Removal of a senior editor

Zhang Ping is, or was, the deputy editor at Southern Metropolis Weekly, a respected publication with a streak of independence.

Nonetheless, even Zhang’s blog writings appeared to cross some red lines, and he was sacked this week. Writing under the name Chang Ping, he recently raised a storm of criticism in the blogosphere with an essay titled How to Find the Truth about Lhasa, analyzing the censorship that hinders deep understanding of unrest in Tibet.

The University of California at Berkeley’s China Media Project translated one of Zhang’s recent blog posts. Titled My Cowardice and Impotence, here is an excerpt:

I am afraid of other people praising me as a brave newspaperman, because I know I am full of fear in my heart. I did write some commentaries on current affairs, and edited some articles that exposed the truth. I lost my job and was threatened for speaking the truth. However, to be honest, these were exceptional cases. They were my miscalculations. In my various media positions in the past decade, what I’ve practiced most is avoiding risk. Self-censorship has become part of my life. It makes me disgusted with myself.

Some of my peers are proud of their censorship skills, and like to show it off to employers. I have similar skills, and I am using them everyday. But I am deeply uncomfortable with it. I feel ashamed about it, just like an executioner knows that he is good at killing.

I could console myself by saying that I am not alone in avoiding risks. There are risks in all professions, and everybody has to know how to control it… However, the media industry is different. I participate in telling lies to the public whenever I cancel a good news story, whenever I delete a sentence of truth, if we regard the media as a public good.

I could also excuse my cowardice by saying that tens of thousands of jobs are at stake if I speak the truth. I should take responsibility for others who rely on the publication for a living… However, I have to admit that I wouldn’t have the courage to speak out, if there were not so many colleagues associated with me, or if I was required to make sacrifices to secure their jobs. How can I use others as my fig leaf and pretend to be noble?

…Compared to the importance of the media to the society, what I’ve done is very limited. I should be ashamed of taking such an important position in this industry and not doing more. I should be more ashamed when I get honors for my work.

Even if I don’t have the courage and capacity to do more than I can do now, I should at least live honestly and conscientiously, and be aware of my cowardice and impotence.

The Paris-based Reporters Without Borders, an advocacy group for freedom of speech, issued this statement about Zhang’s firing:

06.05 - Deputy editor removed because of editorial about Tibet

The deputy editor of the daily Nanfang Dushi Bao, Chang Ping, announced today that he has been removed from his post because of his editorials about Tibet, especially two entitled "Universal Values" and "How to find the truth about Lhasa", that contrasts with the government’s propaganda, according to the web site Boxun. He has been the target of a smear campaign on the Internet and in other newspapers for daring to say that events in Tibet show that the government has not solved the problem of minorities.

"We deplore this unfair removal of a well-known member of the liberal press," Reporters Without Borders said. "Once again, only the voice of propaganda is permitted in China with the aim of getting the world to believe that all Chinese support repression in Tibet."

Chang is known for writing serious, independent editorials, in which he often denounces press freedom violations by officials. In 2006, for example, he criticised a government bill on crisis management that envisaged additional restrictions on the press.

He used to be deputy editor of the famous weekly Nanfang Zhoumo and deputy editor of Waitan Huabao. He was removed from the Nanfang Zhoumo deputy editor position in 2001 after publishing two investigative reports that had a lot of impact.

Comments

[jeff]

Zhang Ping raised a legitimate question at a wrong time. Remember Bill Mahr?

[Junhui]

I actually enjoyed reading Zhang Ping's translated article. It brings to light a lot of questions. Though I agree with Jeff that Zhang Ping raised a legitimate question but was at the wrong time, however if Zhang Ping is not to ask now, then when?

I fully support Zhang Pings opinions and questions. I don't think it was fair that he lost his job. In fact; I think it should freely be available to all. We as Chinese would be hypocrites if we told pro-Tibetan supporters to question their facts and ask our own people to not question the facts given to us.

[Search4T]

Worse yet. When you have a shadowy organization like RSF with alleged ties with foreign government agencies such as CIA to be your one of your most vocal advocate. Too often the unwitting associations with NGOs like this one only help ruin the the career of the journalis/activists who could have otherwise maintained their independent voices in the mainstream. Instead, they became refugees in their own country. Their voices could only be channeled in from outside. Their causes reduced to the statistics in these NGOs' annual reports and fundraising flyers.

[jeff]

Junhui

I agree. I guess the publisher is feeling huge pressure from the public. I don't think it is CCP this time. Why we Chinese never grow up? Always go from one extreme to another. Sigh.

[DJ]

I have to agree with Search4T, any time someone brings up statements from Racist Without Borders to back up his/her point, the argument is already lost.

[DrSeuss]

DJ,
Most western reporters are not racists or are they intentionally trying to distort coverage on China. In fact, they tend to be the more progressive people in western society.

Like China, they too have baggages, and they too have limitations.

Some of the criticisms are fair but let's not go too far (such as looking for bias and racism in every instance). Otherwise, you'd be doing the same thing to these reporters as you accuse them of doing to China.

Let's use this opportunity to improve communications and help each other learn different perspectives so that we'd all have a more complete understanding of this world.

[DJ]

DrSeuss

I respect your attempt at communications and understanding. Please note that my rant below is not meant to direct at you. Please also note that I had nothing against Zhang Ping himself in anyway. I am just "amused" to see RSF used as moral authority in Tim's article.

Your point about western reporters is likely true for many. Nevertheless, the question is: is RSF a group of real reporters or is it just a paid political shell company?

Frankly, I would have leaned towards giving most of the western media and reporters the benefit of the doubt prior to March 14. No more. The collective bankruptcy of their credibility in my eyes is total. (and I only reserved such distinction for the Fox news in the US before this point.)

Imageine what it would have felt like for an American if the headline of the French newspaper after 9/11 is "Today we are all Muslims!"

The best I could say about many of the reporters and commentators in the western media after the recent (still mostly unacknowledged) fiasco is that they are subject to group think and simply try to produce content of "truthiness" as defined by Stephen Colbert. The worst about them, well, I won't bother to describe.

[A B]

There is a comfort zone in every society, and when the envelope is pushed too far, predictable consequences follow.

Has it ever occurred to people here that if TJ were to do too good a job understanding the Chinese from the Chinese perspective, he would "lose" the readership as it would probably be beyond what they can accept about China?

Likewise, if TJ were to totally take the American perspective, he would end up being termed "anti China" and losing his ability to work well in China.

The tricky part is to bridge both, and pushing the envelope on both sides.

Regrettably, Zhang Ping pushed a bit too far.

Let us hope that there will be a road back for Zhang Ping.

[A B]

There is a comfort zone in every society, and when the envelope is pushed too far, predictable consequences follow.

Has it ever occurred to people here that if TJ were to do too good a job understanding the Chinese from the Chinese perspective, he would "lose" the readership as it would probably be beyond what they can accept about China?

Likewise, if TJ were to totally take the American perspective, he would end up being termed "anti China" and losing his ability to work well in China.

The tricky part is to bridge both, and pushing the envelope on both sides.

Regrettably, Zhang Ping pushed a bit too far.

Let us hope that there will be a road back for Zhang Ping.

[paolang]

Zhang Ping was removed from his post as deputy chief editor of the Southern Metropolis Weekly, not because of his blog posting as Tim said, or his editorial as the RSF claimed, but because of his article about Tibet published in London's Financial Times.

However, according the Danwei blog, Zhang will keep his position as the leading writer of the same magazine, unless he chooses to leave.

[shenqh]

How Dan Rather ended his job from CBS? If a reporter made comments against the bottomline of a society, he must go.

[anyno]

I could only wish that all editors have such a conscience, regardless of nationality or ethnicity. Whether bowing to government pressure or consumer preference.

[Junhui]

I don't think Zhang Ping's article was very "anti-China". I think it was just bringing an important factor too light. He said the Western Media did have questionable information but if we are to question them why not question Chinese media as well.

That's all he said. He didn't say don't believe in the Chinese press. He just basically said question what you read.

[carry anne]

This guy sounds great and isn't it a good thing for RSF to make it more publicized? I like orgs like RSF because they sotof hold people accountable for stuff that might just be secret without them. Now there are lots of blogs to let us know about injustices like this, but I don't see anything to complain about. Mr. Ping wrote a great sortof confession article (superb) and RSF reported on it. SOunds good to me... But clearly I don't know the history that some are complaining on RSF.

About the media in "the west' don't forget that minus a few, they are capitalistic enterprises, not state owned enterprises. They are biased (which is normal because human beings are not robots) probly often and maybe even corrupt.. But it's not quite comparable to CCP media that is the guard dog of the party or the mouthpiece for CCP indoctrination. You can sue them and stuff if you feel it's the right thing to do, but in China, if the media lies about you, forget suing, forget protesting, forget even mentioning it!

[DrSeuss]

DJ, I understand your frustration. The problem with western reporters is not inherent racism or wanting to be biased; the problem is really many of them are kind of out of touch, even clueless, in terms of historical/cultural context and in terms of the sentiments of the average Chinese.

It's like a Chinese newspaper sending a Chinese reporter to the US, with minimum knowledge of English and stays in Chinatown most of the time. The Chinese reporter is unlikely to have an in depth grasp of American society. I see the same thing with western reporters in China.

It calls for dedication and sacrifice to provide truly objective and in depth reporting on China. But these reporters cannot be reporters 24/7. They have families and they have lives outside of work. It's nearly impossible for them to fully grasp a country and a culture so complex without devoting their lives to their jobs and most people cannot afford to or would want to do that.

On top of that, they have deadlines to meet and they are in a for profit business so they need to write things that westerners want to read. At the end, I find many articles on China written by western reporters are really about what westerners want to read rather than what is really going on on the ground in China.

[Jack]

DrSeuss,

I have been in America as an overseas Chinese student for two years, I totally agree that your comments about western reporter are so true.
As I have noticed, most news reports about China here in the US are biased. I believe that there are many reasons behind this practice. One of the reasons of their doing so is that they write reports or comments about China in this way just for satisfying their readers' appetite that has already been biased. Another reason, as far as I can see, is that they do not really know much about China. Freedom of media and speech has given the Western median including the Americans the rights to speak out with apparent biases that most of the poeple do not even realize in their own country. The general public has been brainwashed in this way since they were kids. For example, I read news and listen to radio talk shows here in America that have groudlessly attacking Obama and Clinton, which seems to me so funny.

[shenqh]

In future, Chinese reporters should be educated to focus on reporting from Indian reservations,ghost districts of Phyladephia city, abondoned factories with broken window glasses in Ohio, drug trade in black communities, polygamy in Texa and UT, junk products like sub-prime mortgage from Wall street, gun shooting on campus, sex scandals from Govenors to presidents, ...etc. The Chinese government should hire reporters with many years living experience in western countries.

[Tim J]

I believe some readers have a misunderstanding about the nature of this blog, and perhaps even the larger role of foreign reporters in China. Here’s a little explanation. My postings on this blog are not news articles. They are not thoroughly researched. They do not strive to present a balanced, unbiased view of China or the world. They are simply reflections or tidbits that I find interesting as I go about my work. If you are looking for an unbiased and complete view of China here, you are looking in the wrong place. Actually, that goes for my news articles as well. One person cannot present a complete picture of China. Nor do I strive to. I try to research news topics as thoroughly as I am able. There are constraints of size, time and money. Our newspapers in the United States rarely print articles that are longer than 600 words from China. So while I may file 1,000 words, they don’t usually get published in their entirety. A second point: The Western media is not a worldwide free public utility. What you read on this blog is free to you. But it is not free for my news organization to keep me here in China. So I use the best discerning judgment I have, developed over 30 years in the journalism business, to figure out what might be most interesting to newspaper readers in the 30 markets where we have newspapers, and in the markets where the McClatchy-Tribune News Service has clients. They actually pay for our reports. Another point: Those of you complaining about the Western media are generally Chinese nationals. You pick lines out of stories that don’t please you. But there is a torrent of information coming out of China. Just go to Google News and search “China.” You will be reading all day. Picking what is important is like trying to take a sip of water from a fire hose. If you find certain news outlets that report on China in ways you don’t like, then quit reading them. You have free choice. Read what suits you. And some of you feel foreign correspondents have inadequate knowledge of China, as if we should be weaving history from the Three Kingdoms in our stories. I have reporting colleagues who are historians on China. Two have Ph.Ds. The foreign press corps in Beijing is top notch, in my book. My qualifications are different. I am not a China Hand. But I have traveled to every province in this country except Jiangxi, Hunan and Guangxi. And I’ve spent 25 years of my life outside of my native country. So I bring a certain global perspective to what I do. Take it or leave it.

[shenqh]

I think Tim's last post include me. The point from me is: If Chinese reporters just make the reports as I suggetsed in my previous post, it will certainly give a wrong picture about USA and I believe that the readers in USA will not be happy. There is a general trend for wesetern reporters in China interested more in dark side of China, rather than give a whole picture about China. That is indeed a problem. It is not we Chinese don't know where the dark sides in western socities are. We would rather look things positively and prefer all societies are in harmony.

[heresiarch]

As a westerner, I'd be as quick as anyone to admit that the western media has serious problems. I'd also say that the media in China has plenty of problems. Here's the thing--the problems of one don't magically cancel out the problems of the other. Nor do the flaws in one remove its right to criticize the other. In fact, I think that they SHOULD criticize each other: their problems are quite different, and they can offer a valuable insight into the other's weaknesses. Western media is absolutely right to note the pervasive negative effects stemming from government censorship in China, and the Chinese media is perfectly entitled to point out the unconscious racism that informs so much of the western media's Asian coverage. Demanding that everyone shut up unless they're absolutely perfect doesn't make things better. It just lets the crappiness fester on.

[DrSeuss]

Tim,

I understand your frustration and anger. It is hard to have the very value of ones' work questioned. I should supplement my prior comment a little bit: I believe your work is valuable because it represents a distinct perspective and sometimes it's better for a fresh pair of eyes (or an outsider) to examine an issue. One prime example is Alexis de Tocqueville and his Democracy in America. His insights on American proved to be invaluable although he was only in the country for nine months.

I know the western media have been bearing the brunt of this Chinese counter attack and in many instances have been treated unfairly. But funnily enough, I find parallels between western media bashing and China bashing: the western media are composed of evil imperialist racists and the Chinese are evil democracy haters; the western media is not qualified to comment on China because they do not know China and the Chinese people are not qualified to comment on China because they are brainwashed; western reporters are held at impossible standards whereas the Chinese state media's shortcomings are ignored, China is held at impossible standards whereas certain western countries' shortcomings are given a near free pass. Now I guess we at least know how each side feels when it is being treated unfairly.

The truth is neither side is perfect and each side has its valid points. Let's appeal to our best side, learn from each other and make this world a better place, as difficult as they may be.

[DJ]

Tim Johnson,

I don't see how you have any ground to complain.

"If you find certain news outlets that report on China in ways you don’t like, then quit reading them." Your statement is just as valid as "if you have nothing to hide, why do you care about privacy?" Sounds reasonable at the first glance, but completely wrong.

The irrational anti-China and anti-Chinese sentiment present in the western population is in a significant part fed by the "truthiness" (or propaganda, take your pick) manufactured by various media outlets. And you are expecting us to turn away instead of protesting bias when we see it?

Funny thing is: one of the common talking point in explaining the Chinese reaction in the more recent reporting on China is that Chinese are not good at taking criticism. Are you so assimilated that you are taking on this "trait"?

You may think that you have the experience and good intention to not be a fair target, you are wrong. Your last line in the blog entry on Taiwan 30 million dollar scandal is a perfect example of the attitude and approach so common in the bias/hatred manufacturing business. You may not realize it, but you are a member of it.