Matt Schiavenza From the Dragon to the Apple- A Sinophile in New York

China and Western Media Bias

Writing in the Guardian, Timothy Garton Ash makes an important point about international media coverage of China:

Hard though many Chinese may find this to believe, since their own media reflect the policy of their party-state, western governments have almost nothing to do with it. The main cause lies in the economics and professional dynamics of the west's commercial news business, which is going through one of those "gales of creative destruction" that Joseph Schumpeter saw to be characteristic of capitalism.

As they compete fiercely for readers and viewers, mainstream western media tend to stick with a few stories that are familiar and interesting to them. They report so much about Tibet not because they are ideological China-bashers but because their consumers are fascinated by and care about Tibet. Yes, their news stories on China's domestic politics tend to the sensational and the negative - so do their stories about the domestic politics of their own countries. Those who edit and select these stories are just following the market-oriented rules of their trade. If it bleeds, it leads. Knocking copy is selling copy. Good news is no news. "Many Chinese city dwellers moderately content with rising standard of living" is not a headline that would sell many papers.

(Emphasis mine)

Blogger and historian Jeremiah Jenne, writing in the new Global Times, adds:

And while accusations of professional journalists coming here to blatantly push an agenda is (mostly) paranoid hogwash, I do think that there is a tendency to let preconceived notions dictate how certain stories are covered, and this is obviously a problem. It would also be naive not to also discuss the role market forces play in the decision to run articles on certain topics at the expense of others.

Both points are correct, I think. Bad reporting about China typically derives from laziness, sloppiness, or lack of access- not a deep anti-China racial animus in the hearts of the reporters themselves. The narratives that emanate from foreign reports in China are sensationalistic because, as Gash points out, these narratives sell.

In countries which possess free, private sources of media, these sources compete for scarce readers and advertising revenue. In China, the interests of media are subordinate to the interests of state power. As a result, criticisms of the state in the Chinese media are virtually unheard of.

Therefore, the only criticisms a Chinese person may hear of his own government comes from foreign sources. As people typically dislike hearing foreign critiques of their country, a common defense is the biased shortcoming of the critics themselves. It is far easier for a Chinese person to claim "they hate China and want us to fail!" than it is to confront the issue that the Beijing regime often exhibits barbaric and brutal behavior.

In the United States, conservative Republicans shriek "liberal bias!" as an explanation for why their ideas do not have greater currency among the electorate-at-large. As with the nationalist Chinese brigades, this prevents them from making the difficult decision to confront their own ideas and understand why others disagree with them.

In terms of watching the Chinese media, it is important to distinguish between reporting that is actually biased- of which there is some- from reporting that merely reflects the nature of the business.

UPDATE: Link for the Guardian piece added.