China's media cautious on Myanmar By Dinah Gardner
BEIJING - He lies on the ground, one hand on his belly, the other flung out
behind his head clutching a camera. A soldier in baggy khaki and flip flops
points a gun at his prone body. Panicked civilians flee in the background,
chased by more soldiers and baton-wielding police. These are the last moments
of Japanese video journalist Kenji Nagai's life; slain covering Myanmar's mass
pro-democracy protests in Yangon last week. (See
Myanmar's blogs of bloodshed , Asia
Times Online, September 29.)
While Japanese TV showed shocking video footage of the mortally
wounded Nagai and the international press published grainy photos of his body
on the rain-damp street, China's media all but shunned the images.
Guangzhou-based Southern Metropolis News was one of the few mainland papers
that printed photos of a dying Nagai. But even the paper, one of China's
boldest publications, did not dare show the whole photo. The image carried on
their website was carefully cropped to cut out the armed soldier. The fleeing
protesters had been reduced to a couple of sarong-clad legs. Strange editing
indeed - as it removes all context from the image; the fact Nagai died covering
a bloody crackdown of a civilian protest by armed police and troops.
And while a small number of papers did print the uncropped photo – the Beijing
Times, for example, published both versions - the Nanfang Daily's treatment
reflects the country's overall timid media response to the momentous events
that unfolded on its doorstep last week.
Before the violence escalated on September 27, Chinese media coverage of
Myanmar's unrest had been low key. Most reports were buried inside newspapers,
despite the fact these protests attracted tens of thousands of people and were
the biggest demonstrations in the neighboring country for 20 years. The bulk of
coverage was and still is by Xinhua, one of the few news agencies with a Yangon
bureau. On September 25 it reported the protests saying demonstrators carried
banners calling for "an improvement to people's livelihoods, the release of
prisoners and national reconciliation", but made no mention of their demands
for democratic reform.
Most reports carried the bare bones of what was going on, ignored the
protesters, instead quoting Myanmar government sources or official media.
Initially they contradicted reports of a harsh crackdown. "Officials have
consistently exercised restraint in handling these demonstrations and have not
employed force to disperse the demonstrators," the Beijing Youth Daily said on
September 27. TV news more or less ignored the protests.
After the violence kicked off and websites were flooded with photos and video
footage of the brutal crackdown, Chinese media could no longer ignore the
story. While they reported the official death toll, international concern and
calls for restraint they largely continued to ignore or brush over the
demonstrators’ demands, giving more prominence to the junta's official line.
While Western media were quoting Yangon consular sources on possibly much
higher death tolls and human rights organizations on the alleged arrest of
thousands of monks and protesters, the English-language China Daily decided
instead to run a story quoting only Myanmar Foreign Minister U Nyan Win,
blaming the crackdown on "political opportunists" helped by some "powerful
countries".
That theory, that it was villainous forces from outside Myanmar that engineered
the demonstrations, coupled with allegations that Western media had been
exaggerating the situation, started to crop up in the Chinese press.
The Global Times - a tabloid published by the People's Daily group - started
the ball rolling when it sent its reporter to Yangon on September 28. In his
article, translated into English on a Beijing-based blog, Ren Jianmin threw
into question all aspects of Western reports on Myanmar from whether the
country was denying journalists visas - he got in without a problem - to
whether there was any violent crackdown at all. The streets were quiet and
peaceful, he said, yet he arrived at night during a curfew.
"There has still been no believable evidence that the reports of the new
'bloody conflict' by the Western media are true," he wrote, although he did not
bother to quote protesters, locals or overseas consular staff apart from his
driver. He did, however, refer to the state-controlled The New Light of Myanmar
which claimed: "The Voice of America and the BBC have told huge lies." As one
American Beijing-based writer who focuses on Chinese media said: "While the
piece does make some good points about international coverage, those points
could easily have been made from [their bureau in] Beijing."
Even so, Global Times is one of the few Chinese media that has been publishing
more than the dry official speak from Xinhua, points out David Bandurski, a
researcher at the University of Hong Kong's China Media Project. "Global Times
... has had a reporter filing stories regularly from Thailand, much of it
reporting statements from 'foreign' media - the Singapore Straits Times, Thai
papers, Western papers. [It has also] ... paid particular attention to
statements in the West saying China should play a bigger role in resolving the
situation."
But, it has also found academics to quote who throw doubt on the West's motives
in choosing now to interfere in Myanmar affairs. "Burma's [Myanmar's] military
junta has been in government for a number of decades and lately America and
Europe have only been paying attention to Burma because they are interested in
its resources," the Yangon reporter wrote.
A Chinese government source who analyzes international news media said the
issue was too sensitive in China to give it much prominence. "We are very close
to the government in Myanmar," he said. "Media have to be careful how they
report the situation. They don't want to cause problems between the two
countries."
"This is not a big surprise," said Bandurski. "Burma is not just a trade
partner but a political ally and neighbor of China and China has not really
shared with the outside world what its relationship with Burma really is. Some
have said Burma is a puppet regime [of China] and some have said it's
effectively a province of China.
"China is just saying it doesn't want to mess with their internal affairs.
That's just the party line, and when you have a party line like that the media
would really be pushing it to have anything more complex or deeper, different
coverage."
Bandurski adds that if this was a domestic issue it might, ironically, prompt
more media debate. "It's also an issue of foreign policy, an area of greater
sensitivity. If this was something domestic, like a draft law or some other
social issue then it's not so sensitive but since it's foreign policy it falls
into that same category as other off-limits subjects such as religious
movements, superstition, the Falungong."
Perhaps more important for Beijing, though, is that the news of the protests
and their pro-democracy content hits a bit too close to home. The
demonstrations bring back memories of China's own bloody crackdown of democracy
protests in June 1989 and the images of marching monks may prompt fears their
own disgruntled monks in Tibet might also be inspired to make a bid for
freedom. At the best of times, the media would be wary, but with the upcoming
October 15 Party Congress, editors will be even more cautious.
Dinah Gardner is a freelance journalist based in Beijing.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
