CNN statement on Tibet coverage

See CNN statement on Tibet coverage

A Chinese translation (together with critique) is here.

Seems cnn has some blood sucking over-priced lawyer to write this. It basically dodged its previous defense and dropped the "car on fire" excuse. Now it simply said "The one image in question was used wholly appropriately in the specific editorial context and there could be no confusion regarding what it was showing"

To defend the fact that it chose some particuler side of opinions and points of views it concluded its statement with "CNN's reputation is based on reporting global news accurately and impartially, while our coverage through the use of words, images or video always reflects a wide range of opinions and points of view on every story."

:) :) :)

Here I would quote a few comments on that Chinese translated page (this site, despite its name which suggests 'patriotism and military related theme' has mainly rational and educated members)

• 其实CNN最开始如果表达：自己是因为适应版面而进行的裁减，对引起的误解表示遗憾，并把照片更换既没有做太大的退让，也不会有这么大的波澜。还可以顺便说说自己播了多少国人”喜欢“的镜头。现在它在中国人心目中位置降低，咎由自取。它的公共关系部门应该好好检讨一下......我们的宣传部门也要引以为戒


• 俺代表中国共产党中央委员会、中宣部、CCTV，对CNN的傻瓜们表示衷心的感谢。是你们让我们树立了信心，知道了这个世界上没有最差，只有更差。让大家都站到了党中央一边，这可是对党中央的最大鼓舞和最直接帮助，这里要再次感谢CNN。俺要授予CNN的各位以三八红旗手、五四奖章、青年文明号、新长征突击手、优秀共产党员…荣誉称号。谢谢大家！！

Related:
MSM biase in the West - and the cnn refutal
做人不能太CNN

Bonus: an 'anti-cnn' poster I found in that Chinese webpage. Pretty creative.

Engagement in Korea

A very interesting discussion in NKZone, a blog on North Korea (DPRK), on the recent visit of New York Philharmonic.

It quoted Andrei Lankov's view

• Hardline critics may be right that North Korean officials will portray these visits as a foreigners' tribute to their "Dear Leader". However, one should not overestimate the efficiency of this propaganda. I grew up in the Soviet Union in the 1970s and officially approved cultural and academic exchanges were a critical source of information about life overseas and helped arouse serious doubts about the communist system.

Professor Lankov's comment is consistent and supported by everything I heard from the Chinese in the 1970s. e.g., the visit of Nixon, Ping-pong diplomacy, opened their eyes to the west, and paved way for Deng's reform which followed. Even though, as Lankov correctly pointed out, Mao was still in power and Deng in the village at the time.

China vs USA

Here is an interesting comparison from a Lithuanian "Guy" in China, in the comment field of a blog I stumbled upon.

• Hello Nick,
  I’m Lithuanian. I lived for a fairly long time in the US (Minnesota and Massachusetts) and now I live in China.
  The similarities between the two countries are downright scary. (Especially visible here in the American-inspired, newly-built, fast-living city of Shenzhen.)
  1) Large-scale economic migration (though Americans don’t call that half of their nation that changes house every two years “migrant workers”, that’s basically what they are).
  2) Over-reliance on trucks and cars (though the Chinese seem to be getting a little, just a little smarter with their railways). Governments of both countries arguably care little about the environment.
  3) Cultural insularity - near impossible to make a friend in China without speaking some dialect of Chinese (preferably putonghua). And you just try to live in the US without speaking English… Beyond language, both nations tend to view themselves as, ahem, simply superior. (Because by and large, both have ill-defined inferiority complexes. Americans are often defensive when they compare themselves with Europe, and the Chinese… with America - )
  4) Both the US and China have bafflingly large populations immune to reason. I won’t say anything about the US apart from reminding you to read Nick’s previous editorial. China: just think that most Chinese are not even aware there is censorship in their country. Just… wow.
  5) Lack of social safety nets. Culture of fear quite visible in both countries (though for vastly different reasons). Health care and pensions (I mean mostly lack thereof) give headaches to both Chinese and Americans.
  6) Geographic size. The surface of China is almost precisely that of America (though the landscape is hugely different).
  7) Gated communities for the rich. (And in China, increasingly, the middle class - which is of course vastly richer than the people living on under a dollar a day.) Oh, the joys of life behind armed guards!
  8) Patriotism, support for the army. The Chinese think their army is, ahem, “pure”. I am kidding you not, this is the word they most often use to describe the PLA. Pure.
  As to America, a more flag-waving country there will never be.
  9) Cut-throat capitalism. (Though to be honest the Chinese labor market is similar to the one America had in the 19th century… not now.)
  10) Astounding hypocrisy with regard to sex and mores in both countries. For instance, both the Americans and the Chinese are too virtuous to gamble, that’s why the first only do it in Indian reservations and on rivers, and the second in Macau I won’t even talk about sex ed (Though, again, the US is subject to strong regional variations and China’s cities are light-years away from the hinterlands).
  And lest you think I am a sour European:
  11) People from both nations tend to be hospitable and quite sweet. All you need to do is shout “China is the best”! or “USA no 1″! and you are treated to endless rounds of beer or bai jiu! Then business is going very, very well - it’s amazing!
  I find both nations endlessly and hopelessly and equally weird, but I’m quite fond of both… and their quaint little ways.
  kind regards,a Lithuanian
  — Posted by Guy in China

As for the owner of that blog, this is part of his resume, "...He's also one of the very few Americans to be at least a two-time visitor to every member of the Axis of Evil. ..." Huh? Axis of Evil? :)

Anyway, here is my take

1. Migration in US is perhaps because it is a 'big' country; for China, a bit articificial/temperal because of the economic special zone (the average distance of migration has significantly shortened in the last few years, when the Sichuan girl is not able to find work in Chengdu, instead of Shenzhen, resulting in (cheap) labour shortage in the sweatshops in Guangdong
2. May I also add mega-stores (Wal-marts!) on top of car
3. "insularity" is common to 'big' countries, I guess. But I am sure there is more Chinese who speak English than American who speak Chinese :)
4. True. Though I would like to argue that it is unfair to use total number as a measure. Perhaps in terms of % population they are on par with the Lithuanians
5. Hmm... social safety net. Nice observation. I know this but never really make the comparison. Perhaps this is related to #9 below
6. China = dry + dry + wet; USA = wet + dry + wet. Geographically, USA is like China with an Ocean to its west, hence twice as much of arable land
7. I saw walled community in Shanghai. But urban China is a much much safer place than the US (Inner city, I mean)
8. Agree
9. Couldn't agree more. They are both the most capitalistic countries in this world
10. This one is even nicer observation. Chinese gamble in Las Vegas and American find sex in Shanghai!

Postmortem of Taiwan election

Just as I had thought, according to Ma's aide Su Junbin (English translated by ESWN)

• The extremist/fundamentalist (i.e deep greeen and deep blue) had already made up their mind. It was the moderates who were swayed. Actually, not just be swayed into voting, but also into NOT voting
• 苏俊宾：我们的支持率其实没有上升，因为讨厌庄国荣的人本来就支持我们，他讲了更令人讨厌的话，对我们来讲没有任何帮助。
  南都：也就是说，庄国荣事件没有对选举造成任何影响。
  苏俊宾：有。我们的支持率没有上升，但他们（长昌配）的支持率掉了两个百分点，连绿营的基本盘都有2%看不过去。长昌配的支持率都已经很低了，再掉两个百分点是雪上加霜。所以，庄国荣事件对我们来讲，最大的效果并不是攻城略地，而是守住城池，使他们没办法步步进攻。所以庄国荣有一定的贡献，应该颁“华夏奖章”给他。
• Q. Six days before the election, Ministry of Education Secretary-General Chuang Kuo-jung used foul language at a Hsieh-Su rally. Even the normally intransigent Hsieh-Su campaign headquarters issued an apology. The media believed that this incident affected the Hsieh-Su campaign. After the election, certain pan-green voters thought that Chung Kuo-jung and Chen Shui-bian were the culprits for the election loss. According to the KMT internal polls, how many percentage points did Ma-Siew get as a result of Chung Kuo-jung?
• A. Our support level did not rise, because all those who detest Chuang Kuo-jung are our supporters already. Even if he said something worse, it would not have helped us.
• Q. That is to say, the Chuang Kuo-jung affair had no impact?
• A. There was an impact. While our support level did not rise, the Hsieh-Su support level fell by 2% because even the greens found it intolerable. The Hsieh-Su support level was low to begin with, and this made it even lower. The Chuang Kuo-jung enabled us to defend our territory and ensure that they cannot attack us. Therefore, Chuang Kuo-jung made a contribution.
• It was the economy, stupid. And it was the China market that matters the economy, stupid!
• “民进党过去八年来的两岸政策是封锁的，它没有办法解决中层的问题，导致台湾没有办法跟韩国、日本、新加坡去竞争，它们跟大陆的经贸是正常的，我们则是有重重限制的。在这样的前提下，我们当然想改变。所以我们的一个议题抵得上他们20个议题，最后从选票也可以反映出来。”
• DPP was caught with surprise and become inconsistent at Ma's reaction to Tibet. When you got inconsistent and put aside your values and your principles at an all out offense, you lose (take heed, pan-Dem in HK!)
• 过去民进党政府抵制奥运圣火到台，民视、三立电视台等亲绿的媒体都拍手鼓励。TVBS跟其他的媒体则讲：政治归政治，体育归体育。但是这次马英九发表声明之后，三立电视台就错乱了，他们开始讲“政治归政治，体育归体育”了
• 所以那天很有意思的，过去民进党政府抵制奥运圣火到台，民视、三立电视台等亲绿的媒体都拍手鼓励。TVBS跟其他的媒体则讲：政治归政治，体育归体育。但是这次马英九发表声明之后，三立电视台就错乱了，他们开始讲“政治归政治，体育归体育”了。当你听到民进党和亲绿的媒体也在讲“体育跟政治分离”的时候，你就知道他们无法操弄“统独”意识了。我们把它逼到理性那里，有什么不好？我们把它逼回正轨，它就无法操纵了。选举最怕什么？最怕情感。投票是个感情的动作，是个情绪的动作。而现在，它要挑战我们，它必须理性。在这种情况之下，很简单就达到了我们想要的效果。

Good lesson for HK. Particularly the last point.

The Tibet mystery - updated

Read this WaPo story. The conspiracy theorists tried to extract information from this as well.

I had been pondering about this, pundita spelled out most the mysteries I had been trying to write (though I do not necessarily agree with his theory) (update: now pudita has more conspiracy theories out. IMHO he is pushing it too far. ESWN has a post that refuted some of the 'evidence'/'photo' he quoted. see below for more (in red fonts))

• There's just one problem with those images: they don't document the protest marches in Lhasa that took place on March 10 and 11, and yet those were the key protests -- the biggest in almost 20 years in Tibet.


• But when it came to reporting on the peaceful attempt to march on March 10 and a smaller attempt on the next day, news organizations and websites outside Tibet had to rely on anecdotes. The wording used by Reuters news and the Phayul Tibetan website to describe the attempts at peaceful protest marches is typical of the game of blind man's bluff that news organizations were forced to play: "Radio Free Asia cited a source as saying..." "According to sources within Tibet..."(8)(9)


• But if activists inside and outside Tibet had years to prepare for a historic protest march in Lhasa, and if the monks had been waiting almost 20 years to stage a mass protest, where was the network to record the attempted march and the inevitable crackdown by the authorities?

-- via ESWN

Pundita, refuting many of the wild guess/speculation/conspiracy theories, reached his own conclusion, which seems quite plausible (and if that is true, Hu has really mastered the media war against the D.L./TYL 'clique')

• So, following Ruan's attempt to explain how Hu done it is very frustrating, yet this doesn't mean the gist of his accusation is wrong. There is still not much to go on, but from the mosaics available so far, a highly suspicious pattern has emerged:


• Draconian measures were used to halt all peaceful demonstrations by the Tibetan monks in Lhasa, while no measures were taken to halt Tibetan rioting against Lhasa's Han Chinese and Hui Muslims -- not until after the rioting was clearly fizzling out and widespread damage had been done to Han businesses.And unlike Ruan,


• I think there is indication to suggest that the "spontaneous expressions of resentment" in Lhasa got big help. The same kind of help made famous by Soviet Communist Party bosses under orders from Moscow to turn East European democracy marches into deadly mob violence

My take is that there is some truth in this, but seems too seamless. I highly doubt if Hu (or his incompetent bureacrats in Tibet) can engineer such a complicated 'coup'. Much more likely, though, is that things happened, and went out of control, there was not sufficient police force, there are some militants/planned among the Tibetans, and when Hu/etc saw the riot going bad, they decided to let it on its own path for a while (knowing this presents a golden chance to win the media war), while waiting for reinforcement to ensure they won't have to fire in the crack down.

A variation to this may be some under-cover may have discovered certain faction with the "general clique" are planning something. Hu/etc then decided to give them a free hand (while confining the monks in Jokhang). The Ruan story is not credible. Ruan comes from the C-C.P himself, these people are not very rigorous when it comes to claims and rumours. You may remember there have been wide-spread rumours about army mutiny in Sixth month of 19-8-9. In fact, perhaps 99 out of 100 rumours from the ex-C-C.P informants turn out to be false.

This is why I advocate the government to pay full compensation to the victims, and what I meany by "毕竟国家在那两天与蔵= 独势力的公关战中选择了牺牲他们" (Update: China took the heed)

---

More comments about Pundita

• Pundita also claimed the the notorious ET was among the "first" to report SARS in 2003, he wa TOTALLY wrong. I was in HK then, HK media reported that at least a few weeks prior to ET. ET just recycled it
• Regarding the PAP around the temples prior to March 14. IT was quite clear that they tried to confine the monks there, perhaps believin they were the leaders and confining the leaders means the stopping the mob, largely. What they did not expect is that there are more monks, from elsewhere (or some of the major temple monks were outside). The stories of the Johkang monks told the western reporters last week are consistent with this explanation
• The line of police blocked has been photoed and reported by Kadfly long ago
• White scarfs were needed to identify the shops/houses. The mob includes some Tibetans from outside Tibet for sure. Even Tibetans in Lhasa are not able to remember every single shop especially when they pulled down the gates. Pundita himself became a conspiracy theorist when he made that scarf 'expalnation' (our views diverge from that post)


• Finally, if C-C.P really want to 'stage' this. All it needs to do is to arrest a few monks, spread some rumours to incite discontent. It does not need to go into such 'conspiracy' length, assuming such degree of widespread discontent among the mob. On the other hand, if there is no such discontent, do you really believe a few agents can create such a scene?

Having said all these, if one believes in the (indirect) account from WaPo and the Phoenix TV reporter Chen Lin, then there were indeed someone who organized the riot (it was not "spontaneous). And these people are Tibetans from outside Lhasa. Though it is unclear whether they are exile Tibetan, or Tibetans from the countryside, or C-C.P spies in disguise.

Mysterious symbols on most of the burnt shops in Lhasa (source: Chen Lin's blog)

Youtube shooting its own feet

Not sure if this is related to the T-related media war, youtube has disabled search by rating or by view count. (some commentators say it is about artificial view counts of those scientology mockers, others said it is the big "do evil" google strategy of controlling the way we search with their critera, i.e."relevance" )


But here are the temporary fixes, as youtube will soon close these loopholes. Longer term fix should be to bring competition to youtube, tudou/etc are well positioned to take this role, unfortunately the PRC censorship means they have to forgo this golden opportunity.

• 1) ***MOST VIEWED****
  To Search by MOST VIEWED, SAVE THIS BOOKMARK and REPLACE the word "KEYWORDS" with your search term (i have inserted a 'return' to make them appear on the blog:
  http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=[KEYWORDS]
  &search_sort=video_most_viewed
  
  2) ***BY DATE ADDED/MOST RECENT****
  To Search by DATE ADDED, SAVE THIS BOOKMARK, and REPLACE THE WORD "KEYWORDS" with your search term:
  http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=[KEYWORDS]
  &search_sort=video_date_uploaded
  
  3) ***BY VIEW COUNT****(diff than most viewed)
  To Search by VIEW COUNT, SAVE THIS BOOKMARK, and REPLACE the word "KEYWORDS" with your search term:
  http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=[KEYWORDS]
  &search_sort=video_view_count
  

Thank you Mr Tusk, we have one more ticket!

1) It was said that the Olympic principle is for the people, not politics. Yet many politicians were invited to attend the Olympics. This is against the Olympic principle

2) A few western politicians are talking about not attending the Olympic, for whatever reason (Tibet, human right, anti-China, anti-C.C-P, or anti-Chinese people, pick one). Polish Premier Donald Tusk is the first one of them, though it is unclear if there is follower. (Czech Havel is also not going, for "personal reason")

3) I am glad that Mr Tusk is not going. Because, after all, he should not have been there. Nor should any of these politicians, western or Chinese. Their coming have made the Olympic opening ceremony such a scarce commodity, expensive and impossible to buy

4) Their absence will leave the tickets available to the people, Chinese or foreigner, which are what the Olympic is truly for

5) The Chinese goverment should not have sent out teh invitation for these politicians from the outset. The Olypmpic committtees of various countries should have reserved the tickets for the people, not their own politicians

Finally, since the Ollympic is for the people of the world. And that this year China (as a country) is hosting it. The chinese people (at least the overwhelming majority) believe they are hosting it. The government is organising it. So if you have issue with the government (so do we the people), take it up with it, and do not send your politicians there. Fine with us.
But the people, the shop owners, taxi drviers, average citizens believe they are the hosts themselves, as far as we can hear from the street. So boycotting the Olympic is also boycotting the Chinese people, not just the governement (which are different concepts).

However, it is consistent with the Olympic that politicians should be left out of the Olympic. So thank you Mr. Tusk, for leaving your dirty politics out of the Olympic, and leaving one more tickets to us tourists.

Maps: Qing dynasty and other old maps

See more in this blog. The blogger used these maps to show that Tibet was part of the Qing Empire (to counter claims that it was independent all the time before 1951).

IMHO all these history talks are trite. To us geographers (with better knowledge in history) we are more interested in these old maps themselves.

Meanwhile, here is a full collection on Harvard Yenching Publication on old China maps. There is a 1939 map published in Japan, where Manchukuo, Mongolia and Tuva were independent, while Tibet was labeled part of China. (Apparently Japan did not recognize USSR's annexation of Tuva)

Youtube unblocked but strong filter is still on

Well, yes, many sites were unblocked here in China. I believe it is mainly because the situatiuon has "stabilized". But the strong filters on keywords such as "T\bet" are still on.

As a result, even videos on youtubes such as videos such as "Riot in T/bet: True face of Western media" and "T/bet Was, Is and Always Will be a Part of China" are still blocked. Because they contain the "keyword".

What this means is that the theory (as reported/hinted by many bloggers and MSM) that the unblocking of youtube was related to these 2 videos are without base. So far the only site that has managed to pass the strong filter test is anti-cnn.com (which was still blocked some 30 hours ago by the strong filter). The nanny has been very selective.

Light reading: how KMT lost the previous election

Q: How did KMT lose the previous election in 2004?



A: Because some of its supporters used their personal seals to chop vote!

The "Greatest Beaty" in the "Greater China" is not alone, an influential writer (MYJ had to answer her question about setting example for 6 year old in his winning speech on Saturday) implied she did the same, and probably four years ago as well. Our Greatest Beauty also told the press that a few of her friends also made the same mistake. Plus another actress Chang Ting, and some others, all pan-blue voters.

(UDN alleged our GB probably did the right thing 4 years ago, but he personal seal might have been a round one then -- she said she carries 3 seals with her)