5 September 2011:
The thing about press freedom.
Two things in the newspapers today prompted me to talk about press freedom. It might not be the best exposition article you get to read, so bear with it if there are any errors.Firstly, Beijing Propaganda Bureau has taken control of two Beijing newspapers, the Beijing Times and Beijing News. You may view the article here. It claims that this is not a crackdown on the papers, which are known for bold reporting, most recently about the Wenzhou train crash in China.
Indeed, there was news that newspapers in China were tasked to only report on the positive side of happenings after the disaster, which was seen as a big insult to the China Communist Party (CCP). The reports were supposed to be only on rescue efforts and heroic events, and not about the cause of the crash. Which is no doubt, since there was probably a lot of under-table stuff going on that led to this crash. From a commentary I read, the tracks were constructed way ahead of their time, so as to meet with July 1, the annieversary of the CCP. The project was accelerated so fast, that shoddy work started to take place. According to an article, a hardening chemical that was supposed to be added was not, since their pace was too fast for the chemical to be even manufactured.
Anyways, it is believed that due to the going against of edicts for reporting, the Propaganda Bureau is taking over the newspapers. The level of press freedom in China has dropped once again, and it really is a sad thing. By taking such a measure, tens of millions of people are going to be "blinded" by the media, being unaware of things going on around them.
I was rather pleased when it was reported in the Straits Times or other newspapers that the two papers had been reporting bravely against rules previously. I thought that slowly, China was going to release its control on the media, and slowly allow citizens to face the facts that they are bad things about its partial regime. It is time to stop hiding black spots on their supposedly flawless white records. It is time to let China people be aware that yes, their leaders do make mistakes as well.
Sadly, this move did not last long. The Bureau claims that this taking over is not a crackdown, but who knows? Maybe, sooner or later, one of the papers vanishes, leaving the other to be yet another mouthpiece for the CCP. It is already said that the two papers might be merged into one. I suppose this makes easier control for the Bureau, since they only have one outlet to censor everyday. And yes, I do believe that everyday, "見不得人" things are being censored from China's newspapers everywhere.
It is a sad thing but, what to do ...?
Secondly, someone posted a letter to The Straits Times' forum about "online chatter" not just chatter. Article: here. My main point following would not be about whether the "online chatter" was only just chatter, or something more than that. I would like to focus on a statement that the writer made in the third last paragraph:
... mainstream media like The Straits Times must find the people's authentic pulse; visionaries and insightful individuals must ask probative questions and share valid views; comedians must nudge us and artists, inspire us.
With that, I would already like to conclude that Straits Times (ST) is not pro-government. Or at least, it is not largely controlled. I do see instances where yes, there seems to be some prior arrangement so as to highlight certain pro-government news, but I believe that is a minimum.
If that was the case, would this letter have even made it to the papers? If the setting was in China, and this letter rephrased to suit its context, it would probably be burnt in some chute. And the next day, yet another person vanishes from the face of this Earth.
I once attended a seminar, where the editor of 聯合早報 talked to us about how news articles are being arranged in newspapers. She showed us the case of the 911 incident (which, incidentally, its 10th anniversary is in 4 days time). Newspapers around the world reported it on the cover page; only China's People Daily, being controlled strongly by the government, featured it as a miserable side story. To be fair, the story was still on the first page. However, the news that superceded it was no big event that happened in China, it was merely about leadership renewal and visits of China leaders.
See the difference? People in Singapore keep complaining that we are under a regime, and that ST is being controlled and used by the government to portray the ruling party (which basically forms most of the government anyway) in the positive side. How true is this?
Many a time, I have seen ST and other papers running less than positive articles about leaders, and often featuring very frank commentaries about the shortcomings of our leaders. Think about it, if this was in China, would you even get to see such commentaries?
While I understand that Singapore ranks a low 136 out of 178 countries in the Press Freedom Index, I feel that at least ST is not that controlled. Of course, it may be careless analysis on my part, and I stand corrected if there are any flaws in my logic. :)