Angry Chinese Blogger

Angry Chinese Blogger: The news and views about China that the big media can't, or won't, tell you

The is no single truth

Menu: Home

When Censorship Bites Back

« H E News and Politics :: Human rights and personal freedoms :: News and Perspectives :: email
posted Monday, 11 June 2007

When it comes to the messy task of covering up events in a country's history that governments would rather you not know about, it is generally agreed that there are two ways to go about it.

1) Attempt to twist events into to more favorable form
2) Deny everything

As can be observed from China's history books, which state categorically that very little happened over the last 50 or so year, particularly during periods in which China's population dropped sharply, Beijing has a tendency toward option number 2. If it's embarrassing or humiliation, and especially if it is illuminating, then it simple didn't happen.

Unfortunately, it for Beijing, it would seem that some of its efforts have been a little too successful, as was evident early last week when officials at a Mainland newspaper failed to censor references to one of the most controversial events in modern Chinese history on the grounds that individual responsible for screening a particular section of the paper was utterly unaware of the events significance.

Cheng-don't

According to reports, an unidentified man approached staff at the Chengdu Evening News and asked them to print a personal message offering tribute and condolences to the mothers of victims of the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre.

Under normal practices, the message would have been refused permission to appear in the newspaper and the man would have been reported to the police. However, the individual in charge of that section of the newspaper had not been taught about the Massacre, or exposed to information about it from other sources, and was thus unaware of the significance of the message. Resulting in it appearing in the paper on Monday 4 June, the 18th anniversary of the massacre. Humiliating the both the Chinese government and the editorial staff of the paper.

Policy

It is current Chinese state policy to exclude references to the Tiananmen Square Massacre from official accounts of history and to preclude it from being referenced in both printed publications and the wider media. Acknowledgment of the Massacre in any way is forbid, as is discussion of the events which lead up to it and its aftermath.

It is also state policy to prohibit discussion of the reasons why it is prohibited to discuss the Massacre.

Tiananmen Square

The Tiananmen Square Massacre is the name given to the brutal crackdown which ended the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest. In it an unknown number of civilians were massacred by the Chinese military on the orders of the Chinese government; who feared that they were loosing control over the masses.

Estimates of the casualties vary. According to the Chinese government there were 200-300 deaths, many of which Beijing claims were soldiers. The Chinese Red-Cross put the number at between 2600 and 5000. Accounts by neutral foreign journalists and observers often put the number at between 400 and 800. Other sources, including Soviet and NATO intelligence reports of the period, put the number in excess of 6000. The true figure is unlikely to ever be know.

tags:        

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit


View Comments/Add a Comment (2)


1. Dixon Webb left...
Wednesday, 13 June 2007 1:13 am

My friend, you have a great blog.

I am interested in China for several reasons. The overwhelming number of people in China (and India), no matter their circumstances at the moment, will one day have the power to control much of what happens in the world. It is inevitable. Both countries have just reached the edge of their "industrical revolution". Both have begun to slowly rise from comparative poverty and started to excersize their economic entrance into world markets.

In China the government is being forced to change from devout communism to a more capital intense economy. The idea that all proceeds from citizens must go to the government in order for the government to disperse the proceeds back to the citizens in a fair and equitable distribution, has been rather forcefully proven to lead to economic disaster. In the long run communism and socialism just doesn't work. Therefore it can be surmised that China will slowly evolve into a modified combination of socialism and capitalism combined. Thiis, in turn, will most likely result in a government that is more sensitive to the needs of the governed, a government that firmly controls the greed that is part of a capitalistic system, and a government that is more open and active in the family of nations around the world.

While others, particularly Americans, are concerned that China represents a growing threat, in reality the emerging NEW China is an economic powerhouse that promises to be a factor in the economies of all nations - and at the same time, with the proper humanitarian based, rapidly changing government structure, China has the potential to be a tremendous influence for "good" in the world, and America's best partner in keeping the peace.

This has become a long 'comment' and I apologize. It wouild be interesting if any of my views coincide with yours?

Dixon


2. ACB left...
Wednesday, 13 June 2007 3:20 am

When you get right down to it, America traditionally labels any form of competition over power, influence or money as being a threat. You need to be able to read between the lines in order to figure out exactly what America's problem with China is.

When America calls China a military threat it doesn't mean that China is threatening America physically. What it actually means is that China is threatening America's ability to dominate the Pacific. It's the same with economics, politics and genetics. America isn't really referring to an actual threat, but rather a redressing of the balance as China reaches the stage where people will buy its gods rather than American goods, will look to China as a power brocker rather than America, and that Chinese breed faster that whites when living overseas.