Party and Government Censorship Results in News Media Being "Silent and Absent"

Communist Party and government control over, and censorship of, China's news media prevents journalists from writing and publishing critical investigative reports, according to an article by Professor Zheng Baowei in the October edition of Journalist Monthly [Xinwen Jizhe]. The monthly journal is a joint publication of the Shanghai Communist Party Central Committee and Academy of Social Sciences. Zheng, director of the People's University's News and Social Development Research Center (Center), writes that journalists and editors in China face "many layers of obstruction, heavy pressures, and too much interference" when trying to prepare and publish critical articles on important issues (sometimes referred to as "public opinion supervision" reports). Zheng concedes that pressure and interference comes from many areas, including Party and government leadership agencies, enterprises, media relationship networks, and friends. He emphasizes, however, that "the interference from Party and government departments is especially severe," noting that almost 75 percent of the journalists queried in a 2004 Center survey ranked "Party and government leadership agencies" as the top source of interference in news reporting. The result, Zheng says, is that Chinese news media are "silent and absent" during those times when China most needs critical investigative reporting.

The Center's survey found that the percentage of respondents who believed that incidents of "obstructionist interference" in public opinion reports were "very severe" or "severe" was 25.6 percent in the case of radio reports, and 37.4 percent for reports on television. Zheng outlines several ways that Chinese authorities "obstruct and censor" the Chinese news media, including both formal measures, such as issuing "prohibitory orders," and informal measures, such as exploiting personal relationships by "writing notes, making calls, paying visits, or throwing feasts and giving presents." According to Zheng, Chinese authorities at lower levels often need only "one phone call, one oral message, or one informal note" to a "high level leader" to force editors to "terminate" articles they have yet to publish, or "give up halfway" on articles they have already published and forgo any follow-up reporting.

Zheng writes that Party and government departments raise the specter that news reports will "discredit socialism and cause trouble for the nation" to justify preventing the news media from engaging in critical investigative journalism, but that many of those engaging in censorship are primarily interested in quashing reports that will leave them "blemished and tainted." As a result, "some public opinion supervision that should have been carried out is censored, or is only carried out through the central media or media in other localities." Zheng characterizes the current state of investigative reporting in China in this way:

[T]here is too much supervision of ordinary problems, and too little supervision of serious problems; there is too much supervision of middle and basic levels, and too little supervision of higher levels; there is too much supervision of individuals, and too little supervision of work units; there is too much supervision of those who step down, and too little supervision of those with positions; there is too much supervision of outside problems, and too little supervision of local problems; there is too much supervision of other people's problems, and too little supervision of one's own problems.

Although it is unusual for Chinese authorities to allow such frank criticism of the Chinese government's censorship system, authorities generally permit it when the author avoids complaining about central government censorship, and addresses censorship only at the provincial and local level.

See below for additional analysis.
 

In October 2004, Hao Keyuan, editor-in-chief of the Yilu Evening News, one of China's largest newspapers, wrote an editorial entitled "Twelve Major Changes in Running a Newspaper," which also noted the problems that China's censorship system creates. One of the changes that Hao listed was "Although one must submit to controls, one must nevertheless try to achieve something meaningful." Hao wrote that "the problem is that when some local Communist Party and government [officials] carry out news administration, they are far too subjective, and excessively interfere in many aspect of the news. Often what is done is according to some senior official's personal opinion, and reflects their bias."

Like Hao, Zheng carefully avoids criticizing central government censorship, such as the system of prior restraints that the Party and the central government uses to restrict who may publish news and who may engage in journalism, the General Administration of Press and Publication's and the Central Propaganda Department's screening system for politically sensitive news, or the Party' and government's policies requiring journalists and editors to have government accreditation and receive political indoctrination.

Zheng does not call for Chinese authorities to remove legal and political restrictions on the freedom of the press guaranteed to all citizens in the Chinese Constitution. Rather, he proposes to standardize Party and government control over the news media through establishing legally defined mechanisms for screening proposed investigative report topics and censoring completed investigative reporting articles and programs:

Screening of Proposed Reports: Zheng suggests Chinese authorities require all Party and government offices and executive agencies to respond within a defined time period both to media requests to conduct interviews on particular topics and to publish the manuscripts they have submitted for approval. He also offers specific suggestions on controlling what gets published, saying that ordinarily a given news media outlet should not allow "negative reports" to account for more than 30 percent of their total reports, and that to preserve the effectiveness of propaganda reporting, authorities should control the number of mandated positive propaganda articles, and only run them for limited periods of time.

Censorship of Completed Reports: Zheng says that Party and government departments should "create clear rules for what report contents cannot be obstructed, and give the media greater sovereignty. For example, they can stipulate for situations that do not implicate state secrets, the media is permitted to take the initiative in reporting large incidents and problems that the masses are paying attention to, including fast breaking incidents." He also proposes enacting a "Public Opinion Supervision Law," or a "Public Opinion Supervision Regulation," to "clearly regulate the official powers, responsibilities and duties the media possesses" when carrying out critical investigative reporting.