nick’s (n)-line life

It is well known that China has a rather limited interpretation of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The TV stations have a tendency to “edit” their footage to ensure favourable reports. Expat friends have told me that newspapers have, urm, “misquoted” them on a number of occasions. Having given an interview for a local stations myself, I note that the questions which received an answer they did not like led to the question being asked again after “prompting” (presumably to obtain more “suitable” responses).

Hong Kong, however, has never been burdened by the same problems that have affected the mainland. In my personal experience I’ve found people quite willing to have conversations that would be quite risqué in other parts of China. Of course there have been a few transgressions against the constitutional arrangements put in place by the British on handover; a perfect example would be the dilution of the elected legislative council with non-elected Beijing representatives; but on the whole things have generally been kept in a pretty stable state and these arrangements have been upheld.

However, the recent arrest of Ching Cheong (22nd April 2005) is extremely worrying and is the second arrest of a foreign journalist this year. Furthermore, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, there are 42 journalists sitting in Chinese jails today. In the words of the Christopher Warren, the president of the International Federation of Journalism“The latest crackdown by Chinese authorities on foreign journalists and media outlets is indicative of their systematic policy of silencing the media…”. In the past the policy has been to leave foreign journalists alone. I’m sure the government was heavily influenced by Ching Cheong’s Hong Kong nationality, feeling that they could act with impunity towards their own nationals.

The government statements indicate the his wife had supported the detention (does anyone seriously believe this?) but other sources quote her as saying that the government set up the journalist. Furthermore the government claims that the journalist has admitted the charges but reports abroad are heavily suggesting the opposite.

The concern now is that the government will respond with negativity towards the international criticism of their actions on this issue After all they have lost face. During the SARS crisis China lost a lot of face on the international front when it obscured the true extent of the crisis by moving suspects cases out of hospitals and into private hotels (and in so doing further risking the spread of infection). In that instance the government was more embarrassed than hostile but in this instance the xenophobic government may well respond far less favourably if it feels that its sovereignty is being impinged or threatened.

I can’t help but feel that the government’s decision earlier this year to allowed the filming and airing of BBC Question Time from Shanghai as part of China Week (which was, for the first time, cautiously but openly critical of the government on domestic television) might not be decided the same way if the question came up again after these recent events. The concern is that Beijing will act defensively over the international criticism of Ching Cheong’s arrest and take a further backwards steps.

It remains to be seen what the outcome of this particular high-profile incident will be on China’s international reputation, already so spotted, and how it will influence future policy decisions in this area. Furthermore the question remains as to what exactly Ching Cheong was doing in Guangzhou and suggestions that he was receiving documents to further his investigations of the 1989 Tiananmen incident remain unconfirmed.