Chinese censors ban book "In Australia"

Almost since the day that it became a global manufacturing hub one particular quirk has been observed about China: "You can have just about anything made in China, so long as it is for export."

Banned on the Mainland?

Indeed, while Beijing has long kept a tight leash on what is and isn't sold within China's border, and has banned stores from selling anything and everything that goes against the official state line on society, history, and politics, it has long been China's unofficial policy that any fee paying foreigner can have their wares produced in a Chinese factory on the understanding that whatever is produced waves good by to the Mainland at the docks without lingering any longer than is necessary, and so long as they don't return at a later date to cause trouble.

As such, China is a leading manufacturer of DVDs that are banned in China, a leading publisher of books that are banned in China, and is something interesting on the radar as far as games that are banned in China is concerned, too. All but the most provocative of produce has passed through China and into the waiting arms of foreign consumers with nary a whisper.

Up until recently, that is.

Banned Overseas?

Owing to the above, officials at the University of New South Wales Press were somewhat surprised to receive notification from a Guandong based telling them that their latest book would not be hitting the shelves as expected.

According to the publishers, government officials had reviewed the book and refused it export papers on the grounds that it 'violated China's sovereignty'.


The Book?

The book in question was "Putting Queensland On The Map" by Felicity Jack, and contained an account of the life and times of the author's great grandfather, 19th century geologist Robert Logan Jack.

While the book itself was non-political, and covered a period of China's history significantly prior to the communist takeover: The coverage of which is considered to be extremely sensitive by Beijing and is thus often censored, "Putting Queensland on the <ap" was none-the-less deemed to be inappropriate for export by Chinese officials on the grounds that it revealed that China and Tibet have a 'shared border': A border that separates them as two divisible states. This contradicts the official Mainland state line: That China and Tibet have a 'mutual border'. This being a border that China and Tibet - a single indivisible country - share with a second country.


Despite there being only a single reference to the Sino-Tibetan border, it was sufficient for export papers to be refused. Subsequent attempts to negotiate with the publisher did not make any meaningful headway.

A Matter of Course?

Despite claims to the contrary, it is common for Beijing to make censorship demands on audio and visual media that is sold within China. With both domestic and foreign products commonly having to be released as altered 'China editions' before they can receive state sanction.

Examples of this include computer games where campaign maps have to be change to remove the border between Tibet and China or where Taiwanese sports teams have to use the pseudonym Chinese-Taipei, rather than their own national identities, books where references to Tibet and China as divisible entities have to be removed, and overseas Chinese films which have been edited so as to recast villains from the Mainland as being foreigners from other Asian countries.

In many cases Beijing, or individual publishers/printers will negotiate with the Intellectual Property owners prior to making the changes. However there have been multiple instances where works have been censored without their IPR owners having been consulted. Most of the later cases have occurred during a works translation into Chinese.

A Notable Instance?

Though rare - rather than unique - the UNSW case is has none-the-less attracted China Watchers attention because it involves book that is not significantly about China, which is written in foreign language, and which was destined for a foreign market.

Most previous bans placed on foreign books have involved those which are significantly about China (If China is taken to mean Mainland China, Tibet, Chinese-Taiwan, Hong Kong or East Turkestan/XinJiang) and/or written in Chinese. Other's have generally involved books intended for consumption by foreigners living in China. For example, the banning of supplementary Japanese school textbooks, intended for use in a Japanese international school, on the grounds that it contained maps that used a slightly different form of shading/cross hatching to identify Mainland China and Chinese-Taiwan.

A Matter of Attitude?

While most foreign publisher and authors see Beijing's censorship demands as being an undue interference, and resent being told deliberately introduce factual errors into their work, such measures are widely accepted in China where the prevailing attitude is that the current state line represents the true state of the world, and that any changes made in the state line on history, society or politics represent a 'change of understanding', rather than the rewriting, of events.


Concerns?

Although it is too early to tell whether or not this represents a formal toughening of the Mainland's stance,  China Watchers have voiced concern over the publication refusal and it's potential to become a more persistent trend as China becomes more nationalist.

On paper, Western companies can choose to take their work elsewhere if they can not get it printed in China. In the case of UNSW this meant engaging the services of a printer in Thailand. However, not all Western companies can afford to do this. Especially not if they have a standing contract with a Chinese printer and cannot go elsewhere due to time or financial constraints, or if they are part of a joint venture and have a stake in said printer.

Owing to this, some China watchers have queries how many Western companies/authors will go elsewhere, and how many will censor their books in order to get them printed?

For many publishing houses this will not be an issue. They will go elsewhere, either out of principle, or out of a contractual obligation not to edit a work. However, other publishing houses, particularly the smaller houses, may see it as being easier and cheaper to censor their works. Particularly if Beijing demands only small - non-critical - changes. Such as the modification of couple of lines of text or the removal of a "troublesome" word or phrase.

While small per individual publication, China Watchers voice that such censorship would serve to add to the overall air of 'sanitization' that currently exist in both China and the West. Where 'troublesome' issues are commonly airbrushed out, or softened due to comercial interests or for political reasons/due to political correctness. Thus leading to a general environment of ignorance in which people become so used not to seeing something, or seeing a softened version of it, that it they either come to believe the softened version is the correct version, and do not come to see things that are issues as being issues.

tags: human rights  censorship  book banning  press freedom  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit