4241676820233822 ​
2018-05-20 08:14:58 | So, will Google be returning [to China] this time around?
2018-05-20 08:14:58 | 此次谷歌会不会回来? ​

 
 

Building the Party's Internet

In a ceremony in Beijing earlier this week, the director of the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), Xu Lin (徐麟), presided over the inauguration of the China Federation of Internet Societies (CFIS), a broad internet industry grouping whose stated purpose is to “promote the development of Party organizations in the industry.” The federation’s establishment is a clear sign of the growing involvement of the Chinese Communist Party in private internet firms, and further reflection of the broader trend of closer Party governance and scrutiny of all forms of media.
Prominent industry leaders, including Tencent chairman Pony Ma, Alibaba’s founder Jack Ma and Baidu chairman Robin Li, have been appointed as vice presidents of the new federation.
The Global Times quoted Zhao Zhanling of the Beijing-based Internet Society of China as saying that the formation of the federation was about leveraging the “voluntary” participation of internet companies in order to improve the governance of cyberspace. “Just relying on government authorities,” said Zhao, “is far from enough in administering cyberspace, and it’s more important that CFIS members voluntarily clean the cyberspace environment.”
But such industry groupings in China are never voluntary or independent. For many years the Party has used such intermediate structures as vehicles to assert control through means that appear more autonomous and legitimate. More than 10 years ago, I wrote about how the Beijing Association of Online Media, an organization claiming membership by some of the world’s top technology companies, including Intel and Nokia, served as an organ of state censorship.
According to a CAC press release appearing at People’s Daily Online and other state media sites:

The China Federation of Internet Societies said it would conscientiously study and implement the spirit of Xi Jinping’s Strategic Thought on [Building] an Internet Power (习近平网络强国战略思想) and the National Cybersecurity Work Conference, serving as leader for internet social organizations in upholding a correct political direction; serving as a motivator for internet social organizations in serving function roles [in internet governance]; serving as a protector of the interest demands of internet social organizations; serving as a promoter of Party building within internet social organizations; serving as a monitor of the regulated operation of internet social organizations; and promoting the healthy development of internet social organizations on the path of rule by law.

It appears that the primary role of the federation will be to exercise tighter Party control over the complicated ecosystem of various organizations, companies and groups involved in cyberspace governance. The Global Times quoted an official from the Institute of China Cyberspace Strategy as saying that “the Party should step up its guidance of CFIS members so that internet companies could raise their awareness in safeguarding China’s sovereignty and interests.”
The most crucial part of that strategy will be to build and strengthen Party units within these organizations and other CFIS members, including private internet companies. This is something we have already seen in recent months. We wrote last month about a Party study course held inside Beijing Byte Dance Telecommunications, the operator of Toutiao.
And yet somehow, against all reason, the Internet Society of China’s Zhao Zhanling managed to reassure the Global Times: “But the Party units will not interfere in the operations of these companies.”
 
 

The Revolution China Intends to Lead

Trade talks between China and the United States last week ended abruptly and with no discernible progress. Technology was one of the key sticking points, with the US pressing China to put a stop to state subsidies for technology firms under its “Made in China 2025” plan — a blueprint for establishing Chinese domination of advanced industries currently in development, what Axios recently called “the 10 biggest technologies of the future.”


But if we understand how the Chinese Communist Party perceives the need to secure the technologies of the future through the lens of the past, we can better understand just how much it has invested in the idea of Chinese dominance — and how difficult it likely will be to arrive at a compromise of the kind Trump’s negotiators are hoping for.
The following text is a very partial translation of a piece appearing yesterday on page 11 in China’s Guangming Daily, a newspaper published by the Central Propaganda Department. The piece, which was also posted at People’s Daily Online and other sites, was written by Zhi Zhenfeng (支振锋), a researcher in the Socialism With Chinese Characteristics Theoretical System Research Center of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
We translate the opening of the piece just to offer a taste of the official rhetoric surrounding China’s technological advancement and its link both to long-term national development and to the legitimacy and longevity of the Party itself. The reference to the building of an “Internet Power,” readers should note, refers more broadly to cyber technologies and their application across a range of industries.
The basic sense in Zhi Zhenfeng’s piece, which mirrors much official writing on new technologies, is that China, while globally pre-eminent in the agrarian phase of human history, missed out on the industrial revolution and therefore lost its rightful position in the world.
China — or so goes the story — will not make the same mistake again, as the world is on the brink of the next great revolution.

The Fundamental Path to Accelerating the Advancement of the Building of an Internet Power 
(加快推进网络强国建设的根本遵循)
May 7, 2018 / Guangming Daily
In his important speech to the National Cybersecurity Work Conference, General Secretary Xi Jinping stood in the midst of human historical development, at the heights of the overall situation of Party and government work, condensing human historical development and the experiences and knowledge of Chinese people, and accurately grasped the intrinsic principles of the advancing technological revolution and the precious transformation in social production (社会生产变革), scientifically analyzed transformative trends in digitalization and the historic responsibility we bear, systematically described the rich meaning of the Internet Power strategy, profoundly responded to a series of major questions concerning theories and experiences in the development of cyber tasks, and provided the fundamental path to seizing the historic opportunity of the information revolution, accelerating cybersecurity and digitalization work, and accelerating the promotion of definite forward progress in building an Internet Power. A magnificent blueprint drawn on a single sheet of paper, setting a start to a glorious cause. The notion of “the people as the center” established the basic tone woven through this important historical document, and “building an Internet Power” is the strong note advancing bravely in this beautiful symphonic movement.
Digitalization has brought the Chinese people the historic opportunity of a millenium
Humankind has experienced an agricultural revolution, an industrial revolution, and is now experiencing an information revolution. Every revolution in industry has immensely enriched the existence of humankind, bringing multidimensional change economically and politically. During the extended period of agrarian society, China was an economic power in the world, creating a resplendent culture, but it later missed out on the industrial revolution, missed an historic opportunity to progress along with the world, and it gradually slipped to a position where it was passively subjected to abuse. Through several generations of effort, we have never been so close as we are now to the goal of the Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese People, nor have we ever been so confident as we are today, or so capable of realizing the Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese people.
Now and in the coming period, our country’s development goal is to realize the “two millennial goals” as the objective of our struggle. The information revolution has enhanced the mental power of humanity, and it is bringing another flying leap in productivity, creating a broader economic and social transformation. New technologies have brought a new economy, and the new economy has engendered new businesses. . . .
As General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “Digitalization offers the Chinese people an extremely rare opportunity.”

Tech Firms Tilt Toward the Party

In the New York Times today, Raymond Zhong and Paul Mozur write about how China risks spoiling its innovative technology sector through increasingly heavy-handed intervention. While China has in recent years “defied the truism that only free and open societies can innovate,” they write, the country’s “tilt toward strongman rule” under Xi Jinping could put that reputation at risk.
Private technology firms in China are being drawn closer to the Chinese Communist Party across a range of technological development initiatives — from self-driving cars to social credit scoring, from voice and facial recognition to satellite navigation. At the same time, the Party is being introduced more forcefully into technology firms themselves. Zhong and Mozur deal with this latter aspect toward the end of their piece, noting how this is visible at the Shenzhen headquarters of Tencent, China’s largest technology firm:

A chart on the wall shows how many employees are party members (more than 8,000 this year). Another display lists the monthly schedule for employees’ party education. (This month’s offering: training sessions on “New Era, New Thought, New Journey.”)

Tencent’s mascot, a jaunty winking penguin, appears throughout with a hammer and sickle on its chest.

But what does the process of “party education” actually look like? In fact, we had a hint last week from China’s Economic Daily newspaper, which reported on a study session a one of China’s leading start-ups, Beijing Byte Dance Telecommunications Co. Ltd., which was harshly disciplined by authorities last month, its CEO issuing an abject apology.

Bytedance employees attend a Party study session led by Party secretary and editor-in-chief Zhang Fuping.
The Economic Daily reported on April 28 that “the CCP committee of Beijing Byte Dance Telecommunications Co. Ltd. (字节跳动) held a topic course on the conscientious study of the spirit of the National Cyberspace Work Conference (全国网信工作会议).” The work conference mentioned here was the latest forum on cybersecurity, at which President Xi Jinping delivered a speech in which he linked cybersecurity and national security, calling for “improved governance capacity in cyberspace.”
Concerning information controls, Xi said, according to Xinhua News Agency: “Internet media should spread positive information, uphold the correct political direction, and guide public opinion and values towards the right direction.”
The Bytedance study session was chaired by Party secretary and editor-in-chief Zhang Fuping” (张辅评), who according to the Economic Daily shared his own study and explained the link between the spirit of the conference and the company’s own situation.” The meeting was attended both by current Party members and by “those eager to join the Party.” There were reportedly a range of presentations from senior managers, including CEO Zhang Yiming — whose abject and overtly political apology last month was major news — on such topics as “doing a proper job of spreading positive energy” (a Party propaganda phrase) and “enhancing industry self-discipline.” Also on the agenda was the “building of a digital Silk Road” (数字丝绸之路), a tech reference to another of Xi Jinping’s signature policies, the Belt and Road Initiative.
But the chief message was control:

Party secretary and editor-in-chief Zhang Fuping said that the General Secretary had established the bottom line all technology enterprises must follow when he said that “[we] must stay true to the main responsibility of the enterprise, absolutely not allowing the internet to become a platform for the transmission of harmful information and rumors.” As a technology company with a media nature (具有媒体属性), Bytedance must place [correct] guidance and holding of responsibility in the first position, upholding not just its main responsibility but also social reponsibility and moral responsibility.

Control and development have remained in tension in China throughout the four decades of the reform era. Today, in what we might call the post-reform “New Era” of Xi Jinping, control and innovation (the new buzzword for development) are equally if not more in tension.
The Party is gambling its future on the right balance of both.
 
 

Tech Shame in the "New Era"

When does a corporate apology become a political self-confession, or jiantao (检讨), an act of submission not to social mores and concerns, but to those in power? The line can certainly blur in China. But the public apology today from Zhang Yiming (张一鸣), the founder and CEO of one of China’s leading tech-based news and information platforms, crosses deep into the territory of political abjection.

Zhang’s apology, posted to WeChat at around 4 AM Beijing time, addressed recent criticism aired through the state-run China Central Television and other official media of Jinri Toutiao, or “Toutiao” — a platform for content creation and aggregation that makes use of algorithms to customize user experience. Critical official coverage of alleged content violations on the platform was followed by a notice on April 4 from the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film, and Television (SAPPRFT), in which the agency said Toutiao and another service providing live-streaming, Kuaishou, would be subject to “rectification measures.”

Read through Zhang’s apology and it is quickly apparent that this is a mea culpa made under extreme political pressure, in which Zhang, an engineer by background, ticks the necessary ideological boxes to signal his intention to fall into line. At one point, Zhang confesses that the “deep-level causes” of the problems at Toutiao included “a weak [understanding and implementation of] the “four consciousnesses”. This is a unique Xi Jinping buzzword, introduced in January 2016, that refers to 1) “political consciousness” (政治意识), namely primary consideration of political priorities when addressing issues, 2) consciousness of the overall situation (大局意识), or of the overarching priorities of the Party and government, 3) “core consciousness” (核心意识), meaning to follow and protect Xi Jinping as the leadership “core,” and 4) “integrity consciousness” (看齐意识), referring to the need to fall in line with the Party.

Next, Zhang mentions the service’s failure to respect “socialist core values,” and its “deviation from public opinion guidance” — this latter term being a Party buzzword (dating back to the 1989 crackdown on the Tiananmen Square protests) synonymous with information and press controls as a means of maintaining Party dominance.

Zhang also explicitly references Xi Jinping’s notion of the “New Era,” and writes: “All along, we have placed excessive emphasis on the role of technology, and we have not acknowledged that technology must be led by the socialist core value system, broadcasting positive energy, suiting the demands of the era, and respecting common convention.”

In the list of the company’s remedies, there is even a mention of the need to promote more content from “authoritative media,” a codeword for Party-controlled media, which suggests once again that the leadership has been unhappy with the idea of algorithms that wall users off from official messaging if they show no interest in such content.

We include a translation of Zhang’s apology letter below, excepting (only for the sake of time) the final section on management of online communities. We have left the Chinese alongside the English, believing this letter offers an essential view of the deep tension in China right now between technological innovation and economic reform on the one hand, and the urgency of political controls on the other. Here we have a technologist celebrating innovation and apologizing at the same time for its political crimes — in a way quite redolent, in the sense that this is a jiantao made before the leadership, of the pre-reform era.

Apology and reflection

今日头条的朋友们:

Dear friends of Jinri Toutiao:

我真诚地向监管部门致歉,向用户及同事们道歉。 从昨天下午接到监管部门的通知到现在,我一直处在自责和内疚之中,一夜未眠。

I earnestly apologise to regulatory authorities, and to our users and colleagues. Since receiving the notice yesterday from regulatory authorities, I have been filled with remorse and guilt, entirely unable to sleep.

今日头条将永久关停“内涵段子”客户端软件及公众号。产品走错了路,出现了与社会主义核心价值观不符的内容,没有贯彻好舆论导向,接受处罚,所有责任在我。

Jinri Toutiao will shut down once and for all its “Neihan Duanzi” app and its public accounts. Our product took the wrong path, and content appeared that was incommensurate with socialist core values, that did not properly implement public opinion guidance — and I am personally responsible for the punishments we have received [as a result].

自责是因为辜负了主管部门一直以来的指导和期待。过去几年间,主管部门给了我们很多的指导和帮助,但我内心没有真正理解和认识到位,也没有整改到位,造成今天对用户不负责任的结果。

I am responsible because I failed to live up to the guidance and expectations supervisory organs have demanded all along. Over the past few years, the regulatory authorities have provided us with much guidance and assistance, but in our hearts we failed to properly understand and recognise [their demands]. Nor did we properly rectify the situation, which led to the present failure to be responsible to our users.

自责也是因为辜负了用户的支持和信任。我们片面注重增长和规模,却没有及时强化质量和责任,忽视了引导用户获取正能量信息的责任。对承担企业社会责任,弘扬正能量,把握正确的舆论导向认识不够,思想上缺乏重视。

I am responsible also because I failed to live up to the trust and support placed in me by our users. We prioritised only the expansion of [platform] scale, and we were not timely in strengthening quality and responsibility, overlooking our responsibility to channel users in the uptake of information with positive energy. We were insufficiently attentive, and in our thinking placed insufficient emphasis on our corporate social responsibility, to promote positive energy and to grasp correct guidance of public opinion.

同时,我也辜负了投入无限热情和心血打造了这款产品的同事。产品出现这么大的问题,停止服务,我有领导责任。

At the same time, I failed my colleagues who invested such boundless enthusiasm and hard work to create this product. For such major problems to emerge with the product, and for service to halt, I bear leadership responsibility.

3月29日央视报道我们的广告问题后,我不断反思自己以前的想法,反思公司现在的做法,开始大力推进公司员工提高意识、改进管理、完善流程。

On March 29, after China Central Television reported problems with our advertisements, I engaged in steady reflection over my previous ways of thinking, reflected upon the company’s current methods, and began an energetic campaign among our staff to raise their consciousness, improve management and streamline processes.

我是工程师出身,创业的初心是希望做一款产品,方便全世界用户互动和交流。过去几年间,我们把更多的精力和资源,放在了企业的增长上,却没有采取足够措施,来补上我们在平台监管、企业社会责任上欠下的功课,比如对低俗、暴力、有害内容、虚假广告的有效治理。

My background is engineering, and my originating idea in starting this business was to create a product that would facilitate interaction and exchange among users worldwide. Over the past few years we have invested more energy and resources in the growth of the company, but we did not take the proper measures to improve supervision of the platform, and we did not adequately do our homework in terms of effectively controlling such things as low-row, violent and harmful content, and fake advertising.

我们作为一家十八大后快速发展起来的创业公司,深知公司的快速发展,是伟大时代给的机会。我感恩这个时代,感恩改革开放历史机遇,感恩国家对于科技产业发展的扶持。

As a start-up company developing rapidly in the wake of the 18th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party, we profoundly understand that our rapid development was an opportunity afforded us by this great era. I thank this era. I thank the historic opportunity of economic reform and opening; and I thank the support the government has given for the development of the technology industry.

我深刻反思,公司目前存在问题的深层次原因是:“四个意识”淡薄、社会主义核心价值观教育缺失、舆论导向存在偏差。一直以来,我们过分强调技术的作用,却没有意识到,技术必须要用社会主义核心价值观来引导,传播正能量,符合时代要求,尊重公序良俗。

I profoundly reflect on the fact that a deep-level cause of the recent problems in my company is: a weak [understanding and implementation of] the “four consciousnesses” [of Xi Jinping]; deficiencies in education on the socialist core values; and deviation from public opinion guidance. All along, we have placed excessive emphasis on the role of technology, and we have not acknowledged that technology must be led by the socialist core value system, broadcasting positive energy, suiting the demands of the era, and respecting common convention.

我们必须重新梳理我们的愿景。我们说,要做全球的创作与交流平台。这就要求我们必须保证所“创作”与“交流”的内容是积极向上的、健康有益的,能够给时代、给人民带来正能量。

We must make a renewed effort to sort out our vision of the future. We say, we want to make global platform for creation and conversation. This demands that we must ensure that the content of “creation” and “conversation” are positive, healthy and beneficial, that they can offer positive energy to the era, and to the people.

我们必须重新阐释并切实践行我们的社会责任:正直向善,科技创新,创造价值,担当责任,合作共赢。我深刻地认识到,企业的发展必须紧扣时代和国家发展主旋律。

We must renew our understanding and enactment of our social responsibility; upright and good, innovative technology, value creation, taking responsibility, cooperation and mutual benefit. I profoundly recognise that the company’s development must stick closely to the era and to the main theme of national development.

今天,监管部门、公众和媒体指出了公司存在的问题,是对我们的善意提醒和有力鞭策。我跟我的同事们将立即着手改变,改变自己的思想,改变我们的做法。

Today, supervisory organs, the public and the media have pointed out problems in our company, and this is well-intentioned reminder and an encouragement to us. I and my colleagues will work immediately to bring about change — changing our own thoughts, and changing our methods.

一、将正确的价值观融入技术和产品
Introducing correct values into technology and products

1、加强党建工作,对全体员工进行“四个意识”、社会主义核心价值观、舆论导向、法律法规等教育,真正履行好企业的社会责任。

1.1 Strengthening the work of Party construction, carrying out education among our entire staff on the “four consciousnesses,” socialist core values, [correct] guidance of public opinion, and laws and regulations, truly acting on the company’s social responsibility.

2、强化各业务线履行社会责任的制度化机制化,将其列入业务考核范围。
1.2 Strengthening implementation of systems and mechanisms for social responsibility in various business activities, bringing them into the scope of business assessment.

3、进一步深化与权威媒体合作,提高权威媒体内容的分发,保证权威声音有力传播。

1.3 Further deepening cooperation with authoritative [official Party] media, elevating distribution of authoritative media content, ensuring that authoritative [official Party] media voices are broadcast to strength.

4、强化总编辑责任制,全面纠正算法和机器审核的缺陷,不断强化人工运营和审核,将现有6000人的运营审核队伍,扩大到10000人。

1.4 Strengthening the editor-in-chief responsibility system, comprehensively correcting deficiencies in algorithmic and machine review [of content], steadily strengthening human operations and review, raising the current number of operational review staff from 6,000 to 10,000 persons [carrying out content review].

[Translation omitted here for section on management of online communities]

Finally, I again express my apologies to supervisory organs, and to the friends who care about us.

我们理应做得更好。我们一定会做得更好。

We ought to do better. We will definitely do better.

我们真诚地期待社会各界帮助和监督我们的整改。我们绝不辜负大家的期望。

We earnestly await help from various parts of society in supervising our rectification. We will not disappoint everyones’ hopes.

今日头条创始人、CEO张一鸣

Jinri Toutiao founder and CEO Zhang Yimin

2018年4月11日
April 11, 2018

Sunset for China's "Sunshine Boy"

Zhou Xiaoping’s praise for Xi Jinping was never faint, but his enthusiasm may have damned him nonetheless. The young internet writer, once praised by state-run Chinese media as a great disseminator of “positive energy,” or zhengnengliang (正能量), through his professions of love for China and a profound sense of grievance directed toward the West, seems now to be fading into the wings.
A report on March 22 noted in an otherwise unremarkable account of the minutes of a conference of the Sichuan Online Writers Association held the previous day that “[the] conference accepted Comrade Zhou Xiaoping’s resignation as chairman of the Sichuan Online Writers Association.”

Zhou Xiaoping is absent from the leadership at the March meeting of the Sichuan Online Writers Association.
By March 24, this detail about Zhou’s resignation had risen to the headlines at Shanghai’s The Paper, and from there was re-posted to other prominent news sites like Sina and QQ. But beyond a suggestive wink to readers there was no attempt inside China to flesh out the story, a fair indication of its sensitivity. Editors merely bolded the above-mentioned line from the original report on the conference, trusting that readers would infer its significance.
Before long, however, Chinese-language media outside of China had offered a credible explanation for Zhou Xiaoping’s not-entirely-unexpected exit: his close connection to ousted internet czar Lu Wei.
Lu, once the confident face of Xi Jinping’s elbows-out approach to the control of cyberspace as head of the new Cyberspace Administration of China, was placed under investigation in November last year for “severe discipline violations.” This news was followed months later, in February, by a notice from the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection that was unusually harsh in its characterization of Lu’s alleged crimes, saying that he had “lacked shame” and “traded power for sex,” that he had been “domineering” and “cruel in his work style,” and the ignominious list went on.
Lu Wei’s star had burned out quickly. And his was the star to which Zhou Xiaoping had hitched his wagon. It was likely Lu’s stunt to arrange for Xi Jinping to single out Zhou Xiaoping for praise during the 2014 Beijing Forum on Literature and Art. At that event Xi laid out his vision of the arts as a vehicle for morally uplifting messages that put the Chinese Communist Party at the center of that morality. “Art and culture will emit the greatest positive energy,” said Xi, “when the Marxist view of art and culture is firmly established and the people are their focus.” To Zhou Xiaoping and Hua Qianfang (another online writer known for his nationalistic paeans) Xi said, shaking hands after the forum: “I hope you create even more works of positive energy.” The scene was referred to repeatedly in official television newscasts.

Zhou Xiaoping’s writings appear in Cankao Xiaoxi in October 2014.
In the wake of the forum, Zhou Xiaoping enjoyed a torrent of state media coverage, including an exclusive interview with the People’s Daily, and publication of his online writing in Reference News, a daily published by the official Xinhua News Agency. Selected pieces often bore overwrought titles like, “Fly, Chinese Dream!” — this being Zhou’s recollection of the May 1999 bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade by American bombers (“The gun barrels of the Americans,” Zhou wrote, “have always pointed directly at the heads of all Chinese.”)
Zhou Xiaoping earned the nickname “sunshine boy,” or nuannan (暖男) — derived from Chinese internet slang for a young man who, like the sunshine, instills people with feelings of warmth — following one of his most famous pieces, titled, “A Sunshine Boy for His Mother Country” (我待祖国如暖男). When the Sichuan Online Writers Association was founded in June 2015, part of a nationwide movement to bring online writers into the Party-led fold represented by the dominant China Writers Association, Zhou Xiaoping seemed the ideal public face for the new organization.
But the “positive energy” emitted by Zhou and other fiery and attention-seeking young nationalist writers online soon became a headache. Zhou’s ardent, boot-licking expressions of national love were a lightning rod for criticism. According to some accounts, they were viewed as ineffective propaganda, embarrassing and counterproductive — or worse, as active attempts to undermine Xi Jinping through “high sarcasm,” or gaojihei (高级黑).

A November 2017 report from Caixin Global on Lu Wei’s anti-graft case includes a picture of Lu’s 2014 visit to Facebook headquarters.
If Lu Wei is the tiger’s head in the old Chinese saying about aggressive beginnings and effete endings (虎头蛇尾), then Zhou Xiaoping is the snake’s tail, quietly slithering into the darkness. The propaganda blitz surrounding “positive energy,” Lu Wei’s pop term for cyber control and censorship (more here), is a thing of the past. The new tiger’s head is an old and familiar one — an emboldened and consolidated Party-state media machine urged once again to go out into the world and “tell China’s story well.”
Some wryly predicted such an end for Zhou even at the moment of his rise. As former CMP fellow and blogger Yang Hengjun wrote in November 2014, closing an essay on Zhou:

Zhou should keep this in mind: in the history of the CCP, people like Yao Wenyuan and Zhang Chunqiao, who sought to curry political favor and make some small profits by praising and flattering officials, wound up on the garbage heap of history.  On the flip side, people like Deng Xiaoping and Xi Zhongxun, who boldly presented their own critical viewpoints while suffering torture and censorship, proved to be the greatest contributors to China and the Chinese people.
So let’s turn the page on Zhou Xiaoping; that will benefit everyone.

Goodbye, sunshine boy.
 
 
 

Guerrilla Ideology

The following commentary, written by former CMP fellow Chang Ping (长平), was published in Chinese last week by Deutsche Welle. We offer our translation here to help shed light on China’s recent move to combine its three major state-run broadcast networks into a single super-network to be called, in its external dimension, “Voice of China.”

A 2010 cartoon by Kuang Biao showing Chang Ping under pressure.
Most readers will remember Chang Ping as a news editor until 2001 at Southern Weekly, the relatively outspoken paper based in Guangzhou that has fallen on tougher times since a staff walkout there in 2013. He was later an editor at Southern Metropolis Daily, another paper under the Nanfang Daily Group with a reputation for pushing the envelope — but was forced from this position in 2008 after a strongly-worded commentary criticizing China’s policies in Tibet. Chang continued to write for various publications under the news group until he was finally forced out in 2011.
The essential argument Chang makes in this commentary is that the Chinese Communist Party has never at any point relinquished its Cold War rhetoric in the domain of news and ideology, and has never halted its preparation for an ideological showdown with the West. In fact, he says, the wealthier China has become, the more it has invested in its bid for ideological dominance. The recent announcement of the creation of “Voice of China,” says Chang, is only the latest chapter in the Party’s campaign of ideological opposition, which is colored by a nationalism driven by a narrative of victimization.
One of the most interesting assertions in Chang’s piece, however, is the reference toward the end to Mao Zedong’s 16-character mantra on guerrilla warfare as a way of understanding China’s international media push: “When the enemy advances, we retreat; when the enemy makes camp we harass; when the enemy is exhausted we fight; and, when the enemy retreats we pursue.” In his introduction to the China Story Yearbook 2014, almost two years into Xi Jinping’s (now theoretically unlimited) tenure, editor Geremie Barmé similarly referenced the 16-character mantra as a means of understanding Xi’s approach to foreign policy. “It is an approach, he wrote, “that purposely creates an atmosphere of uncertainty and tension.”
The 16-character mantra may offer more than just a metaphorical lens for understanding China’s actions globally. The West is suffering various forms of democratic exhaustion. The United States is retreating. And China, as evidenced by its second Human Rights Council resolution in nine months and other international actions, is clearly on the offensive.

Amazing, ‘Voice of China’ (厉害了,中国之声)
The Party Governs All (党管一切)
“The organizational structures of China Central Television (China Global Television Network), China National Radio and China Radio International are now eliminated. The original names are to be retained domestically, while externally they will now be all known under the name ‘Voice of China.'” This is a passage from the Chinese Communist Party document called Program for the Deepening Reform of Party and Government Organs, a document that is full of word usage and grammatical problems — suited to the rashness and ignorance of leader in the new era.
Many internet users [in China] gleefully shared a joke about a report on Xinwen Lianbo, the official nightly news program, that went: “News from this station: this station is now eliminated.” But in fact the intent of the Program was not to eliminate these media, but rather to combine several official media into a single entity, renaming it the “Central Radio and Television Network,” to be called “Voice of China” (中国之声) externally.
I suspect that my colleagues at Voice of America and Deutsche Welle (meaning “German Wave” but translated into Chinese as “Voice of Germany”) feel a certain strangeness at this. Radio France Internationale (RFI) has recently been referred to the Chinese official Party media Global Times as “Voice of France.” Other media similarly named include “Voice of Tibet” (西藏之声) and “Voice of Taiwan” (台湾之音) — and in history there was “Voice of Free China” (自由中国之声) and “Voice of Asia” (亚洲之声). All of these media perhaps feel that they are different from one another, but in the eyes of the Chinese Communist Party they are all essentially “voices of the hostile foreign forces” (境外敌对势力之声), and China must have in response its own “voice.” Moreover, that voice must be even more powerful. Make no mistake, this naming of China’s new network is no mere coincidence, but a purposeful collision with your names.
The Cold War Isn’t Over
Thirty years after an end was declared in the Cold War, this assertion has been constantly in doubt. Quite a number of articles in the New York Times in recent years, written by a range of observers, have pointed out that the Cold War as an ideological struggle has never passed.  Unfortunately, most of the attention has turned on Russia, and has overlooked the importance of China’s role. But today, China’s influence surpasses that of Russia in a number of areas, and [overlooking this fact) is an error that researchers cannot afford to make.
Over more than half a century, the Cold War media of which “Voice of America” was most representative sought to break through restrictions on information in the socialist camp, and to spread Western concepts of democracy. They offered massive amounts of news and cultural programming, reaching audiences through shortwave radio, and made huge contributions to the victory of the West.
After an end to the Cold War was declared, and the West underwent an ideological shift, these media said goodbye to their old mission and entered a new era. They sought an exit from their Cold War mindset, to tone down their propaganda hues, and to become more objective, independent and comprehensive modern media. This didn’t happen just in the media. The think tanks that had been supported and funded by the government during the Cold War experienced similar changes.
Twenty-eight years ago, Chinese students and city residents set the stage for dramatic change. Very quickly, the socialist camp collapsed [on a global scale] and those on the front lines in China fell in a bloodbath. Western societies, eager to celebrate their victory, buried their heads in the sand and believed that China had opted into a new international order. China feigned civility on the one hand, while declaring on the other that “Western hostile forces have never given up their desire to destroy us.” Not only did China not, as the West did, remove, disband and transform its “forces” deployed for media and intelligence activities, but in fact it continued to invest greater resources in its Cold War thinking as it grew in economic strength, building a formidable external propaganda system. “Voice of China” is one result of these efforts.
While one side unilaterally declared an end to the Cold War, entering a post-Cold War era marked by tolerance and diversity, the other side strengthened its state propaganda apparatus, making a large-scale attack on the free world. “Voice of China” can work unhindered on the global internet, while Voice of America, Deutsche Welle, Radio France Internationale and others are restricted by the Great Firewall, left an environment arguably worse than that of the shortwave radio environment during the Cold War.
Chinese on the one hand have brittle glass hearts, so ready to make nationalist declarations of victimization. On the other hand, they act with utter lack of consideration over discrimination against Africans in their official Spring Festival Gala, show contempt online for “Ah San” (a pejorative reference to India), “Bang Zi” (referring to Koreans), “Monkey” (referring to Vietnamese), and “Ghost” (referring to Japanese). What is going on in their heads? When Chinese authorities unleash campaigns to “oppose Christmas,” but also talks about pushing “Spring Festival culture” out into the world — what kind of logic is this? People in the West can very easily spot the unfairness here, but in the nationalist ideology trumpeted by the Chinese government this is characterized as “our victory.” By the same logic, the weakening in firepower among the various “voices of the hostile forces” (境外敌对势力之声) does not call for a transformation of the ideological stance [in China], but instead means “China is amazing” (厉害了我的国). [NOTE: “Amazing China” is the title of a patriotic film released in China last month, becoming the highest-grossing ‘documentary’ of all time in the country.]
The attack prepared by “Voice of China” can be viewed against this ideological backdrop, an incarnation of Mao Zedong’s “small thug strategy” (小流氓战略方针) [or his 16-character mantra on guerrilla warfare]: “When the enemy advances, we retreat; when the enemy makes camp we harass; when the enemy is exhausted we fight; and, when the enemy retreats we pursue.”
Western societies cannot possibly retreat to the point of the Cold War Era. But at the same time they must face the challenges brought by the rise of China.
Chang Ping, a veteran Chinese journalist and commentator, currently lives in Germany. 
 

[Featured image by Gwydion Williams, available at Flickr.com under Creative Commons license.]

When Reform Means Tighter Controls

Under an institutional restructuring plan announced today by Xinhua News Agency, called Program for the Deepening Reform of Party and Government Organs (深化党和国家机构改革方案), China has announced a deep restructuring also of the institutions overseeing the media and film industries.
We will have further comments on these changes in due course, but for now we would just like to provide full translation of the portions of the Program dealing with media and public opinion.

Naturally, one of the changes now getting the most attention is the complete razing of three major national media platforms — China Central Television (China Global Television Network), China National Radio and China Radio International — and the formation from their ashes of a new super-network to be called the Central Radio and Television Network (中央广播电视总台). The Program makes clear that the resources of all of three of these networks will be referred to in their external incarnation as “Voice of China” (中国之声).
Just to quickly give readers an indication of what this change means in terms of direct Party control from the center, China Central Television was previously overseen by the General Administration of Press, Publications, Radio, Film and Television (previously just SARFT), a department under the State Council. The super-network will now be situated as a state-sponsored institution, or shiye danwei (事业单位), directly under the State Council, and directly under the supervision of the Central Propaganda Department.
The bear, in other words, will be hugging its “mouthpiece” media even more closely now. And that is largely the point that comes through here — the tighter, more centralized control of media and ideology.
The opening of the Program emphasizes: “The leadership of the Chinese Communist Party is the basic nature and character of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Party, government, army, society and education — east and west, south and north, the Party leads all.”

(Section 11)
The Central Propaganda Department (中央宣传部) has unified supervision over news and publishing work. In order to strengthen the concentrated and unified management of news and public opinion work, strengthen the management of publishing activities, and develop and invigorate the publishing-related undertakings of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the management responsibilities of the General Administration of Press, Publications, Radio, Film and Television in the areas of news and publishing will be transferred to the Central Propaganda Department. Externally, the Central Propaganda Department will bear the sign ‘National News and Publishing Administration (National Copyright Office’) [‘国家新闻出版署 (国家版权局)].
Following reorganization, the principal responsibilities of the Central Propaganda Department concerning news and publishing management will be to put into practice the Party’s propaganda work policies; draw up management policies for the news and publishing industries and supervising implementation; manage administrative affairs for news and publishing; overall planning, guidance and coordination for news and publishing activities; industry development; supervising and managing the content and quality of published materials; supervising and managing the printing industry; managing copyright issues; managing the import of published materials.
(Section 12)
The Central Propaganda Department has unified supervision over film work. In order to better develop the unique and important role of film in disseminating ideas and in culture and entertainment, and to develop and invigorate the film industry, the management responsibilities of the General Administration of Press, Publications, Radio, Film and Television in the area of film management will be transferred to the Central Propaganda Department. Externally, the Central Propaganda Department will bear the sign ‘National Film Bureau’ (国家电影局).
Following reorganization, the principal responsibilities of the Central Propaganda Department concerning film management will be to manage administrative affairs for film; guide and monitor film production, distribution and screening work; organize the censorship (审查) of film content; guide and coordinate major film-related events of a national nature; to assume responsibility for overseas co-productions, and cooperation and discussion on film import and export.
(Section 35)
The creation of the National Radio and Television Administration (国家广播电视总局). In order to strengthen the Party’s centralized and unified leadership of news and public opinion work, and strengthen the management of important propaganda positions (宣传阵地), firmly grasping the right of leadership over ideological work, adequately develop the role of radio and television as the mouthpiece of the Party (广播电视媒体作为党的喉舌作用), the National Radio and Television Administration, a department directly under the State Council, will be built on the foundation of the radio and television management responsibilities of the [former] the General Administration of Press, Publications, Radio, Film and Television.
Its chief responsibilities will be to implement the Party’s propaganda guidelines and policies; to draw up, supervise and implement policies and measures for the management of radio and television; overall guidance and coordination of the radio and television industries, and of industry development; to promote the reform of system and mechanisms in the radio and television sector; to supervise, manage and censor (审查) the content and quality of radio, television and online audiovisual programming; take on responsibility for the import, storage and management of radio and television programming; to coordinate the promotion of the going out [overseas] of the radio and television section.
The General Administration of Press, Publications, Radio, Film and Television will no longer be retained.
(Section 36)
The creation of the Central Radio and Television Network (中央广播电视总台). Adherence to correct guidance of public opinion (坚持正确舆论导向), placing a high priority on the building and innovation of dissemination methods (传播手段), raising the dissemination force (传播力), guiding force (引导力), influence (影响力) and credibility (公信力) of news and public opinion — these are the key starting points in firmly grasping the right of leadership in ideological work. In order to strengthen the Party’s concentrated development and management of important public opinion positions, in order to enhance overall strengthen in radio and television media, in order to promote the integrated development of radio, television and newly emerging media, accelerating the disseminating capacity of international broadcasting, China Central Television (China Global Television Network), China National Radio and China Radio International will be combined to form the Central Radio and Television Network, which will serve as an institution (事业单位) directly under the State Council, returning to the leadership of the Central Propaganda Department.
Its principal responsibilities will be to propagate the theories, political line and policies of the Party; to plan and manage major propaganda reports; to organize the production of radio and television; to produce and broadcast premium radio and television products; to channel hot social topics; to strengthen and improve supervision by public opinion (舆论监督), to promote the integrated development of multimedia; to strengthen the building of international broadcasting capacity; to tell China’s story well.
The organizational structures of China Central Television (China Global Television Network), China National Radio and China Radio International are now eliminated.
The original names are to be retained domestically, while externally they will now be all known under the name ‘Voice of China’ (中国之声).
 
 

Xi Jinping, Constitutional Reformer

“Entering a New Era, Achieving New Acts.” This is the bright gold slogan emblazoned this week across the top of the official website of the People’s Daily — right over the top of an image of President Xi Jinping, identified as “the people’s leader,” or renmin lingxiu (人民领袖).
Xi Jinping’s new act, the amendment of China’s Constitution to remove term limits on the country’s presidency, paving the way for his own indefinite period of rule, has been the subject of fevered discussion outside China. Inside China, the topic is virtually impossible to broach, unless privately and in person.

The authorities have actively policed social media, including private chat groups, ensuring networked citizens do not have an opportunity to comment or speculate en masse. China’s cowed news media, meanwhile, have drowned the issue in a parade of noise, glorifying “the amendments” without offering any clear explanation of what these are or what they entail.
This approach was on full display in the article pinned to the top of the People’s Daily website yesterday. The piece, “Web users hotly discuss the constitutional amendment passed by the NPC,” is a compilation of comments reportedly made to the Strong Nation Forum (强国论坛) and the People’s Microblog (人民微博) about “the amendments” . They purr with praise about “protecting the fruits” of reform, “realizing the organic unity of the Party’s position,” or “enriching the constitutional spirit.” But the only hints as to the content of the recent amendments to the Constitution, which formally passed a vote by more than 3,000 NPC delegates on Sunday, come in a pair of posts alluding to the constitutional creation of a National Supervision System and the inclusion of “Xi Jinping Thought” in the Constitution’s preamble.
Unsurprisingly, the published comments make no mention whatsoever of the removal of presidential term limits.
But as I read through China’s non-coverage of these constitutional amendments, it struck me how far we have come in the dashing of liberal hopes for constitutional change since these hopes were voiced in late 2012 and early 2013, just at the dawn of the Xi era.
Marking the 30th anniversary of China’s 1982 Constitution on December 5, 2012, just weeks after he became general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, Xi Jinping said: “We must firmly establish, throughout society, the authority of the Constitution and the law and allow the overwhelming masses to fully believe in the law.” He also emphasized that “[no] organization or individual has the privilege to overstep the Constitution and the law, and any violation of the Constitution and the law must be investigated.”
In the wake of the anniversary, political reform advocates in China drew inspiration from Xi’s remarks. For them, “firmly establishing the Constitution” could be construed, and seized upon, as a means to push deeper social and political change through a process of actualization. The Constitution, they argued, already formed a consensus about China’s direction for the future. If the country could just put into practice the rights laid out in the Constitution — rights like “freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration” —  this would be immense progress.
On January 2, 2013, the China Media Project published an English-language translation of the New Year’s Greeting that opened the January edition of the liberal journal Yanhuang Chunqiu. Called “The Constitution is a Consensus for Political Reform” (宪法是政治体制改革的共识), the article argued that divisions over how to promote political reform, a “task of pressing urgency,” could be bridged by turning to the language of the Constitution. “As this new year begins, we have a new group of leaders, and certain changes in the way these leaders operate have been cause for encouragement,” said the article. “In this new year, what we hope among a multitude of other things is that there can be real action to make our Constitution real.”
This week, China’s Constitution did indeed get more real — in ways that liberal intellectuals find impossible to accept. The removal of presidential term limits came as a kind of culmination of the illiberal march of Chinese politics, through the very document liberal intellectuals had hoped just five years ago to make the blueprint of meaningful reform.
One has to imagine the insult cuts deep. Xi Jinping, it turns out, is a constitutional reformer after all. And now that he has detonated term limits on his own position as head of state, he can continue to be.

But the strange ambiguity in China’s constitutional pledges still runs just beneath the surface, even in the Party’s propaganda.
One of the comments in the piece on the People’s Daily website, reportedly offered by an internet user writing under the alias “Welcoming Justice” (欢迎正义) said: “Encouraging the people to study the Constitution, standardizing words and actions, will lend even more vitality to the new era. Revering the Constitution, respecting the Constitution, studying the Constitution and cherishing the Constitution. Those serving as officials and cadres must practice [the Constitution] through their actions, establish themselves as examples, and lay down the constitutional spirit. Those cadres who don’t understand the law, the people don’t need. Those officials who don’t understand the law, the ordinary people don’t welcome.”
And what if the people do study the Constitution? What if they expect the document, and the rights it stipulates, to be taken seriously by their officials?
Not to worry. These questions, and all others, are now firmly in the hands of one man, and there really is no need to “hotly discuss” them.

Web users hotly discuss the constitutional amendment passed by the NPC
March 12, 2018
On the afternoon of March 11, “Amendment to the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China” (中华人民共和国宪法修正案) passed by a substantial margin, drawing the focus of internet users. The vast majority of web users on Strong Nation Forum (强国论坛) and the People’s Microblog (人民微博) expressed the major significance and far-reaching impact of this amendment and urged its endorsement and active implementation.
. . . .
Web user “Daigo” (津哲代后) said: “The passing of the amendment shows the heart of the Party and the sentiment of the people.”
Web user “Little Cutie” (小可爱) said: “The amendment of the Constitution helps with sustainable development, helps with the continuity of the system, and lets the ordinary people see hope and an objective.”
Web user “Ren Yiping” (任毅平) said: “The advancement of the Constitution with the times preserves the people’s management of their own affairs, strongly defends national integrity, ethnic unity and social stability, and protects the fruits of 40 years of reform. It provides a powerful protection for the great rejuvenation of the Chinese people from standing up to becoming prosperous to becoming strong.”
Web user “Erlong’s Truth” (二龙实话) said: “I wholeheartedly support the constitutional amendment. The times are changing, society is progressing and there is always room for the innovation of theories.”
Web user “Ding Guisheng” (丁贵生) wrote: “Governing the nation according to the law establishes the basis for justice and fairness. This is an important choice in ensuring the peace and stability of the country. Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism With Chinese Characteristics for the New Era (习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想) benefits the long-term stability and development of the country . . . .
Web user Xu Xiaolin (絮筱霖) said: “Elevating the great achievements and precious experiences created by the people to the national constitution, realizing the organic unity of the Party’s position, the national will and the people’s wishes, is a successful instance of our Party’s governing of the nation.”
Web user “Aiminmao” said: “The writing of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism With Chinese Characteristics for the New Era into the preamble to the Constitution provides a safeguard for the course of realizing the Chinese dream of the Chinese people! The constitutional amendment of the National People’s Congress will surely bring health and well-being to China in the new era.”
Web user “15191221122” said: “The Constitution has not only force but warmth, and is closer and closer to our ordinary lives.”
Web user “Crying Bird” (啼鸟) said: “If there are no laws to govern a country it will slip into chaos, and if the laws do not change they will decline. We must resolutely protect the authority of the constitution, supporting changes that accommodate the new situation of the new era.”
Web user “Big Meat-Eating Rabbit” (吃肉的大兔子) said: “The constitutional amendment will have an important influence on the struggle against corruption, patching up shortcomings in supervision, and it can more effectively support the development of the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics.”
Web user “Mu Yanhong 102” (慕艳红102) wrote: “The life of the Constitution is in its implementation, and the authority of the Constitution is in its implementation. The process of constitutional amendment is also an opportunity to spread knowledge of the Constitution, and a process of enriching the constitutional spirit. We must fully utilize the rare opportunity afforded by the constitutional amendment, raising the constitutional consciousness of all the people, achieving among the people a consensus about the Constitution. This is especially the case for leading cadres, who must be models in the study of the Constitution, in honoring the Constitution and in promoting the Constitution.”
Web user “Welcoming Justice” (欢迎正义) said: “Encouraging the people to study the Constitution, standardizing words and actions, will lend even more vitality to the new era. Revering the Constitution, respecting the Constitution, studying the Constitution and cherishing the Constitution. Those serving as officials and cadres must practice [the Constitution] through their actions, establish themselves as examples, and lay down the constitutional spirit. Those cadres who don’t understand the law, the people don’t need. Those officials who don’t understand the law, the ordinary people don’t welcome.”
Web user “Bluetooth Dream Release” (蓝牙放飞梦想) said: “As a discipline inspection official, I resolutely support the constitutional amendment. The establishment of a National Supervision System will enable full-coverage monitoring of all public officials who exercise public power . . . . ”
Web user “Yun Liu Yi Jiangnan” (云柳亦江南) said: “As a grassroots Party member and official, I must take the earnest study and respect of the Constitution as the base of my life and work. I must do my part, protecting the Constitution and respecting the law, contributing my energies to this great Mother Country of ours!”
Web user “Not Forgetting the Original Intention, Always Moving Forward” (不忘初心一直向前) said: “As members of the Chinese Communist Party, we must support the amendment of the Constitution, serving as good and law-abiding citizens, and as qualified Party members.”

Will China's President Be Informed?

“To err is human,” Deng Yuwen, the former editor of Study Times, wrote in the South China Morning Post today. “And a leader who tolerates no checks on his power is even more likely to err, because power can make one arrogant and impervious to other views.” As the National People’s Congress opens tomorrow, one crucial focus will be a proposed change to China’s Constitution removing term limits for the presidency. As many commentators have warned this week, such a change would pave the way for Xi Jinping to rule for an indefinite period, and would undo a key political reform measure introduced by Deng Xiaoping. Potentially vesting great power in the person of Xi Jinping, as opposed to collective leadership, it would also raise serious questions about whether Xi’s leadership can be sufficiently adaptive, or whether it will, as Deng Yuwen said, be “even more likely to err.” There has long been reason to wonder, in fact, whether Xi Jinping isn’t sealing things up so tight that the system is gasping for air. In late 2015, one year before his elevation as “the core,” Xi Jinping put his foot down on “improper discussion of [the policies] of the central Party,” or wangyi zhongyang (妄议中央), a phrase that was added to the Party’s updated Disciplinary Regulations. Don’t chatter about the Party’s business, he seemed to say: Just follow my lead. Visiting key Party media a few months later, Xi gave a speech in which he stressed that the media “must be surnamed Party” — meaning that they must do the Party’s bidding. In the same speech he mingled oil and water by stating that “positive propaganda,” which has traditionally signalled suppression of critical news coverage, is at one with “supervision by public opinion,” the phrase that has long been synonymous with more probing, and even investigative, coverage. “Supervision by public opinion and positive propaganda are unified,” Xi said. Yikes. So where, then, does China’s Mr. Personality get his information? Some technologists argue that new technologies have already presented authoritarian states like China with a solution, making possible “a big-data dictatorship.” Those in power can count on endless streams of information, from social media sentiments to credit information, all harnessed through artificial intelligence. “Given that many dictatorships collapse as a result of poor information,” Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, wrote on Project Syndicate this week, “digital technologies could become an even more powerful prophylactic against bad decision-making than term limits.” In fact, the Chinese Communist Party has long dealt with the delicate balance between information controls it sees as imperative, and the need to ensure restricted flow of valued intelligence. We can see this tension in one of the Party’s oldest systems of official intelligence, the insider news briefs and journals known as “internal references,” or neibu cankao (内部参考). Cheng Li, a senior fellow at Brookings, noted in his book The Power of Ideas that these internal references are produced by a range of actors, from think tanks and government departments. They can sometimes circulate only at the most senior levels — for example, among Politburo members — and at other times may be available to provincial or county-level leaders. During the heyday of the commercial press in China, from the mid-1990s through around the Beijing Olympics, internal references were often tip sheets used by enterprising reporters, clueing them in to potential stories. A journalist for a major Party-affiliated newspaper in Beijing once told me that his paper produced internal reference documents only on an irregular basis, whenever there were critical stories that editors or their Party superiors determined could not be made public. When they did produce an internal brief on a story, this could circulate at quite senior levels in the capital, sometimes even getting an endorsement from a member of the Standing Committee. Other media may produce internal references on a more regular basis. Systematic study of the internal reference system would present obvious challenges. But it would be fascinating to discover how the system might have changed, or is now changing, in light of the explosion of big data. My guess is that internal references remain as much or more relevant today. Despite the faith of technologists, there are plenty of facts and observations that must still derive from good old-fashioned reporting.
In any case, the news media in China remain very much involved in the manufacture of internal references — a reminder of how the Party regards media as arms of intelligence gathering as well as propaganda. Earlier this month, a commentary in The Beijing News voiced concern over the abuse of two local news journalists in Hebei province who had been investigating a pollution case. According to media reports, journalists from the Internal Reference team of Hebei Television, the province’s official television network, had gone to Quzhou County (曲周) in southern Hebei to follow up on reports of pollution by a local enterprise. The journalists were mobbed and seriously beaten by assailants who also stole their filming equipment, wallets and mobile phones. At some point, one of the journalists was bound by the assailants, who threatened to throw them down a well. A subsequent investigation showed that the enterprise in question had identified itself as a goat breeding cooperative, but in fact was manufacturing industrial plastic sprays, and flouting environmental laws. The commentary in The Beijing News portrayed the case as a worrisome disruption by local thugs (with the possible involvement or negligence of county officials) of a necessary process of supervision by the media — not as an agent of the public interest per se, but as an indispensable arm of the provincial leadership. “The undercover journalists had a special mission,” the paper wrote, “to represent the Hebei Committee of the Chinese Communist Party in conducting an undercover investigation, performing a supervision role.” The paper continued in its affirmation of the role of Internal Reference-related investigations:
Undeniably, if it had not been for the investigation by these journalists, this illegal workshop would have continued to illegally pollute. . . . Protect the journalist’s right to report, and allow them to carry out their work with ease, with the courage to expose problems in society, and they will uphold the social and public interest. If the opposite occurs, and the environment for reporting grows serious, and certain people can use violence to prevent reporting, beating and threatening journalists with impunity so that they feel a general chill, then this will necessarily mean the loss of the front line in news supervision (新闻监督), and the greatest loss will be the social and public interest.
It is fascinating to note what this passage reveals about mainstream official views of the role of the “journalist.” There is clearly a righteous tone about the value of their work — and yet, there was never any real expectation of exposure in this case, not public exposure anyway. The point was internal exposure to provincial leaders, who apparently tasked the reporters with the investigation. In this case, the “social and public interest” is to be served only in secret. In fact, the “general chill” of which the writer speaks has already happened to the media in the broader sense. Nothing makes this point more clearly than Xi Jinping’s conflation of “supervision” and “positive propaganda.” In the face of severe restrictions on news reporting, one might imagine the internal reference system offering some relief in the form of premium restricted access content. But one substantial weakness of the system is that it maps right on top of the Party-state bureaucracy, meaning that provincial officials, for example, who have direct control over outfits like Hebei Television, have an incentive themselves to remove or tone down reporting of potentially damaging stories. By contrast, one reason that the investigative reporting carried out (largely) by commercial newspapers from the end of the 1990s was so effective was that it utilized “cross-regional reporting,” or yidi jiandu (异地监督), meaning that papers from one administrative region would report on malfeasance in another. A paper in Guangzhou could report on corruption at the city level in a neighboring province without immediate fear of reprisal from its Party bosses in Guangdong. Xi Jinping does not seem to have much interest in this sort of intersectional supervision. He has brought to heel China’s once unruly (by today’s standards) press. His leadership has been marked across the board by greater centralization and a top-down approach. We might suppose that information is not getting bottlenecked, that it is filtering up to Xi, and to others who make the key policy decisions — that they are not “arrogant and impervious.” But the reality is that we have no way of knowing. No one does. And that has to tell us something.