|
 |
|
Statement Presented to the Congressional-Executive Committee
on China
By Huang Ciping
The Wei Jingsheng Foundation
Setember 08, 2003
No Press Freedom in China after SARS
My name is Ciping Huang. Today, I am making a statement on behalf of
the Wei Jingsheng Foundation and the Independent Federation of Chinese Students
and Scholars, regarding the current news media and information channels being
controlled by the Chinese government.
Early last spring, the China press got unexpected world attention because of
SARS. The initial cover-up by the government resulted in terrible consequences
including panic and many deaths in China. However, only after the disease
spread overseas and caused an international outcry, was the Chinese press
loosened and allowed to give out the number of deaths and related health
information, trustworthy or not. As a result, kindhearted people around
the world have an increased hope for Chinese press freedom. As an old saying
said: a loss may turn out to be a gain; the SARS storm might bring a positive
reform to the Chinese press.
Of course, the world should welcome each step of progress towards democracy
and freedom, no matter how small the step might be, if only it is a sincere
step. However, people must be wary of illusions or wishful thinking. Without a
systematic guarantee in China, any step forward could be easily taken away by
the government.
The freedom of the Chinese press has long been a goal that Chinese people
have pursued. During the 1989 Tiananmen democracy movement, many young people
sacrificed their lives for this goal. For a short few days, the Chinese
people thought they gained that freedom, only be crushed by tanks and the
government propaganda machine later on. Now there are still many people
both on the China mainland and abroad struggling hard to get even one private
newspaper or magazine published in China. So far, has anything changed?
The only one real voice to be heard in China is the voice from government.
Non-governmental approved voices are cut and muted.
The sad reality is: China has not gained more press freedom since SARS.
Even during the seeming opened crack of reporting on SARS, very little
attention was given to the Chinese government’s decree to “severely punish the
rumor spreaders”. Several dozen people were arrested for spreading the
news about SARS.
In June 2003, the Chinese Communist Party Central Propaganda Department
criticized more than 10 major well known newspapers and magazines, such as
<Beijing Communication>, <Three-United Life Weekly>, <Finance>
etc. The cited issues included SARS and the reporting on corrupted officials.
After this criticizing, some “sensitive articles” had to be “killed” before
publishing. Especially those articles reporting on Doctor Jiang (who first
appealed to open truth on SARS) got tight censorship by the government and many
articles were cut. Due to the new regulations, SARS reporting is not a free
topic but has a very clear and disciplined line that the most journalists have
no guts to cross. The forbidden topics also include: the North Korea
nuclear crisis, the nuclear submarine 361 explosion case, and Zhou ZhengYi, the
top corruption case in Shanghai. (See Attachment 1, all the 5 attachments are in
Chinese.)
In recent months, the government has had more meetings to call for “The
Reform of China Press and Publication.” The proposals included cutting the
number of totally controlled newspapers, clarifying the “Party’s disciplines”
and emphasizing the purpose of propaganda etc. However, as Cai YongMei,
The executive editor of Hong Kong’s <Open> magazine (Kai1Fang4) analyzed:
“I think the government doesn’t want to lose the control of media. Light issues
and non-sensitive topics might get loosened, but serious topics, or those they
think are principal issues will be held as tightly as before”. (See Attachment
2)
Last month, the veil over this “reform” was finally lifted. The Chinese
government finally decreed their detailed regulations without a sign of real
reform. These regulations demonstrated further the hard-line face of the
central government that tries to make a successful and strict control over the
news media. In particular, the regulations ask for strict censorship, and
include dismissing and appointing the leaders. (See Attachment 3)
Also in the summer, the Chinese news media and universities and
academic/research institutes received notices from the government clearly
stating prohibitions to discuss certain issues, in particular modifying the
constitution, political reforms, and the 1989 Tiananmen democracy movement.
We want to emphasize that China has a long way to go towards real press
freedom. The root of the problem lies in the system, which has been there
for over half a century under the Chinese Communists’ rule. The following facts
are some of our highest concerns. The problems still exist after SARS.
-
There is no real private press in China and no independent journalism
under the Chinese Communists’ one-party leadership.
So far, except for some pointless papers and local small magazines (e.g.
equivalent to “how to do make-up”), China doesn’t have a single newspaper or
magazine owned by a non-government agent or company. The registration of a
press is a very complicated and strict step. The government at any time can
easily crush a newspaper or magazine agent/company if it violates the
government regulations, or even just displeases some officials.
-
Internet Censorship is a serious abuse of the basic human right of “right
to knowledge.”
If you are in China and open "google" or "yahoo", you won't be able
to find many web sites that you can see in other countries. Since August 31
this year, Chinese government shutdown the search machine “google” in China
again. Just before every political event, Internet become one more place
for the Chinese Communists to tight their “strict strike” control.
According to latest report by Central Agency, the government has 300,000
people policing the Internet, including 30,000 professional work for the
National Security Department, to monitor and filter news and e-mails, to
shutdown websites and to give warnings to people who make "undesirable" web
pages or posts on the Internet. Unless technically specially handled, E-mails
from dissidents such as me are often rerouted through the police bureau before
reaching the intended recipients, and are often rejected and even be
confiscated without acknowledgement. In some cases, the recipients are
harassed, or interrogated by the secret police. It surely is amazing
that while this government has failed to control "forbidden pornographic
materials" on the Internet, it is able to put a pretty good handle on the
dissident voices and even just plain news.
The censoring not only applies to the news and articles posted in foreign
web sites, but also to local people who join “chat rooms”. Liu Di, a 19 years
old college girl, has been detained for months because of some words and
essays she posted in a chat room.
Yet, this type of the censorship is just
part of the integral policing system in China. As the other side of
traffic, I was told by a friend whose sister worked to examine the mails from
overseas that 1/3 of all mails went through inspection, beyond even “targeted
mails”. In addition, phone tapping is common and public knowledge in
China, and is not just applied to the dissidents and activists.
- Brave journalists and liberal editors often get in
trouble, and some are put in prison just because they report the truth or
speak from conscience.
While over all, Chinese people are the victims of the Chinese Communists’
propaganda machine; Chinese news media workers are the direct victims.
In the last 5 decades, many of them lost their freedom or even lives for
it. One of my friends, Wu XueCan, who was an editor for People’s Daily,
was put in prison and tortured after the 1989 Tiananmen movement for his
effort to bring truth to the people.
Many liberal editors and reporters got laid off or even put in prison for
reporting on corrupted officials, on the common people’s suffering, or just
expressing (or even just allowing) a different view from the government.
They make a long list. Here, I want to mention a few:
a) Gao Qinrong, a journalist who reported about corruption on the
irrigation system flaw in ShanXi Province, received 13 years in prison.
(Attachment 4 is an article written by Yu Jie, an established scholar in
China, about Gao.)
b) Qi YanChen, editor, was prosecuted for “spreading anti-government
messages via the Internet” by submitting articles to places such as the
pro-democracy electronic newsletter VIP reference. He was sentenced 4
years.
c) Teng ChunYan, an American citizen and a Falun Gong practitioner,
received 3 years in prison for serving as a source on Falun Gong for news
organizations.
d) An Jun was the founder of the China Corruption Monitor. His
writings were used as evidence of anti-state activities and he was sentenced
4 years. (Interestingly enough, An’s verdict was not announced until April
19, 2000, the day after the UN high commission on human rights failed to
pass a US sponsored resolution to condemn Chinese human rights abuses.)
e) Jiang QiSheng, journalist and political dissident, just finished 4
years jail time in May for his pro-democracy articles including an essay to
honor June 4 victims.
f) Huang Qi, Internet publisher and web host, is still in prison for
publishing stories about human rights abuses, governmental corruptions, and
6.4 Tiananmen.
g) Yang ZiLi, etc. (4 youths), was sentenced lately (after SARS) for
academic discussion.
- To survive one must to speak the Party’s tongue.
It is very common for editors to have to cut some “sensitive sentences”
when they review articles in newspapers or magazines. The most sensitive parts
are not pornography issues, but those related to the political issues. There
is no evidence for a change in this situation.
From very reliable channels, I know that the editors working in newspapers
and magazines can only have part of their own minds, if they care about their
life or their family’s future. They consistently have meetings to “listen to
the government’s opinion”, that usually announce some “important regulations”
of how to report certain sensitive events. “Keep the same tone with Party” is
the first rule for all journalists in China. Some of my editor friends say
that they don’t have their own tongue but the Party’s tongue.
- China has been rated “the second worst country for
freedom of press and speech.”. The bias, misleading, even false news
serve for Chinese government’s agenda.
On sensitive issues, only the government will have the right to decide if
the news can be opened to the public, and when and how. For example, the
unemployed workers’ unrest in Northeast China will be suppressed in any
newspaper with the “reason” of “not disturbing the stability of the country”.
Early this year, in my home town, Hefei City, when thousands students took to
the streets to protest the wrongful deaths of their fellow students, no
reports appeared for days in the official news media even though the city
residents knew something happened because of the paralyzed traffic and angry
crowd.
Government events cannot be revealed on time without the Party’s control.
Most of them become “top secrets”. The Chinese people have little chance to
know what their “people’s government” does or will do. Even foreign
correspondents based in China cannot get timely news – they face routine
surveillance and need special permission for leaving their city of
residence.
For important world events, even though some city people can watch the news
from foreign satellite broadcasts (not very easily), most will be influenced
by the media controlled to report only the news the government wants people to
believe. For example, the reporting of the Iraq war was totally biased
-- Saddam became a “hero” in the reports. Of course, this case is only
one of many illustrating how the controlled news media has been misleading
many Chinese people in an effort to realize the government’s own agenda.
Dislike and even hate of America is on the agenda. One of the most
noticeable expressions is that the news media becomes the government’s tool to
fan up “nationalism”. Many more examples can be found that cover almost
all important world events, such as the North Korea Nuclear crisis, Taiwan
across the Strait, and the American pilots being shot down in HaiNan,
China.
- The Chinese people don’t trust the news if it is
presented by the Chinese government.
Chinese people do not have faith in the Chinese government. They
always know that their government cheats. They do not trust the
government and what it says. Yet, for fear of their lives, their
freedom, and their families, most people could not and do not dare to voice
their hope for a free press.
During the beginning period of SARS, Chinese people, especially those
living in the big cities such as Beijing, Nanjing, and Shanghai, relied on the
news sent by their overseas relatives. Some of my friends who worked in the
USA told me that they were very busy looking for SARS news and were sending it
immediately back to China so that their family members would have a timely
updated true picture of the cases.
Those people who don’t have oversea relatives usually rely on BBC, Voice of
America, Radio Free Asia, or other overseas media since they have less
confidence on their own government’s report. Everybody knows the phrase
“In China, we only have one voice.”
After SARS, Chinese people still do not have confidence in the government
media, especially on political issues or other important issues.
Attachment 5 is an article on the subject that was written by an overseas
Chinese who returned to China.
- Foreign Investment and Internet will not bring free
press to China.
Many foreigners, especially foreign investors, argue that their investment
will bring freedom including press freedom to China. The Chinese
government has also quietly encouraged such kind of notion, including making
academics and Western politicians believe in it. On the other hand,
Chinese government rightly pointed out that ‘the News Media is a special
enterprise that does not follow the rule of “who invests in it, owns
it”. The government specifically stated that “the news media is a state
enterprise” which applies to all the newspapers.
Similar ideas apply to the Internet. The Internet and advanced
computer technology have become the tools for government monitoring and
suppression of dissidence. It is a shame that a US company like Yahoo!
has voluntarily cooperated with the Chinese government’s requirements and made
the guarantee to filter contents disliked by the government. It is more
a shame for Western companies to work closely with the Chinese government to
create the product “Golden Shield” which blocks information transfer and
tracks addresses and messages to help make state policing the best in the
world. (For detail about “Golden Shield”, please visit an article on
DaJiYun at: http://www.dajiyuan.com/gb/2/5/6/n188071.htm.)
What is the difference between doing these things and the exporting of high
military technology to China a few years ago?
Here we urge the freedom and democracy loving American people and the US
congress to examine these issues and to prevent these moneymaking deals on the
price of Chinese people’s human rights and freedom.
To summarize our statement, there is no press freedom in China, even after
SARS. The support and effort from the outside world will always be necessary and
important. But first, we must know the real picture and what is really happening
in China. Any credence or wishful belief of press freedom coming soon in China
is not only concluding a wrong judgment, but also might hurt the people who have
been and will be sacrificing their lives for China’s press freedom. The
Wei Jingsheng Foundation and IFCSS wish you can carefully evaluate the situation
based on valid facts and continuously push the Chinese government for the
better.
Thank you.
Ciping Huang
Executive Director, Wei Jingsheng Foundation
Human Rights Committee Chair, IFCSS
|
|
Back To Top
Previous Page
