Zhongnanhai

I enjoy trying Beijing's vast plethora of dining and drinking establishments, and once wrote a restaurant review column for Beijing Today magazine. I'm no culinary expert, and seeing as they were paying me peanuts, I decided to bail on the endeavor not long after it began (the magazine wouldn't even pay for the meal!). Also, as much as I love going out to bars around town, I could never compete with one Jim Boyce.

But in the spirit of shared information, I feel I may as well post the following email. I have dined at the Pavilion in Beijing twice without any problems. That being said, this email is written by a major media personality in Beijing, in my judgment, is a credible witness. You can certainly make up your own minds.

I just thought I would fill you in on my last experience at The Pavilion. It's a bit long, but well worth the read.

Let me first say that I have regularly frequented this bar since it opened.

OK. So, I arrived with some friends on Saturday evening at 6.50pm, just in time to grab a couple of happy hour drinks and sit back and enjoy the evening. After collecting our drinks at 6.55pm, we headed outside to find a table. Consuming two courses and many drinks, as well as inviting quite a few friends to join us (who also consumed food and many drinks) we decided to leave The Pavillion at 1.30am and headed to the cashier to pay the bill.

Checking the bill I noticed that we hadn't been credited our original happy hour drinks. I questioned the bill nicely and was shouted back at with "It says 7.04pm". That was because it took 5 minutes to originally find a table (after greeting some friends), sit down and then give the staff a table number so they could put our 6.50pm purchased drinks on the computer. Anyway, I politely told the lady (the owner Russel's wife, Christine) the situation. She yelled at me saying sarcastically, "Why don't I make the whole bill happy hour prices?" I said that there was no need to take that attitude. ....

The next minute the owner, Russel, came over and started yelling at us. First he called us losers, repeating "This bar is not for losers". Then he said, "If you just came for the happy hour drinks then you are not welcome here" (ignoring the fact that we had been spending money at his bar for over SIX hours). He said "Have you heard of the Bus Bar? It's just across the street. Why don't you go there?"

My friend came back from the bathroom and he shouted at her, "You should know better". Let me point it out that this friend has known Russel for many years and has attended various
functions with him. When she spoke back to him, in disbelief, he said, "Oh, so now you remember my name" (??!!!!) He then approached my other friend who is in the restaurant business. He stood about 5cm away from her face and said "Yes, I know you. Your restaurant is illegal." When she said "What?" in complete astonishment he yelled "Oh, feeling brave
now are we?" He then got all of his staff to come over, pointed at us and said "See these losers, never let them in here again".

I have never in my entire life been spoken to in such a degrading, disrespectful and horrendous way. I can't count the amount of money I have spent in Russel's bar and the number of friends and visitors I have taken there. To treat your loyal customers in such a way is absolutely beyond my comprehension. So, don't give this poor excuse for a human being your hard earned money.

The Pavillion might have a nice garden, but it has a rude, obnoxious, disgusting owner that deserves nothing good in this lifetime. No wonder The Pavillion is going under.

For the past few weeks a story about a Swiss fashion company, which created a label reading f.u.c.k.u China, has been getting quite a bit of press here in mainland China. At first, I figured this would blow over. But alas, (and let me deeply intone with one eyebrow raised in a serious manner) this has officially "hurt the feelings of the Chinese people." And when that happens, "official complaints" must be lodged and petitions must be signed.

I regularly read the Japanese blog site Japundit, which is kind of a Tokyo version of Shanghaiist. I can't help but feel the site likes to laugh at some of China's problems, such as a recent statement by a Chinese government official that China must "raise the quality" of the Chinese people before the Olympics. And now, they couldn't resist running an article about the offending label.

Basically the Swiss fashion design company, Philipp Plein created the limited edition label reading "f.u.c.k.u China". It was found on a Chinese boy in the German city of Bremen. After receiving furious complaints from the Chinese (and the ubiquitous "hurts the feelings of..." statement), Philipp Plein said the whole thing was one giant misunderstanding. f.u.c.k.u China actually means “the fascinating & urban collection: kiss you China.” Ahh, so nothing to worry about, right?

Well, Philipp Plein is clearly being a bit facetious, and it's not like they released the label and somebody said, "Gee, this says fuck u China on it, somebody should've probably caught that." Instead, this was meant to be a joke on China's rampant pirating of the fashion company's products. And, actually, I find it a bit funny.

It's too bad the Chinese don't.

I was discussing this topic with my dad today (although not specifically this story). As a Canadian, my country is often the butt of jokes in the United States and beyond. Who can forget Blame Canada in the South Park movie, or the bumbling, freezing cold, toque-wearing, hockey playing, toothless bumpkin stereotype that seems to persist in American media. Sure, they are insulting Canada. But it's funny. And we don't take it too seriously.

In fact, the Chinese embassy in Germany is even getting involved. Doesn't the Chinese embassy have more important things to do? By making an official complaint about a fashion stunt, it is tarnishing the prestige of the embassy and, in my opinion, "hurting the reputation of Chinese diplomats."

China could use a good dose of humour. Not every joke about China should "hurt the feelings of the Chinese people" (a phrase in itself, as I have mentioned before, is a vast generalization that turns independent, thinking adults into six-year-old children). China pirates goods, and everybody knows it. Just laugh at it, and get on with your day.

One commenter on Japundit summed it up nicely: because the product is in limited edition, somebody in China has probably already copied it anyway.

First, the Chengdu Evening News runs a classified advertisement honoring the mothers of Tiananmen Square victims. And now, courtesy of ESWN, this:

At 20:31 on August 8, 2007, China Daily posted an article titled: "China invites the world to Olympics." The following sentence appeared: "Security was tight around Tiananmen Square, where troops crushed pro-democracy demonstrations in 1989 with huge loss of life, as crowds gathered for the celebrations.". (See Google Cache's screen capture below). This came about because someone did a copy-and-paste job from Reuters' Nick Mulvenney (dated 19:54 on the same evening) without checking the content. Within 12 hours, a revised version was posted (see China Daily). Someone over at China Daily is in big trouble for this slip-up.

I can only assume that the editor(s) in charge of the copy were just lazy and didn't copy edit the story properly. Unlike the Chengdu Evening News case, where the advertising clerk wasn't familiar with June 4, this sentence which was published on the China Daily site was spelled out for all to see. Surely even an editor that wasn't familiar with the event would know this sentence shouldn't be included.

At the end of the day, though, what appears in the English language press doesn't really matter. People familiar with English are usually (and this is a large generalization, I admit) at least somewhat familiar with June 4. If this kind of thing made it into the Chinese language media, I'd be much more surprised.

Those who happen to read this blog and live in the Hamilton, Ontario area can hear a live interview with myself on CHML Radio at 11:05am EDT Friday. That will be 11:05pm Friday in China. You can listen to the interview live by going here, and clicking "Listen Live" on the top left-hand side of the screen.

The interview will be regarding former MP David Kilgour's request for Canada to boycott the Beijing Olympics over human rights concerns. (Warning: That link was GFWed at last check - surprise, surprise. I'll never forget, in the immortal words of Mark Steyn, that a country can not become a world superpower if it remains scared of words.)

I think the interview will also touch on some other China related issues as well.

I am a skeptic by nature. Having been a journalist since the ripe old age of 20, it's something that has become ingrained in me. I try to see things objectively. I would occasionally get a couple of chuckles when, in Canada, when asked to introduce myself at a news event, I would announce my presence as 'fly on the wall.' So when I see the government in this country trying to give me a 'sunshine colonic,' the organ grinder in my brain starts whippin' that monkey for all it's worth. The latest white-wash is the economic stability of this country.

I'm no business expert. I understand the pure basis of economics, but when it comes to understanding cyclical activity, I am at a bit of a loss. However, though I'm not Kreskin, I like to consider myself a forward thinker. And that's why I'm going on record now as saying that this country is headed for the economic equivalent of a Turkish prison shower scene.

I love doing stories on my program about the economics of China on my program. It's the one area I can touch on here in China that is highly unlikely to get me slapped in a 6-foot-square tiger cage and shipped back to 'the home and native land.' And for months I have been -- in a somewhat backhanded way -- putting out a warning over the airwaves that there is an inflation problem in this country that the government, and its economists, are refusing to acknowledge publicly.

The latest stats released by the People's Bank of China show that the Consumer Price Index has risen 3.2-percent this year. Now, on the surface, this doesn't seem that bad, particularly in a country where the economic development is screaming along at 11.5-percent for the first half of the year. However, if you look at where the inflation is rising from, it becomes a bit more interesting. Thanks to some genius in some ministry, farmers last year in China were discouraged from raising pigs. Well, surprise, surprise, now China has a shortage of pigs, and Premier Wen Jiabao has encouraged his people to 'leave no stone unturned' when it comes to raising up pigs. Pigs, and now wheat, are driving up the overall inflation rate. Food is the staple of life here in China, and a good portion of the 900 million or so folks hunkered down in the rural parts of this country barely make enough to get by as it is. Now some will say that the rising prices will benefit the farmers in the poorer regions, because they'll get more for their products. No going to happen. I can guarantee that the pork and wheat producers are not going to be passing off their increased profits to the farmers. That's just not going to happen. So what's the result? When food gets more expensive, the farmers are going to have to find gigs that earn them more money. Where are they going to get those jobs? In the areas of the country that rely on migrant workers -- the urban centers. As such, you are going to see more migrant workers doing manual labor, which generally involves construction. That, in turn, is going to flood the market with guys who are willing to work cheaper than the guy already on the job, which is going to encourage developers to continue expanding and creating more projects, because their labor costs are on the decline. And the housing construction center in this country is the one area of the economy the government is really worried about. As more and more homes are built, more and more people are getting into real estate speculation. As such, you're going to have thousands upon thousands of people dumping their cash into developments that -- for one reason or another -- may fail. As such, you're going to see bankruptcy rates rise, leading to greater instability.

On top of all this, you've got people in this country -- mainly the poor -- who are throwing their money at the mainland's stock markets in record proportions. Every economist knows that markets rise and fall. It's the economic principles involved that make this inevitable. And this is another area that people are going to start taking a bath on. Investing in the markets is an extremely new concept here in China. And what you've got today is a vast collection of uneducated investors, who are throwing in money into companies that have to do a bare minimum of financial reporting, which is generally inaccessible to the public anyway. So when the markets go through a correction, a lot of people are going to be left fenless.

I truly believe both of these scenarios are coming. And the frustrating part is that the government continues to be sunshine and roses. And if you are conspiracy theorist, (which I can be from time to time -- within reason, of course) you could argue that the government is pouring so much hype into the Olympics because it wants us to ignore the underlying problems that this country is facing.

How long until these things happen? That I have no educated guess on. I guess we'll just have to wait until the next bout of SARS, bird flu, or other unforeseeable incident (re: Taiwan) hits to figure out what is going to shake this country's economy to its foundation. But mark my words, it is coming.

The IHT has recently published a story on former Shanghai Party Chief Chen Liangyu, who was purged from his post and put under house arrest for his alleged involvement in the Shanghai Pension Fund Scandal (is it necessary to use the word "alleged" in China?).

It's been widely reported that Chen refused to cool Shanghai's hot property market under strict orders from the central government, which was one of many reasons for his downfall. Now it turns out Chen was interested in much more than just property, according to today's story in the IHT.

The "hai" in the word Shanghai means ocean, but the city had no beach, he would lament. So city officials built a 6-mile, or 10-kilometer, beach in the suburbs, using 128,000 tons of sand shipped in from southern China.

Chen liked tennis, too, so a world-class tennis complex was built at a reported cost of $290 million, even though few Shanghai people play the game.

In a city where relatively few can afford to own personal cars, Chen's government built a $300 million racetrack that critics say is the fanciest on the Formula One circuit.

I am a fan of Shanghai, and this is perhaps a selfish thing to say: but I like the Forumla One track and the tennis center. Both venues have drawn world class sporting events to China. (As for the beach, well, I never made it while I lived there.) Oddly, while he's criticized for this, China is about to spend more on the Olympic games than any previous host country, ironically, building world class sports venues. Tough to single Chen out for this one.

But, the IHT article continues, the final nail in the proverbial coffin came with this:

...he proposed a $5 billion expansion of a magnetic levitation, or maglev, rail line to the neighboring city of Hangzhou, a widely criticized project that raised something relatively new for China: a storm of public protest.

I lived in Shanghai during this period of public protest, and I can attest that people were very angry and were not scared of venting their frustrations. In fact, while I was employed at Jongo News, I sent out our video team to do a story on this.

At the time, we interviewed people along the proposed route who complained mostly of noise pollution. The project, which would see a new $5 billion Maglev line link Shanghai with Hangzhou, was halted in May. And many believe it was a case of the government listening to protesters:

For many, the apparent demise of the project in the face of widespread public opposition marked the end of an era of glitz-driven development, with attendant opportunities for high-level corruption, and the beginning of a new one in which the voice of China's growing middle class can no longer be ignored.

"The public is concerned with the electromagnetism of the train and the government is studying this, and that is one of the reasons the project has been stopped," a People's Congress official was quoted as having said in the China Business Daily newspaper, one of many news reports that suggested that residents' complaints had played a major role in the suspension.

I am of two thoughts on this. One, this is a sign of new China. Residents here have become much more socially active, and no longer fear the government as much as they once did. This is a sign that China is moving down a path which will hopefully lead to more responsible development and engagement with residents.

Two... I can't help but admit that I wouldn't have minded the high-tech, fast connection between Hangzhou and Shanghai. One thing that has made China special is that it is free of feasibility studies, open houses, and compromises. Because it is a communist country, it can build the biggest, most elaborate, high-tech buildings or transportation infrastructure without any public accountability. This has led to many of Beijing's Olympic venues and the current Maglev in Shanghai.

It appears those days are over. And probably for the best.

I was struck by a comment on Danwei recently regarding Chinese thoughts on foreign correspondents and foreign NGOs working in China:

In honor of this date, the Committee to Protect Journalists, Reporters Sans Frontières, and the Foreign Correspondents Club of China have all released reports and held press conferences to tell the world that foreign reporters continue to be hassled and the local media still is not free.

Many of your correspondent's Chinese friends think that the organizations listed above are just silly, trouble-making foreigners who don't really get it.

I surely hope the founder of Danwei, Jeremy Goldkorn, wasn't using the words of his friends to illustrate his own beliefs.

Too often, and much to the approval of the Chinese government, critics of foreign journalists lump them into the same ideologically-driven camp as their state-run counterparts, just at opposite ends of the same spectrum. As someone who has worked in a plethora of state-run media (and media in Canada), I can confirm that the two entities are not the same -- not even close.

First of all, it's convenient, for argument purposes, to dismiss critics of China as "silly". But those organizations listed above, and foreign media in general, have a much higher bar to reach than their Chinese counterparts. Let me give you an example:

My loyal Communist party girlfriend, who works in state-run media and can speak perfectly from Communist party talking points, recently dismissed Jung Chang's latest book, Mao: The Untold Story as utter propaganda. No, she didn't read it. But she has read reviews of the book, and I've shared its contents with her on numerous occasions.

The book is not one of my favorites, and I object to Jung Chang's obvious agenda, which is to tear down Mao's image and turn legends around Mao into myths. But the book, which took 10 years of meticulous research, can stand on its own, despite the criticism. There are detailed endnotes supplied and her work will be/has been reviewed and criticized and pulled apart at various academic institutions and by other Sinofiles. This is the process of finding the truth: letting work be dissected by peers.

Foreign journalists must also live up to this responsibility, even if they fail from time to time. If Joseph Kahn of the New York Times writes an incredibly biased story on China, it will be torn apart in the blogosphere, be criticized by other journalists at home, and hurt the reputation and credibility of his employer. It is this peer pressure which helps enforce journalistic ethics. In addition, in an open society, work can be dissected publicly. As a journalist, you do your best to ensure your bases are covered, because your own reputation is on the line.

Now, to Chinese media. As I have mentioned before, I have worked at CCTV 9 and China Radio International, among others. In both places, we talked about how Tibet has been a part of China for centuries, how the living standards of Tibetans have improved, and how Tibetans have embraced the motherland. I don't object to an organization reporting this, if they have the facts to back it up. But other organizations should be allowed to go to Tibet, and talk to Tibetans, to verify this. This is what would happen in an open and free media environment. Because China can report what it wants internally, and control what other media report, it's much less likely the truth will come out. The bar is lowered for what can pass as "journalism", because nobody's personal reputation can be challenged publicly. Thus, the credibility problem.

So when people in China, the government, or other organizations dismiss foreign reporters, the Foreign Correspondents Club of China, or Reporters Sans Frontiers as "silly", it reveals the lack of hard evidence to support critical claims against these organizations and brings them down to the level of their Chinese counterparts.

Foreign journalists aren't perfect, and often foreign organizations have agendas. But in free countries, we are allowed to determine that on our own, and decide which groups we can ignore and which ones are beneficial.

I'm tempted to go into the problems with state-run media (of which there are many), but this subject was summarized well recently on Imagethief and on Richard Spencer's blog. Both are well-deserving of a read.

It’s very popular to politicize the Olympics coming to Beijing one year from today, but I think many people are forgetting what the games are all about, which of course is the athletes. I am not standing up for China’s human rights record nor am I a fan of China’s current political regime but I think the games are bigger than my personal political bias.

I think its only fair China receive a healthy serving of criticism on its human rights record as it is also using the games to further its claims on Tibet and Taiwan. The Communist Party would be naïve not to expect some blow back from trying to politicize the games and it also needs to remember the true spirit of the Olympics.

The Chinese authorities have done themselves no favors by detaining protesters and journalists this week, and this sort of behavior should not be tolerated -- but let’s not start talking about a boycott just yet. I want to see world class athletes competing not protesters clashing with police. Congress person Maxine Waters, a Democrat from California is putting forward a motion for the U.S. to boycott the Olympics over the atrocities being committed in Darfur. Besides the hypocrisy of the motion I think Ms. Waters has forgotten what the Olympics are about. They are about running faster than the other person, and jumping farther, and personal challenge. They are about training and commitment. The games are about personal sacrifice and human beings pushing their bodies to extremes in the hope of athletic excellence. They are about fair play on the field, not the political arena. I didn't agree with the U.S. boycotting the games in Moscow and I didn't agree with the Soviet Union boycotting the '84 Olympics in L.A.

I will never defend China’s record of human rights violations and suppression of personal rights and freedoms. I don’t subscribe to the Communist Party’s philosophy or strong arm tactics and never will. But, I do believe in the brotherhood of sport. This is an event that can bring us together as planet, as a species, as human beings. While I do believe there is room for freedom of speech and political views during the games I think we should also not lose sight of the spirit of the games, and that spirit lies with the athletes.

Zero-eight, zero-eight is a pretty interesting combination of numbers here in China. No, I'm not referring to the blood alcohol level required to be legally impaired. (though, that is a good combination of numbers, too!) I am referring to August 8th, the one-year anniversary countdown to the start of the Beijing Olympics.

In this country, it is considered somewhat rude and presumptuous to brag about ones self, and show cockiness. Modesty is the preferred style while interacting on a social level. That's why I consistently find it hilarious that the Chinese government continues to pump out the message that everything is rosy, China is rapidly developing and that this country deserves to have a major role to play in the world. Well, to be honest, I can't argue those facts. Things here aren't always 'rosy,' but they are a hell of a lot better than they were 35 years ago. And this country is developing and making major headway on a scale not seen before. However, I think this government is -- perhaps not shooting -- but slowly pushing a bullet into its foot.

The international state-run media organs in this country are creatures of habit and generally pretty tough to listen too when it comes to the news content. China Central Television's channel 9, where a number of my good friends work, is heavily scrutinized by the foreign ministry and -- I'm not making up the name, either -- the Propaganda Ministry. As such, the people in charge of the news content there want their bosses to be happy so that they can get a promotion. They won't get that promotion if their bosses don't get a promotion. Their boss’s bosses are beholden to the ministry officials, who of course, are beholden to the government officials and leaders that the news is talking about. So you see the trickle down effect here. It's the same thing at China Radio International. The 'party system' strikes again! But this time, I believe it's going to backfire.

Not a lot is known of China in the west. I would argue that there are way more misconceptions of this country than of anywhere else in the world. I mean, you really can't understand any place properly until you've lived there. But still, given the fact that China was so closed off for so many years and remains somewhat isolated because of its past, it's still a bit of an unknown quantity. As such, the government is doing what it can to put out its message that China is changing. But in blowing sunshine out its ass the whole time, it's giving the people around the world the impression that this country is a collection of clean, shiny new buildings and streets and that the people are all driving around in brand new cars, all wearing expensive suits and sipping designer teas. It also pumps out the message that all Chinese people are dignified and cultured, the ethnic minorities are all sugar and love, the culture across the country is beaming and, in the words of Chevy Chase in 'Vacation,' whistling 'Zippidy Do-Da' out their asses. But anyone who's lived here for 5 minutes knows this is a crock of shit. Walk a 里(li) (Chinese distance measure, which is the cousin of the kilometer) in my spit-soaked shoes and you'll soon see that this country is no where near the standards most people in the west are accustomed to. So, when the 'glorious' Olympics welcomes the world to see and experience China, me thinks they are going to be taking in and seeing a lot more than they bargained for. And, further to Cam's previous post, I think there might be a lot of people who come to this country and leave disappointed. And I believe that part of the blame will have to be laid on this government's international propaganda campaign. This, and the fact that the foreign media that come here are going to pick this place apart for stories like Oprah on a bag of cream puffs, is something the government here doesn't appear to be prepared for.

The last thing I'll say on this matter, for the time being, is about my previous reference to things here being much better than they were 35 years ago. This was no arbitrary date for this particular post. In the last hour before launching this post, I had the chance to have a 10 minute interview with a Beijing media veteran who came to this city in 1972. While he too agreed that there have been some great changes during his time, he too believes that the government -- quote -- 'Should sell itself short, and deliver high.'

So there I was in Shanghai, taking my friends around town. They had stepped off a long flight from Vancouver via San Francisco, and it was both of their first time in China. The purpose of their trip was to visit Tibet, and quick stops in some Chinese cities was only a bonus.

Shanghai is definitely a beautiful city, and tends to impress those from out-of-town, or even those out-of-country. I greeted the two weary travelers at Pudong Airport, but they perked up when they boarded the state-of-the-art Maglev train, a perfect introduction to "modern" China, whatever that means. But "modernity" and "China" seemed to be the prevailing topic of conversation as the weekend progressed.

Admittedly, Shanghai isn't like Xi'an, Beijing, or Guangzhou when it comes to historical sites. Shanghai is a shopping, nightlife, and entertainment mecca and its history only dates back to the end of the Opium Wars back in 1846 (or thereabouts). Considering the history of the other cities in China, Shanghai is just a spring chicken.

I thought, though, that Shanghai would be a welcome halfway point between the west and China, before they dig deeper into the western regions of the country in Chengdu, Tibet, Xi'an, and elsewhere. But I was a little surprised by one of their observations: China isn't as modern as people say it is.

For years, people coming over here, I think, have expected farmers in straw hats and dusty streets filled with bicycles. Sure, part of that still exists. But on nearly every television channel, newspaper article, radio story, and blog, people are talking about the glistening new buildings, nightlife, shopping, wealth, and the "quality of the wi-fi in the lobby of their Guangzhou hotels", according to noted columnist Mark Steyn. This hype has been building up for years in advance of the Beijing Olympics, yet many of the run-down and dilapidated old apartment buildings still exist. What's more, in arguably China's wealthiest city of Shanghai, we saw the usual assortment of vagrants minus limbs crawling around asking for change, boarded up windows, children asking for spare kuai, and pollution as bad as I've ever seen it in the city. How modern is all that... and how will Beijing, less developed and more polluted, look in comparison?

Perhaps the incessant media coverage of China's rise has risen expectations to the point where they can't be reached. Although I sound like a Xinhua mouthpiece, China does, in fact, remain a developing country. And despite the glitzy headlines, we have to remember that.

I'm also eager to hear what my friends think of Shanghai's modernity, after two weeks in Tibet!