The news media and Tibet

Just a few minutes ago, three Tibet activists unfurled a banner on a ledge of Beijing’s main train station. It read: China’s Tibet Railway: Designed to Destroy.” I stood on the other side of the street, snapped a few pictures, and left with conflicting feelings.

Tibet activists display a banner in front of a crowded Beijing street.

A zoomed-in view of the banner.

Like several other foreign reporters, I’d been alerted ahead of time to the event.

It was timed to coincide with Saturday’s inauguration of a new train that links Beijing and Lhasa, the Tibetan capital. Activist groups abroad say the Chinese government will use the railway to further colonize Tibet, moving ever-larger numbers of settlers there.

While the issues touching on Tibet are of interest, what troubled me is that the activists are generally Westerners rather than Tibetans. Their banner was in English, not Chinese or Tibetan, and few people in front of the train station took notice or were able to read the banner. So without complicit Western media to document the event, it would have gone unnoticed.

Is this unfurling of a banner news, or is it not? I'd like to hear your opinion.

Comments

[Bucket Trucks]

Yeah, you're right

[Hannü]

The train takes people, food (Tibet has little agriculture) and goods (Tibet has little industry) both into Tibet as well as out of it. The Tibetans would want to be able to travel, study and work elsewhere too.

'Designed to destroy'? It's got a nice ring to it but not much sense.

For info from the Tibetans in Tibet, read Dialogues Tibetan Dialogues Han, a travelogue and book of dialogues.

http://www.amazon.com/Dialogues-Tibetan-Han-Hann%C3%83%C2%BC/dp/9889799936/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1210070217&sr=8-1

[herb]

Chinese nationals who are in western contries are protesting the Tibet situation.Fair enough.
Could a group of Americans or Chinese protest as pro Tibet in China? NO!
The whole Tibet-CHina situation is very complicated and I would not pretend to be able to solve it here. However, it strikes me as ironic that the Chinese who are protesting in western countries can't see this obvious short coming of their government. We are affording you rights that your own country would not afford either us or you. Doesn't that tell you something?

[Peter]

It is disturbing that in the west people have the view of tibet as a mythical shangri-la, a land of peace and purity until the red handed chinese butchers showed up with their guns and enslaved the people. always viewed as good guys(Lamaist) vs Bad Guys (Chinese).

Old Tibet stands for something that most democratic nations in the west speak against: Feudal Theocracy rule by religious extremists that brainwash their people.

Tibetans are viewed as saints no matter what they do. those guys can get away with anything as long as their aggression is directed towards Chinese people. in 2000 a group of Tibetan youths terrorized Chinatown of Paris by breaking windows, over-turning cars, throwing fire bombs. etc in protest of 2008 olympics in China. these vandalists/criminals/terrorists were aquited of all their charges because the western media viewed their actions as "nationalist defending their country against a tyranical regime". no its not defending democracy, its called racial biase and terrorism

[CCT]

Ann, if you only bothered to pick up a history book now and then, you'd find the real world to be a far more interesting place.

I don't know if you're any more informed about Western European history... but let's give it a shot. Do you consider folks like William I, Henry III, and John (signer of the Magna Carta) to be "English" kings? Or are they actually French-speaking Viking foreigners?

The "Mongolians" and "Manchurians" you so glibly dismiss as being non-Chinese were as Chinese as Queen Elizabeth (she of Welsh and Norman descent) was English.

As far as Chinese ideas being free to compete in the West, quite frankly, Western ideas are also free to compete in China. Western news is widely available to the vast majority of urban Chinese, and the principles that you trumpet here are adopted by just about zero. The concept that the Qing and Yuan dynasties are not "Chinese" dynasties are a total non-starter guaranteed to end any political discussion.

[Ann]

" I mean, do Americans or the British give a damn about what Chinese people would think of them?
Whild do you presume that Chinese people would give a toss the other way around?
This seems bizarre to me."

Sounds like a belief in free speech and the free exchange of ideas to me. Americans or British would care about Chinese opinions if they're persuasive and have a sound basis. Chinese ideas are free to compete with other ideas in the 'west'.

"I don't see a poll on how Tibetans feel about it. Why? Because the result won't suit Westerners' taste."

No, you don't see a reliable poll about how Tibetans feel because they're not allowed to freely form and express opinions.

This stunt with the banner seems a bit silly, but what should these people be doing if they care about the Chinese occupation of Tibet? The issues aren't all that complicated, and there's plenty of reason to disagree with China's claim.

Their historical claim on Tibet is that the Mongolians once controlled both China and Tibet (and many other countries and cultures - does China have a claim on Russia or India?). And, when China was occupied by Manchurians, the Manchurian emperor had a religious relationship with the ruler of Tibet. There was also a brief period, long ago, when the Tibetan ruler also controlled China, but then he became Buddhist and voluntarily ended his occupation of China.

And, the Chinese came into Tibet with guns less than a century ago and killled anyone that stood in their way. That's the only real claim China has on Tibet.

[Wmms]

Face it. You are paid to spin shit to feed western audiences to make them feel good about themselves no matter what happens. You smell it from the railway to Tibet and you swarm it like a bunch of flies.

I don't see a poll on how Tibetans feel about it. Why? Because the result won't suit Westerners' taste.

You write stuff to sell. Just be thankful that China is giving you material.

[Dana]

"Bing, the reason why no Tibetan or Chinese would unfurl a protest banner in Beijing is obvious. They would be facing 10 years in prison, not a fine for trespassing."

And you know this because....???

[bx]

No Michael, thats the point really, why should Chinese people "care about what anyone thinkgs about Tibet or China"?

I do believe that sometimes, certain people in the west take themselves too seriously. I mean, do Americans or the British give a damn about what Chinese people would think of them?

Whild do you presume that Chinese people would give a toss the other way around?

This seems bizarre to me.

[michael]

Bing, the reason why no Tibetan or Chinese would unfurl a protest banner in Beijing is obvious. They would be facing 10 years in prison, not a fine for trespassing.

I'm sure the 1.3 billion other Chinese are happy with the railway. a) because they don't face cultural marginalisation, b) because how would they know what anyone thinks about Tibet or China when they have the most heavily censored media in the world outside of N Korea.

[Bing]

It's a staged publicity stunt, made by westerners, and for westerners.

It's only news worthy to those eager crowd who want to paint china in bad light.

For me and most chinese i know, we are just happy the railway is done.

Unfurling banners just look silly to me, especially when they are in english.

The only thing that really upsets me in this whole fiasco is that those foreigners were let off hook so freaking easy. They should've been charged with trespassing and pay the maximum fine.

[Calvin]

It is just funny to see the fussy westerners with banners like this. I am not saying they are malicious, not even innocent, which I am 100% percent sure they will strongly deny and make a list of proof that are mentally mature, and I am not even stressing the statement of 'they don't really understand the situation within China'.

It is just that we are in two different world, with a deep cultural gap. One side can seldom convince the other side, if not never.

--------
Welcome to my BLOG http://www.calvin.sh.cn for topics relocated to relocatin to Shangahi.

[davesgonechina]

"Sounds like a Big Han Chauvinist." No, it's something commonly referred to as a "joke", Fubai. As for chauvinism, I refer you back to my earlier point: there's economic and cultural destruction all over China - why only care about the damage done to Tibetans? Who is really being chauvinist here? Han culture has alot of diversity thats been threatened or already destroyed as well, but my complaint is that too often activists describe it as the Big Han Monolith marching on Tibet. That's not fair - a poor guy from Ningxia or Jiangxi who goes to Tibet to be a bricklayer for 50 kuai a day isn't the same as a Party official who thinks that turning Potala Palace into a theme park is a good idea. Guangxi culture is not the same as Shandong culture - but when it comes to talking about Tibet, its all just the Big Han menace, like that Monty Python skit:

"So Miss Johnson returned to her typing and dreamed her little dreamy dreams, unaware as she was of the cruel trick fate had in store for her. For Miss Johnson was about to fall victim of the dreaded international Chinese Communist Conspiracy. (lots of little yellow men pour into the office) Yes, these fanatical thieves under the leadership of the so-called Mao Tse-tung (who appears in the animation) had caught Miss Johnson off guard for one brief but fatal moment and destroyed her. (Miss Johnson is submerged in a tide of yellow men) Just as they are ready to do anytime free men anywhere waver in their defence of democracy."

Maybe if the other 1.3 billion people in China thought Tibetan activists gave a crap about them too, they might listen to what they say once in a while.

[fubai]

"Have you ever tried Tibetan food? Some things aren't worth saving."

Sounds like a Big Han Chauvinist. Let them eat cake, or at least fangbian mian.

[sunbin]

i just have a simple question.

does an electrically powered railway create more pollution than tired smoking trucks operating in low air pressure?

similarly, we may want to analysis the incremental change for all the plus' and minus' and sum them together, before reaching any conclusion.

[davesgonechina]

What exactly did they expect you to write, I wonder? Maybe start out with an ominous nut graf:

While China's economic boom continues to drive forward unchecked, there are signs (puns are always nice) that the rapidity of development has had dire social and cultural consequences. While criticism of the official policy of growth promotion is stifled, voices do occasionally rise above the din of heavy construction equipment. On Friday, two unidentified activists managed to unfurl a banner defiantly declaring that the Tibet-Qinghai Railway, a prominent symbol of the Chinese government's efforts to modernize a nation of 1.3 billion, is "designed to destroy"."

I mean, I expect they imagined such an article. But why not turn it on them? You're in contact with these people - why not anonymously interview them and ask some hard questions, like:

* What did you hope to accomplish?
* What purpose does inviting the Western media serve?
* Why did you choose not to use the Chinese language, and thereby engage the Chinese people?
* Do you believe that the development of the Qinghai-Tibet railway is unique in its environmental and cultural damage, or do other development projects in the rest of China pose similar concerns?
* If so, why don't you give a shit about the destruction of the cultural and physical environment of other ethnic groups in China, including the Han? Why are you expressing some sort of cultural/racial/provincial preference?
* Why are you taking a confrontational approach as opposed to a more cooperative one? Have you tried other approaches? Have you exhausted other possibilities, such as not being obnoxious?
* Issues of Tibet have been beaten to death in the West for years - do you really think there are any new minds to change or people who have not reached a conclusion one way or the other?
* How would you feel if Chinese activists unfurled Chinese language banners in your country protesting the construction of a highway, railway or airport there? Would you even bother to find out what it said?
* Just who the hell do you think you are?
* Have you ever tried Tibetan food? Some things aren't worth saving.

I think there is a story here. How often does any U.S. newspaper or news program investigate the financial links of NTDTV, Epoch Times and Falun Gong practitioners? How often is there a report to see if the Milarepa Fund actually accomplishes anything? How about interviewing young people at Free Tibet concerts to see if they understand anything about the issue or simply really like the Beastie Boys? What about checking to see the lobbying connections between Chinese dissidents and guys like the Blue Team, many of whom are still in the US government and tied to the current administration? Maybe there's nothing to find there, but I've never seen an article that critical looks at who these people are, why they do the things they do and whether they have solid arguments based on solid facts. I think some journalists and editors do feel that the Chinese government commits abuses, therefore discrediting those who point to abuses isn't kosher, even if those condemning abuses sometimes make things up. I disagree with such logic. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the matter.

[eswn]

That's a very Zern question, like "if a tree falls in the forest and no one’s there to hear it, does it make a sound?"

The modernized Chinese media-related version is attributed to blogger Michael Anti: "If the western media did not write about it in English, then it did not happen."

As for this unfurling of the banner is not news until (1) something else significant happened at this scene, such as a police riot; or (2) there is something else in the background of the matter. Without these other elements, this is just street theater without content.

Of course, this in itself can be a meta-story about why people pursue this apparently pointless approach.