Media: December 2007 Archives
The Beijing Youth Daily (北京青年报） has published a large feature on CCTV 9 anchor Edwin Maher in today's edition. In it, he addresses the most recent comments surrounding his profile in the Los Angeles Times.
"During the last four years, the Chinese media has changed a lot and is still going through changes. I think indeed that the door has opened more wide than before; it is more balanced and more objective when reporting sensitive issues."
Edwin became serious when I asked about his opinion on Chinese news reporting. He said, in essence, working as an anchor doesn't mean you can insert your own news or political point-of-view into anything you read in front of the TV anywhere in the world. The anchor's responsibility is to read news clearly and improve the way you read it, but the standpoint is decided by the executives. Edwin believes, whether in the United States, Australia or in China, every media outlet has its own standpoint and has to face criticism from others. This is something can not be changed. It is impossible to satisfy everyone, and CCTV is no exception.
During the last four years, the Chinese media has had lots of changes and is still going through changes, something which makes Edwin happy. For example, more and more political talk shows and those kinds of programs are being broadcast live. Different opinions and standpoints can be expressed.
在过去将近四年的时间里，中国的新闻界发生了并正在发生着许多变化。"我确实觉得中国新闻的这扇门正在开得更大，对于敏感事件的报道也更加平衡、更加客观"
当谈到对中国新闻报道的看法时，埃德温严肃了起来。他说，就本质而言，世界各国的媒体有很多相似的地方。在任何地方做主播，都不意味着可以将自己的新闻观点或者政治立场加入到播报中，主播的职责是清晰地播报内容，提高节目的播报水平，而新闻的立场则是由更高层的人来完成。埃德温认为，无论是美国、澳大利亚还是中国，所有的媒体都有自己的立场。同样，每个媒体也都要面对来自不同方面的批评，这是无法改变的。让所有人满意不可能，央视也不例外。
让他感到欣喜的是，在过去将近四年的时间里，中国的新闻界发生了并正在发生着许多变化。比如，现在很多时政访谈的节目也开始直播，让不同立场、不同观点的声音得以表达。"我确实觉得中国新闻的这扇门正在开得更大，对于敏感事件的报道也更加平衡、更加客观。"
Previously on Zhongnanhai:
It's been with intense interest that I've watched the discussion unfold surrounding the controversial article on Edwin Maher, which appeared in the Los Angeles Times last week. (Our sister site, China Media News, was first to post the article on Wednesday).
The article was somewhat critical of Mr. Maher, calling him a "sellout" for lending western credibility to Chinese government propaganda:
"It sounds like an effort to lend a whiff of Western-style credibility to their news operations, in a superficial way, without having to actually adhere to high standards such as fairness, independence, balance, public service and accuracy," said Neil Henry, a UC Berkeley School of Journalism professor.
"But a propagandist is a propagandist, no matter what one's race or country of origin."
Maher hears from his critics -- from irate e-mail writers to the foreigners he meets. "One writer said there was no excuse for what I was doing. And Westerners on the street will ask how I feel about being a mouthpiece for the Chinese government."
Black and White Cat has since provided a translation from an article in the Global Times, in which the Chinese media have come to Edwin's defense:
A senior media expert told the Global Times that some media in the West are always assuming a role of "moral judge" as if they alone "understand news," they alone are news experts, and only their reports can be the most objective. However, they are completely unaware that they themselves are seeing China through colored glasses. Some foreign experts have lived in China for decades and criticize their so-called western news experts, saying they simply don't understand China, don't understand the Chinese media, or that they have only seen things superficially.
The article on Maher has heated up the debate between western and Chinese journalists, most notably which ones are more balanced in their reporting.
As an acquaintance of Mr. Maher, and former employee of CCTV 9, I can attest to his professionalism, kindness, and generosity. Edwin is like the grandfather of the room, often bringing treats and joking with his much younger colleagues. Through his years of television experience, mostly as a weatherman in Australia, he has earned the respect and admiration of nearly everyone on staff at CCTV 9, including management. I share this respect for Mr. Maher and his accomplishments.
That being said, and before we continue, we need to point out a couple of facts:
- CCTV 9 is directly run by China's Central Government, and must broadcast the expressed wishes of the government.
- Western media outlets may come under pressure from governments not to report something, however are entitled to make the ultimate decision themselves (a right protected by law).
- Western media outlets are free to criticize their own government, officials, leaders, companies, and other organizations, as long as it does not violate libel laws.
The LA Times article, as far as I can tell, seemed fair enough. To those of us who know Edwin, perhaps criticizing him is unthinkable. But the story told both sides: first, it reported that some western journalists believe he has lowered himself by being a mouthpiece for the government. Then it sought reaction from Edwin himself, who talked about the gains being made in state-run broadcasting and that, really, he doesn't care what the critics think anyway.
I would like to ask what LA Times reporter John M. Glionna should have written about Maher to make it more balanced. Did they ask Maher for his comments? Yes. Did they talk to CCTV? Yes they did, quoting one anonymous official. One segment of the story could not have possibly been more balanced:
...CCTV officials say they hope their foreign reporters will help provide a more credible Chinese perspective on world affairs.
Media experts call the move a public relations ploy.
The article also pointed out that CCTV is not alone in seeking foreign journalists, but that Al Jazeera, CNN, and BBC do the same. Contrary to the reporting in the LA Times, as this correspondent sees it, the Global Times took a much more extreme line, writing "They hurl one insult after another, like 'news sellout' and 'mouthpiece'."
The more I hear about the argument for "balanced" journalism among Chinese journalists, the more I'm starting to believe balanced journalism is anything that doesn't touch their sacred cows. Balance means both sides: good and bad. Left and right. Positive and negative.
To make matters more muddied, there are many westerners in China who quickly come to China's defense when its journalism is criticized by outsiders. Often times, the longer foreigners remain in China the more they seem estranged from their home countries, and the more comfortable they are towing China's official party line.
Now, if we examine the piece in the Global Times, we see some seriously flawed journalism.
As this reporter understands it, these so-called Western media figures simply don't understand Maher and they have never made any enquiries on this matter to CCTV.
Actually, as mentioned, the LA Times talked to a station official, and Edwin Maher himself.
"Maher is absolutely not the kind of person they say he is," a senior media worker told the Global Times, expressing intense indignation at the unreasonable attacks from certain Western figures in this report. This person believes that Maher is someone in the media who deserves respect, both for his character and professional ability. This media worker dismisses the criticisms of these so-called Western media experts, "Do they understand Maher? Do they know the facts?"
What kind of person did the Times article say he was? Selfish? Dishonourable? A liar? A bad man? No, they criticized him for using his stature in the media business to help promote a Communist government which is unelected, has a horrendous human rights record, and continually threatens its neighbor, Taiwan. (There are those that will claim the previous sentence was a loaded one, however each of those points are factual.) Obviously those working under this system won't appreciate this point of view, because it cuts a little close to home. But in an open media environment, I would submit, this criticism is fair game.
In addition, the LA Times article did talk about what kind of man Maher is, and also mentioned his long and distinguished career in the industry. These two quotes from the Global Times article are not only misleading, they are downright wrong, and an extremely poor example of the kind of Chinese journalism it claims to defend.
Obviously a western article that is overly critical of China, its government, or its media institutions without any rebuttal is biased. But one that shows criticism of China, and its defense, is fair. And in my opinion, the article on Edwin Maher in the LA Times lived up to that spirit.
At the end of the day, comparing western journalism with Chinese journalism is exceedingly difficult. They are completely different, and run in a completely different manner. When people complain that CNN is the "mouthpiece" of the US government, I ask them about the continual negative coverage of George W. Bush, the Iraq war, Afghanistan, the falling US dollar, and other US policies. Would CCTV 9 run similar criticisms of the Chinese government? Of course not, unless it was pre-approved by the party cadres who roam the highest floors of Xinhua News Agency.
Whatever defenders of Chinese media say, it's still a far cry from being dependable, fair, balanced, and credible news. Sure, Chinese journalists often dig up interesting human interest stories. Some even push the envelope by touching on sensitive subjects. And as Edwin Maher mentioned, the window continues to open. But while some battles for a free press are being won, the war is almost a certain defeat, at least as long as the Communist party remains in power.
One fact is indisputable: The government of China directly manages news stories, angles, and coverage on CCTV 9 and other national media. Regardless of what the reporters can uncover under this system, their work is tainted by association. Western news organizations have many flaws, but at least there is diversity of choice and a number of points-of-view and opinions. This does not exist within China's state-run machine.
For every article that comes out of the west that is overly critical of China, there is another one which has gone to great lengths to understand China's changing landscape, it's rapid development, and its culture and people. Criticism of "western" journalism is not only unfair, it also lumps all newspapers, magazines, radio stations, television programs, blogs and others from Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia, and a handful of other countries into one homogeneous group. On the other hand, media which fall under China's central government can all be categorized in one group, because they all take their marching orders from Xinhua.
I expect some negative feedback from this post, but I refer you to the three points I made earlier. As someone who has worked at China Radio International, CCTV 9, and two other municipal TV stations, I know what happens behind closed doors. As someone who continues to write for foreign newspapers and worked for five years as a journalist in Canada, I know what happens there too -- and sometimes, it's not pretty. But it's far better than it is here, and will be for decades to come.
The staff at these organizations are some of the most talented, friendly, and outgoing that I have worked with, and I consider many of them good friends (some for life). I support them in their quest to use their creativity to create good journalism. Unfortunately, they are working with one hand tied behind their backs. The current state of Chinese journalism is not their fault -- it lies with the government.
As for Edwin Maher, I support what he's doing at CCTV 9. He's aware of the criticism leveled at him, and to his credit, he doesn't care. I admire that much more than somebody who claims CCTV 9 is something that it's not.
