Comments on: Viral photos raise heat on Chinese policy

By: Kristin J.

Kristin J. — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 00:22:04 +0000

I don’t want to make a judgment call on the “one child” policy itself. As you point out in your “International Reporting” presentation, media people have to be willing to step outside of the way they see the world personally. What I would like to talk about is China’s media censorship habit.

In an earlier module, you wrote media are a reflection of society, and that people within a society use that reflection to define themselves. For China, the government carefully crafts that reflection. However, the demand for Western media in China increases with their economy, and because of the Western ideals that are tied to that media, the Chinese people are being exposed to values outside of the traditional, collectivist values supported by the Chinese government.

Vivian wrote about how China is known for its unprecedented, pre-publication censorship. As its economy grows, and its middle class and the people who have access to the internet continue to increase, and people start to internalize some of the individualistic ideals that are embedded in the Western media they are consuming, the Chinese government is going to have to rethink its censorship policies, or at least its approach to censorship. Modern China is fighting against a world media that, as the Finnish president points out, is exceedingly Western. It will be interesting to see how traditionalist China manages its younger, predominately-male population, especially in relation to how those people use world media to define who they are as individuals and as a society.

By: Justin Heavenridge

Justin Heavenridge — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 22:08:36 +0000

Basic math tells us that if every two people have only one child, the population of a country shrinks by half for each generation. Moral concerns aside, it is clear that a policy such as this is not in any way sustainable or healthy. This becomes even more true when gender preferences are taken into consideration.

What is interesting here is how the power of a viral web video overcame the censorship of the Chinese government. According to Willis, in an authoritarian model “the media should exist to support and advance the policies of the government in power and help stabilize the society in the way the ruling powers feel it should be stabilized.” This means that the traditional media was unable to report about this issue, and in the past it probably would have gone unnoticed. Today however, social and online media does not rely on traditional media sources and has the ability to reach large audiences without the approval of the regime in power. As this trend continues, I believe authoritarian regimes will be faced with rough waters going forward, being forced to make dramatic decisions to either stop access to the web entirely or censor it the extreme. Both scenarios are likely to cause public unrest.

By: Whitney Moorman

Whitney Moorman — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 05:05:05 +0000

This is absolutely a horrendous practice by the Chinese government. John Vivian also wrote, “Authoritarian controls can have short-term effectiveness, but truth is hard to suppress for very long.” This is more true than ever today, as the above blog shows, because of the Internet. If the Internet did not exist, would this poor woman’s story have ever been told? Probably not. At least, not to a mass audience. But because of Internet capabilities and media that allow users to tell the story, the truth is being heard. Not only is the truth being heard, but it’s influencing what could be very positive change for a large number of people.

Unfortunately, the Internet is the only tool and the only hope some people, especially those in developing countries, have to hold public officials (like the Chinese government) accountable. In a recent World Press Freedom Day discussion on Social Media (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boppf034528) a keynote speaker from Vietnam noted that the Internet has afforded Vietnamese citizens similar opportunities. “The government can’t control 100 percent of the Internet,” he said. For that reason, he and others have launched a 24/7 Internet radio show that allows them to avoid censorship and encourage fellow citizens to stand up for their own basic human rights.

The Internet is a true platform for truth–and freedom of the press. Accordingly, so is the individual, rather than a gatekeeping or censored reporter.

By: Ashley

Ashley — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 01:36:25 +0000

I find this story deeply saddening. Following a frustrating and turbulent election season, it can be all too easy to wish things were different in the U.S., but stories like this remind me that people in other parts of the world face much bigger issues than a gridlocked Congress and women’s rights.

I think John Vivian put it best when he said, “China’s emergence as a global economic power hinges in part on its ability to tightly control mass media. Government policy is to let nothing interfere with the stability necessary for the nation’s economic engine to remain in high gear.” I might even go one step further and say China’s control isn’t limited to just media; rather, the Chinese government claims control of even the most basic human experiences, like parenting children. I know the Chinese government is committed to being an economic powerhouse, which is certainly a laudable goal, and the country was worried about the population boom of the 1950s. But what is the cost of China’s interference?

As John Milton said “Let Truth and Falsehood grapple: whoever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter.” That is, without a free exchange in the marketplace of ideas, something China is almost too afraid to let happen, the society must settle for bad ideas because they aren’t allowed to think anything else. While I can understand the government’s fear of loosening control, I also think they need to let the citizens live their lives and have their children.