On September 10, Xinhua , the CCP news agency, published a new set of government media restrictions, entitled "Measures on Administration of Release of Press Information in China by Foreign News Agencies." These restrictive policies are sure to raise intense concern within international journalism.
The new regulations require foreign news agencies to be examined and approved by Xinhua News Agency, and go through agencies authorized by Xinhua News Agency before publishing any news in China. Foreign news agencies shall not directly solicit subscriptions of their news and information services in China. Xinhua promises to do a yearly review of every media outlet operating in China, and threatens to revoke the business licenses of those media found to have violated these new regulations.
The new set of regulations consists of 22 articles, many of which are divided into several provisions. Of them the most harmful is Article 11, divided into ten provisions that seem to impose restrictions on almost everything, including severe political restrictions imposed on the news reports in China by foreign news agencies.
But these restrictions are nothing new really. They are the same media restrictions already imposed on China's homegrown television, print, and web-based media organizations. The new regulations are a bold attempt by the Chinese communist regime to control the flow of information into and out of China, and thereby maintain censorship of the content to which the citizens of China are exposed.
What's amusing is how the major foreign media outlets have responded to the publication of the regulations—a system that, in effect, takes away their autonomy and makes these agencies subservient to the state-controlled Xinhua. They—reasonably—assumed that Xinhua is attempting to get rid of its competitors. But the truth is worse. When Xinhua replied that their motives are not economic, it was telling the truth.
Some media organizations hinted that the newly announced regulations could be repealed as happened to a previous set enacted in 1996, in that Xinhua, persuaded by foreign governments, finally gave up taking its 15 percent cut of their profits. The majority of the media organizations in China stayed focused on the economic angle. They intentionally downplayed the more ominous issue of censorship.
Only Reporters Without Borders and the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Beijing had the courage to speak directly to the censorship issue. These agencies spoke out denouncing the news curbs as a deprivation of basic press freedoms.
Before discussing why foreign media attempted to play down the political tinge behind the regulations, let's clarify two points. First, how strong is Xinhua's motive to earn profits? The answer is Xinhua has no keen motive.
As a Chinese news monopoly, Xinhua is offered abundant financial aid and also earns enormous profits by selling news to foreign media, as well as soliciting subscription on exclusive magazines and journals. Its annual revenues are quite considerable.
Compared with its considerable profits, the 15 percent cut it garners from the foreign media outlets is not enough money to motivate it to do anything. These types of profits are not enough to make anyone at Xinhua risk his or her career by going against the edicts of the Chinese Communist Party.
Second, the set of measures was promulgated under the condition in which the Chinese authorities were increasingly tightening its control on the society and adopting a more conservative foreign policy.
Foreign news media really have no alternative but to keep a low profile about China's political intent. Being a segment of the information industry, media have to guard their profits. However, they also have to follow the basic principles of information freedom.
Over the past several years, when foreign media have tried to establish themselves in China, they could not avoid sacrificing some of their principles of press freedom. The journalists at these organizations may have wanted to maintain a high standard, but at the end of the day, the company's bottom line had to take precedence.
This moral dilemma has played out within these organizations and has been kept, for the most part, behind closed doors. Every one of these powerful media groups has a reputation to maintain in their home country.
It's exactly because of this factor—media groups trying to protect their reputations—that the 1996 regulations are little known in the West. At that time, the communication between the Chinese communist regime and the news agencies was kept quiet and professional.
This time, Xinhua posted the regulations on the Internet for all to see, greatly embarrassing these media companies who have tried so hard to establish themselves in communist China—mostly through a policy of strict self-regulation and cooperation with the regime.
Foreign media can resort to the same practice that they applied in the past to minimize the impact of the 1996 regulation, but the feasibility of overcoming the difficulties is not promising this time, because the political atmosphere in China and the international environment now are completely different from those in the mid 1990s.
At that time, China's economic development was in the process of ramping-up and its leaders were hungry for foreign investment. Back then, China needed to establish the perfect international image and it needed the assistance of the foreign media and overseas capital to become a member of the WTO.
Most importantly, the Chinese authorities did not have too much international experience at that time, and the political leaders in the country believed Western investors would hold fast to the principles of human rights and adhere to the guiding principles of democracy.
In contrast, China has been saturated by foreign capital nowadays and the regime has become very choosy about accepting foreign investment.
Meanwhile, the social contradiction in China keeps piling up and there has been constant resistance from the bottom levels of the society. After China joined the WTO, no longer could the United States use the "most-favored nation" treatment as a carrot to push China to improve its human rights record.
More importantly, the Chinese communist regime has become wise to the business practices of foreign companies and investors—the regime now understands that these entities are guided first and foremost by profits, with everything else—including principles—coming in a distant second. The CCP observes that as long as there were profits to be made, the Western companies and investors were more than willing to abandon their principles.
If foreign media still adheres to their Faustian contract with the Chinese communist regime—selling their souls for profit—the Chinese authorities will continue to be free to tighten media controls and snuff out what little media freedom remains in communist China.
Here's a scary thought: The day may not be far off when the Chinese authorities demand the right to read and edit the reports of all foreign correspondents before they are submitted to headquarters. Will it take coming to that point for big media to stand-up to the CCP bullies?
First published in No. 158 issue of Huaxia Dianzi Bao News
Feeds