A recent analysis of China’s media censorship practices deftly analyzes and explains the country’s system of repression and control of the media by using the threat of economically punishment.
The piece, published on May 2 in the Far Eastern Economic Review, is aptly titled “China’s Commercialization of Censorship“. The piece not only explains how China is perfecting the dark art of controlling what can and cannot be said in the public trust of the media. It also demonstrates how the country’s controlling force–the Chinese Communist Party–is setting an example of repression for export:
“More ominously, Beijing’s controlling approach to media, particularly of the internet, appears to be gaining traction beyond China’s borders. In December 2008, Vietnam’s government issued regulations holding ISPs responsible for ensuring that blogs they host do not include content deemed “undesirable.” Cambodia’s Ministry of Information is reportedly preparing a law that would extend traditional media controls to audio-visual online content, a regulatory path similar to that of its counterpart further up the Mekong. China is already believed to share censorship technology and know-how with a number of governments in the region.”
According to the authors of the article, the illusion of a free press inside China is a relative house of cards, especially for those few domestic journalists and media organizations willing to take the risk of publishing reports that expose corruption. A case in point is the severe punishment the business publication Caigong Shibao suffered after going public with an investigative report that exposed suspicious cash-transfers at a branch of the state-run Agricultural Bank of China. The publication, and dozens of its staff members, paid dearly for simply doing their jobs:
“The report was quickly deemed by officials to have violated several media regulations and eventually led to the publication being temporarily shut down for “internal reorganization” [for 3 months]. The suspension of Caijing’s operations led to the dismissal of 70 staff and sent a clear message to other would-be, independent-minded news enterprises: push editorial limits at your economic peril.”
It’s alarming that a country as precipitously on the forefront of international affairs as China would even have “media regulations” to impose upon members of the press. And it’s doubly-alarming that China’s communist party has the power to eliminate the jobs of 70 members of the media. The FEER piece is absolutely spot-on in it’s assessment that suspending Caijing’s operations and firing so many of its staff was intended as a “clear message” to the surviving journalists who might hope to publish other stories about the widespread corruption in China. According to the FEER’s take on the situation:
“In this pseudo-commercial environment a news company’s success or failure rests on its ability to meet government censorship demands, rather than on the quality of its products or services. In the current economic climate, the vulnerability of private enterprises is likely to grow. As their profit margins shrink, so too does their ability to withstand political pressure.”
A threat like this is more than a dark cloud over the journalism community. It’s a sad state of affairs for those who consume the news produced in such a tightly-controlled environment. If they cannot consume news about the truth of the situation, what are they being left with? Information filtered, controlled and crafted by the communist party? How are they to know the difference, then, about what is true and what is not?
The final nail in the coffin of free speech has been the tight grip the Chinese Communist Party keeps on the Internet. At highest risk? News and information of “political consequence”. According to the article:
“In addition to employing “low-tech” means of repression, such as some of the world’s longest prison terms for “cyberdissidents,” the Chinese authorities have been at the forefront of a growing trend toward “outsourcing” censorship and monitoring tasks to private companies. As scholar Rebecca MacKinnon notes, “the process of web site censorship by which domestically hosted content [in China] is deleted completely or prevented from being published in the first place … is carried out almost entirely by Internet company employees, not by ‘Internet police’ or other government officials.””
World Press Freedom Day was just celebrated–or mourned–by journsalists, non-profits, and governments around the world. The passing of the day, and events that drew attention to freedom of the press violations and suppression globally, highlights the fact that China is not the only country seriously threatening freedom of speech within its borders and beyond. But considering the high importance politicians, businessmen, scholars and others have placed on China’s place in the world (particularly in the future), it should occupy a special place of concern.
