Home > Opinions > Untruths and hypocrisy in Chinese media

Untruths and hypocrisy in Chinese media

By Dhundup Gyalpo | Tibet Net

Dhundup Gyalpo Lobsang Wangyal

They say, on average, eight out of 10 people read headlines, but only two out of 10 read the rest. Others say the headline is read by five times as many people who read the entire content. If that is the case, then the copy editors of Chinese propaganda have been hitting it bang on the head.

Earlier this month, China Tibet Online published an “unsigned” article, supplied by the People’s Daily, under the unceremonious title of “Religious Dictatorship of Dalai clique.” Had you clicked on that, to your surprise, you would have found the actual content to be entirely a different story altogether. In fact, there was absolutely no mention of “religious dictatorship,” nor was there anything that could be seen as directly relevant to the headline. Sounds like the proverbial case of “hanging sheep’s head to sell dog meat.”

“Headlines in newspapers and magazines were once written with readers in mind, to be clever or catchy or evocative. Now headlines are just there to get the search engines to notice,” writes David Carr of The New York Times. He also gave some interesting examples of how using hot terms can bring a headline to the top of the heap in online searches. However, the gurus of headline writing skills still maintain that the headline should be essentially a promise (to readers) that must be delivered in the ensuing content, if not for anything else than at least for the sake of one’s own credibility. But, try telling that to the official Chinese media!?

The People’s Daily article in reality turned out to be standard Chinese propaganda on “democratic management committees” (DMCs) that are today the lords and masters in Tibetan monasteries. Quoting Du Qinglin, deputy chairman of the Standing Committee of the CPPCC and director of the United Front Work Department of CPC Central Committee, the article claims that the introduction of the “democratic management system” has paved a solid foundation for the modernisation of monasteries and development of Tibetan Buddhism.

It is a no-brainer that in Chinese jargon “democratic management” is a euphemism for “control by the Chinese Communist Party.” Even Du Qingling himself had in the past revealed that only those “monks and nuns who are politically reliable, learned and respected should be selected to monastery management committees.”

DMCs are thus composed of government-approved, “patriotic” monks, and in some cases, even party cadres and government officials, who exercise strict control and surveillance over the administrative and religious life of the monastery, including enforcement of state indoctrination campaigns like “patriotic education” sessions. During these, monks and nuns are forced to pledge their obeisance and total submission to the CCP, mainly by slandering His Holiness the Dalai Lama and recognising the Chinese-appointed Panchen Lama. Those who refuse to comply are expelled from the monastery, or in certain cases even thrown behind bars.

No wonder a young monk from Tibet was reportedly quoted as saying that the “democratic management committee” has “hijacked the monastery to serve their own purposes of making a lot of money from tourists and carrying out propaganda work.” [Read more in When the Sky Fell to Earth: The New Crackdown on Buddhism in Tibet]

For the purveyors of Chinese propaganda, it is not an exception but the standard rule to manufacture rosy narratives while completely whitewashing or denying the ugly truth behind them. The article brought home the sheer futility of entertaining any expectation of even a modicum amount of objectivity from the official media, which is to begin with a CCP organ through-and-through. When it comes to political issues in general, and the Tibet issue in particular (which is increasingly portrayed as one of China’s sacrosanct, non-negotiable, core issues), the official media has no option but to be scrupulously dogmatic in sticking to the party line.

As a result, the state-run Chinese media outlets are afflicted with an uncanny propensity for self-delusion and psychotic denial of obvious facts, largely through harebrained logic and inconsistent arguments that often run contrary to the rhetoric of their own propaganda. For example, take another piece published by China Tibet Online: “Article unveils Dalai Lama’s double tricks on Independence of Tibet and violence.” This article took strong exceptions to His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s comments during an interview for the NDTV news channel. The Dalai Lama was asked: If the majority opinion within the Tibetan community changes (from the Middle-Way Approach to independence), will His Holiness be willing to change his position? and His Holiness replied by saying that he would “have to” as he is not a dictator.

Although His Holiness’ views would be seen as quite normal and natural in a democratic society, China Tibet Online lambasted his comments, claiming the “change of Dalai’s position has caused great concern among quite a few international media because it articulates that he will switch his precious stand to independence of Tibet and violence.”

Well, hold on a second. If we take that assertion at face value, it clearly implies a categorical acknowledgement on their part of something that the Chinese press continually denies: That His Holiness the Dalai Lama at present is not seeking independence, but a middle-way solution that can be arranged within the constitutional framework of PRC!

Furthermore, one hardly needs a reminder that China offers a worst-case scenario for press freedom and free speech. For more than a decade now, China has been the world’s number one jailer of journalists. It is hardly surprising that, in their Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2009, Reporters Without Borders ranked China 168th (or 8th from bottom) in terms of press freedom.

In a ridiculous twist of irony, it is none but China itself that has been scowling and howling against the alleged biases in the Western media, particularly on the Tibet issue. The jury however is still out on whether the Western media has been guilty of biased coverage. Even though the Western media is not infallible, in terms of its overall standard of accuracy, fairness and objectivity, there is still no comparison between Western and (official) Chinese media.

Most important of all, the Chinese idea of “fairness” apparently lies in others saying what they want them to say. But “fairness” lies in being free to say something, whether in agreement or dissent. This is exactly the reason why China, in light of the abysmal state of its own domestic media, totally lacks the moral authority to be pointing fingers at foreign media. As they say, people who live in glass houses should not be throwing stones.

Copyright © 2010 Tibet.net

Published in Tibet.net