What are the editors doing? If the author wants to use information to support his article (or opinion) he should really cite references and sources. He doesn't even have a link to information any about himself. It's like the Liberal Government. You can't believe anything they say or do because it all comes down to the almighty dollar. That is their world view. If it becomes acceptable for both men and women to work, despite 20 years down the track the average family no better off than when only one head was working, I ask how are they benefiting. I would say an economy with double the output! Should I just accept what the author says without condition?

Those were part of my objections to this writer's last article. There with things in inverted comma's with nothing to show whether they had been said by credible sources or Spotty the Talking Dog. There were no references whatsoever and no provenance given for any of the information.

If, indeed the CCP is so stringent in its crackdowns, if the truth is hidden, if internet lines are monitored then where on earth is he getting his formidable and all-encompassing information from? Is there some vast spy network smuggling out forbidden data at the risk of their lives to one elderly retired gentleman at his computer in suburban/rural Australia?

Perhaps that sounds harsh - but if the writer continues his China polemics without any references, he leaves himself wide open to just these sorts of comments. Its in his own interest - and proves the superiority of Western propaganda - to supply sources for these swathes of very impressive inside facts.

Perhaps the two previous posters have not heard of the old adage that "Truth is stranger than fiction". No doubt all those people who go to China for the Olympic games will come home with impressive stories of how lovely it was in Beijing, but I wonder how many will be allowed to avail themselves of the opportunity to go out into the hinterland, unaccompanied by minders, to see what is really happening to the peasantry.

Even 13 years ago, before the industrial giant awakened and the bicycle was still the main mode of transport, air pollution in Beijing was there for all to see. I shudder to think what it is like now. It might be somewhat better for the games, but that won't last long.

I suggest you read :-
http://www.voanews.com/uspolicy/archive/2005-07/2005-07-21-voa6.cfm
http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/August/200708081551151xeneerg0.963421.html
and particularly
http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/exp/
and
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-03/26/content_318058.htm
another very credible source
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/1621

You see, where there is a will, there is a way, and all this information about conditions in China do get out, some of it very well attributed.

David

If a population of nearly 1.5 billion cannot or will not free itself from the yoke of Communism, there is not much the rest of us can do.

More importantly, there is no way that we can understand the Chinese and why they do what they do; their mindset and attitudes to human life are totally beyond our ken.

Our dealings with China will always be of the ‘walk softly and carry a big stick’ variety. Fretting about Tibet, people tossed out of their homes to make way for the Olympics, and the horrid form of government in China won’t help anyone.

We have surrended our industry to China, and our new Prime Minister has shown that he intends suck up to them for all he is worth. The US is not prepared to take them on. China will be able to get away with anything it wants to into the foreseeable future

China Mr.Right is going to do an outward march and not even the mighty (at the moment) USA is going to stop them....Revelation 9:16 and 16:12. I think they will come here as well.

VK3AUU,

You wonder how many people will be able to go out into the rural areas unaccompanied by "minders"?

Wot the..? Short answer is ..every one.

Just what kind of strange ideas do you have of China? I go out into the rural areas and see the "peasantry" (who would object strongly to such a label, by the way) whenever I get sick of the city. Rural China is a mecca for backpackers, holidaying overseas workers, any of us who want to get away for a while. Do you have some idea that it is a huge fenced off area patrolled by dogs and soldiers or something?

And who or what are these "minders" of whom you speak?There are thousands and thousands of foreign people living in China - are we all supposed to have our own individual "minder": will one be allocated to each of the millions of visitors expected this year? Or are we all fitted perhaps with microchips or anklets like criminals?

I did look up the sites you provided: you do realise how old they are, don't you? One was ten years old, for goodness sake. But anyway, thats exactly my objection to so much of the misinformation people print about China - its a mish-mash of second-hand, dated, bits and pieces picked up randomly from popular propaganda.

If this writer is privy to up to date, on going information from sources within China then, in order to gain any credibility he must a) name his sources, b) provide evidence that he either lives in, visits regularly, or has some personal and current knowledge of the country he is writing about c) speak Chinese fluently enough to be able to examine ALL the sources.

Without any of the above his comments are just second hand opinions selectively chosen and contain as much authority as persons who believe that people in China have "minders". I'm not knocking you there VK, just illustrating that, as it stands, this writer is no more an authority to be believed than any other person in the street.

Romany and Richard
Naïve or just regurgitating what you are being fed or dream up? You look. You read, but fail or refuse to comprehend what you are reading. Whether it is your job, intentional or unintentional, you obviously do not apply discipline to your research. Get beyond Xinhua, China.org, China-on-line and China's other state media.

If you are familiar with the Chinese countryside as you claim, then you must be wandering around a very different China than the rest of us work in and know. Have you tried using the www in China to connect to foreign sites? How about the Olympics? How about arable land loss? Three Gorges Dam problems? Ever wondered why you get so many error messages? You cannot be that ignorant of the many reliable and reputable links continually monitoring China's web operations.

Expats from many countries consult and work in the field throughout China on projects ranging from World Bank, foreign aid, agriculture, communications, energy, environment, pollution control, regeneration, sewage, water, to name just a few. There are also many reputable foreign journalists. Spoken to any of them?

Working in countries like China, multi disciplined expat professionals actively network, but not on the web, sharing on ground information and comment to compare with official data and media and to develop a better understanding of their working and political environment. From his articles and style, I can only assume that Arthur is also in this category but doubt if he is fully retired.

AgScientist

Continuing
As for statistics and quotes? China unloads at every opportunity at State and Provincial levels. Officials readily jump into print in state media on grand projects to show their support for the party. Your inference to a spy network exposes your purpose or the limit of your intelligence. Sharing information, networked database development and satellite imagery is not the sole and exclusive domain of military intelligence. Like me, many thousands use imagery in our daily work. Not found in Google Earth are dedicated purpose and high definition imagery widely used in agriculture, archaeology, aquaculture, cartography, demographics, economics, environment, global warming, hydrology, meteorology, oceanography, pollution forecasting, urban planning, vulcanology to name a few. Japan, South Korea and the US constantly monitor China's degrading farmlands and expanding desserts to plot the formation and paths of China's annual polluting sandstorms that shut down cities in Japan and Korea and ride the Pacific Conveyor to contribute to America's west coast air pollution. Likewise, China monitors the rest of the world for both military and civilian purposes. That's life.

To find credibility I suggest that you stop reading Ian Fleming, Dan Brown and Tom Clancy and playing with the spooks and fairies at the bottom of the garden. Grow up, do your own honest disciplined research, and become part of the real world. I am fluent in Mandarin and like many of my associates, learn much more by listening and speak Mandarin only when strictly necessary while in China.

AgScientist

I know nothing much about China. But that is not necessary to express an opinion on this topic. I think the author is saying that the Chinese Government is window dressing without much regard for the wellbeing of the people,and therefore should not have been given the Games by the IOC. China probably does have huge problems with respect to freedom, environment, and equality but why should these things disbar them from staging the Games. For one thing, the contrast between the cleaner air of the games period and the regular atmospheric pollution will, I imagine, provide a strong spur to their environmental efforts. I can imagine benefits too for other areas of Chinese life. Let's encourage the success of the Chinese Games and be encouraging rather than negative. It is possible to be firmly supportive without being nasty.

robbieju -

hey, I could have done without all the slagging off - but thanks for your post. Yours is exactly the kind of thing that's needed. Despite being accused of being partisan to China, all I continually go on about is unreliable sources - on either side of ANY question - providing unverified information that is unquestionably taken up as truth with no questioning from the gullible. Well, exactly what you accused me of, I guess.

Your post supplies the information that a) you speak the language, b) you are on the spot c) you are in contact with others in the same position and d)you are au fait with the constantly shifting tides of public opinion, government edicts, and source material in the field.

This article, the second by this author, provides no reason for credibility whatsoever.

There are no fairies, leprechauns, tongoloks, or any species of imaginary creature at the bottom of my garden. That is actually my point: the tendency to believe any old bovine excreta that falls into one's own way of thinking: I simply believe it behoves all of us to research facts before forming immovable opinions and then acting on them. I dunno, maybe you have never read any of my posts before? If you want to wade into me again take a deep breath, go read a couple and perhaps that will be more convincing.

I teach journalism and I assure you I give exactly the same opinions here to my students; constantly challenging them to find the truth about propaganda that emanates from this side as well. I take as much issue with a student telling me, for example, that there are no drugs in China as I do with an OLO poster disseminating the belief that tourists are inescapably bound to Cold War personal 'minders' dogging their footsteps.

Romany, perhaps you should also read the following before you get too starry eyed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2005/oct/31/china.pollution

All is apparently not all doom and gloom as is illustrated in
http://knowledge.allianz.com/en/globalissues/climate_profiles/climate_china/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=air%20pollution%20china&utm_campaign=Allianz%20Knowledge%20-%20Country%20Profiles

So I expect things to get a lot worse before any improvement is made.

David

VK3AUU,

Ah c'mon now. What have I ever posted that would reveal me as potentially "starry eyed"?

I have continually repeated - in issues from feminism to the convoluted one of China, that I take no sides. I am not taking, nor have I ever taken, sides in this dispute. I do, however, continually post about misinformation and bias.

A previous poster wondered about the level of my intelligence? It is such that I take every piece of information which comes my way with an initial grain of salt. I do not align myself with any stance which does not have verifiable facts behind it. I do not find partisanship, ignorance, Wikipedia, romanticizing, or the premise that if you repeat something often enough it becomes the truth, to be valid forums upon which to base an informed opinion.

I have had plenty of life experience in the world's trouble spots or areas of contention which has shown me, however, that the groundswell of public opinion based solely on the foregoing criteria can lead us into actions which are ill advised.

A previous poster ironically and gratuitously advised me to reform my research methods. Rigorous and far-ranging research is indeed what I am constantly advocating facrissake. My objections to articles such as this are not based upon the premises they support. They are based upon the fact that the premise bears absolutely no indication for anyone adopting it as to why it was formed.

Do I make myself clear now?

Romany

Rather than fill available comment space I tender the following for you as well as contributors and those commenting with just a few search headings on Google to review the spread of reports, media treatment, and the plight of those defending rights in China.

Type the words inside the parenthesis into the Google search box and review the various responses for the protests -

"Heilongjiang farmer protests"
"Heilongjiang Touxing Project protests"
"Shanwei protests"
"Dongnangang protests"
"Dongzhou protests"
"Sanjiao protests"
"Baotou soldiers protest"

To check out just a few of the individuals in China trying to make a difference. Type the names in parenthesis into the search box

"Wang Yi blog" (not to be confused with CPCC member)
"Teng Biao" (rights lawyer)
"Gao Qinrong" (former state media journalist)
"Lu Banglie" (rights activist)
"Liu Xiaobo" (rights activist and writer)
"Zhao Xin academic human rights defender"
"Feng Qiusheng Taishi village"

You also may like to check out the work of Xiao Qiang, now director of the China Internet Project at the University of California at Berkeley.

Type in "Xiao Qiang China Internet Project University of California at Berkeley".

His work focuses on Beijing's directing financial, technical and human resources toward controlling the Internet, including hiring agents to post messages defending the party and undermining its critics both within and outside China.(sound famliar?)

China cannot expect to "big brother" others without being "big brothered" itself.

Anyone researching China cannot produce a credible opinion or result by relying solely on media or heresay from within China only.

If you need any further input, let me know.

Arthur Thomas
April 21, 2008

Arthur,

As you may have noted, I teach journalism so naturally am aware of some of the persons and incidents you posted links to. Have also discussed with students the Internet related work of Xiao Qiang, and the controversy concerning the closing down of Wang Yi's award-winning blog. As you can imagine, in the wake of the the Lhasa riots, these kinds of issues are hot topics right now.

Am glad you did post these links but remain stymied as to why you did not source either of your articles originally?

Romany

The search headings were not intended for you or your students and only backgound commentary for my own research.

They were intended to provide background and links for those who access On Line Opinion and are not familiar with the real situation in China and may wish to gain a broader perspective.

Since you acknowledge they are important enough to raise with your own students, is it not unreasonable and fair to share it with all interested parties to expand their knowledge as well and granting them the opportunity make an informed opinion of their own?

Arthur T
April 22, 2008

Arthur,

Well yes, as your last post was headed and directed specifically to Romany, I did indeed consider that it was meant for me.point

O.k., I hear what you are saying. But all the information you posted is a matter of public domain so that anyone who IS interested can easily access them. As I tried to illustrate in a non-confrontational way even despite the restrictions we have access to all this stuff too and engage in dialogue about it.

I'm afraid I disagree with your basic premise, however. Look, all the average person knows about China is that it has a history of human rights abuses, its restrictive, it pollutes. Ask anyone. Supplying sites that enforce this belief is not what I, as an educator or a journalist consider news, really.

But how many people know about the people, organisations, groups within (not exiles) China who are working to change things? How many people know about the small but real advances? How many people know about the changes that have taken places in people ideas in the last ten, five, two years - or even since Lhasa? How many people know what the embryonic leaders - the students, the young people as a whole - are thinking or doing? How many people know know what the people not the government is thinking?

I could sit down right now and provide a list of sites and personal anecdotes and experiences to prove that Australia also abuses human rights, that our pollution is horrendous, that our Government does not always gibe with the will of the people. Is that an objective and ubiased picture of Australia for those who have never been there?

Romany. It is all very well to look at the push for change in China by both young and old, but from my fairly extensive reading (which I won't quote here), there seems to be a considerable push by those who seek to retain power, to suppress any changes which even according to Chinese law, ought to be taking place.

There appears to be both a top down push as well as a grass roots push for change, but it is being frustrated by the people in power at the local level, who seem to have the co-operation of the police and military to keep the citizens in check.

David

Romany,
That you are a lecturer in journalism came as a surprise and especially for one with the extensive first hand knowledge of China that you claim.

Your request in responding to VK3AUU, "a) name his sources" (Arthur's), coming from a western journalist and especially one lecturing in journalism aroused my interest and two other associates in HK. Any journalist who has worked in China and is as familiar with China as you claim is always aware that his association with any Chinese citizen has the ability to create problems for those individuals. To ask anyone to provide names and details of individuals in China involving contentious matters such as the internet, human rights, freedom of religion, official corruption or criticism of official policy etc in open forum is to place those individuals in an untenable position and is unforgivable. I'm surprised you didn’t know this, or that you deliberately asked Arthur to do so. Ethics problem??

As a senior lecturer with extensive time in China, you must have had the opportunity to speak directly with many foreign journalists to seek alternative views and reason for the continuing log of complaints by foreign journalists working in China. Your professional position would have granted you opportunities as an investigative journalist to connect with the cells and networks to speak with journalists such as Gao Qinrong and many others. The only reason that such a connection would not be available is by association with individuals not trusted or without credible connections to the network or cells. And before you jump back onto your spooks diversion, cells and networks have universal applications, so no need for that juvenile "shh….. they're coming" comment.

By the way, what visa do you visit China on?

AgScientist

West media in China, from the most respectable to most disgusted.

Just 20 years ago, VOA (Voice of America) is the most respectable media in China. VOA broadcasts in lots of frequencies(FM, AM, SW) and lots of dialects in China. 20 years on, as China becomes open and millions of Chinese go to west countries, most of TianAnMen protestor changed their minds. VOA becomes most disgusted media. Recently, VOA(China) hotline had to cancel its program halfway, because it was too embarrassed by audience's harsh criticism.

Today, China becomes more open and is most populous internet user country in the World, but CNN becomes the token of hypocrisy and intrigue. West media represented by CNN completely lost another generation in China.

West media changed medium generation mind, who ever embraced so-called west freedom, and lost another whole younger generation in China.

Does West deserve a 'fair go'?

"Today, China becomes more open and is most populous internet user country in the World" and also the most restricted. Give us a break and stop feeding us BS.

David

Robbieju,

I do not, nor have I ever, claimed "extensive experience" in China. I am not, nor did I try to pass myself off as a "senior lecturer", nor did I do anything so naive as to ask anyone to supply names and addresses of private contacts within China.

I do not "visit" China, I live here. I do not work as a journalist here but, as I said, as an educator. Though I do, from time to time continue to publish articles both here and overseas. I am not a political journalist. I am apolitical.

I considered I had made the reasons for my objections quite clear in my previous posts. Was I not clear enough? If not, please indicate where the confusion lies and I will re-state my position.

Ag Scientist

Good response. I have been enjoying this exchange, and shared your concerns about Romany whose name and reference to lecturing in journalism suggested a European lecturer in a Western University, not a Chinese teaching journalism in China as he now admits. His choice of pseudonym was apt - the language of the Gypsies travelling foreign lands.

Foreign journalists in China closely study the environment in which they operate. It requires intensive research into the media, government instrumentalities and policies and lays the groundwork to determine the veracity of media reports and leaks, and identifying the myriad of traps.

Teaching is a respected profession in China and takes teachers into varying
conditions throughout China, some good and some into extreme hardship conditions.

Teaching or journalism in China offers opportunities for rapid advancement, pay
increases and benefits provided one has the following qualifications. Proficiency in English, German, French, Italian, Spanish or Russian combined with a high level of computer literacy and party membership. The upgrade involves intensive training to expand and hone those skills. The new job is full time and part of a huge team constantly monitoring web sites to identify material considered damaging to China's image and to actively undermine the credibility of articles and comment regardless of fact. These are the teams that are of interest to Xiao Qiang, director of the China Internet Project at UCLA's Berkeley campus referred to by Arthur. Of course Romany would direct all students to study Xia's work.

These operations come under the direction and control of the CCP's Central
Propaganda Department and its Internet Propaganda Management Department. It
operates under no specific State law and is the sole office responsible for enforcing media censorship and control, and the regulation of propaganda inside and outside China.

Continued

Continuing

China's internet police monitor chat rooms, internet cafes and web sites to trap the unwary into disclosing names and links. A common tactic is for a small team to operate as individuals to discredit targeted articles and support each others comments.

Only the brave and those seeking change dissent, risking their jobs, property and physical abuse by this department and its enforcers. Casualties include Li Datong of the China Youth Daily, and just recently, Zhou Shuguang and his refreshing Golden Age Blog plus many more. Despite the risks, dissenter numbers are increasing.

Chinese journalists disclosing Propaganda Department directives to foreign media
can be charged with divulging state secrets and face severe consequences.

The average Chinese cannot be blamed for their views since they are reliant on strict state controlled media content and a heavily censored Internet.

When using text from the Chinese media and records, experienced researchers do so acknowledging that such text reflects official CCP policy, not necessarily the truth.

Mao made an art of exploiting the power of the media. The greatest demonstration
was suppression of the 1958 - 1962 Great Famine during which more than 30 million were estimated to have died of starvation during ideal farming conditions. It was only revealed in the mid 1980s by independent researchers who traced the events and cover ups of the tragedy. Other massive loss of life cover-ups included the Banqiao and Shimantan dam failures, Ankang floods and 253 dam collapses since 1991.

When Romany admitted he operated from China, I asked associates in China to log
onto Online Opinion and check out the battle - only got error messages. To avoid
being GFW-ed, Romany requires clearance to a government authorised link to bypass the GFW (China's great firewall).

Were you involved in Ordos II AgScientist?

Expat China Journo

Everyone needs courage and wisdom to find and accept the truth, both in China and West.

Before China designed its own internet DNS system due to explosive increased internet users, USA monopolizes global DNS system. Both China and West monitor the internet.

20 years ago, VOA is the most popular and respectable media in China. Most west media such as VOA spent a lot of money in China. 20 years on, CNN becomes the symbol of sinister and hypocrisy. "Be a man, don't be CNN" becomes the No1 fashionable internet language in 2008 in Chinese society.

Systematic constant diatribe China by West media using unproven allegations cost their credit. It is not China's internet policing that average Chinese distrusts west media. Considering west media's advantage and China's media's disadvantage(there are lots of professional anti-China protestor and dissenter supported by west), it is perfect right for China to take some restriction on some media. Actually, most media such as VOA, CNN are not restricted.

It is not human rights or democracy dispute between China and west. The dangerous point is that most Chinese become more and more weary of West preaching. Recently, most Chinese criticise CCP for its moronic propaganda and soft line to West.

Arthur

Your response to my comment in "What to do about China etc" on China diverting the Brahmaputra seemed unbelievable and beyond consideration by any reasonable thinking government.

I followed your search headings on Google plus other links and was shocked and then outraged at the results.

I have also found several references but get confused and experience problems in researching and locating many of the rivers, towns and geological features in the various articles. This project appears real. Can you provide more information?

Apologies for my caustic comments earlier.

Cyclops

Expat China Journo

What a relief, another with real information on China.

With so much international attention and Australia's increasing reliance on China, we need to know more.

Such intense world wide criticism of China cannot be attributed to just a few emotional minority groups and individuals, conspiracy theories, national egotism and personal agendas.

When it comes to China, the more we know the better we can understand the claims and counter claims, especially about Tibet, Xinjiang, human rights, media freedom, pollution and now water and media manipulation.

What else is there that we do not know?

Regardless of professed qualifications, why sit back and accept what is published?

Ignore uninformed and biased opinion, why not question and make it informed opinion?

These contentious issues need to be raised and that is what Online Opinion can do.

No more Romany and his mates for credible comment.

Keep it coming.

Cyclops

Cyclops

Researching China can be confusing when it comes to names due to various reasons that range from use of Wade-Giles, Pinyin, local names and various ethnic language names of old Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, etc.

The term Tibet can also be confusing. Chinese reports appear selective in the use of "Tibet" and "Tibetans". Tibet was occupied by the PRC in stages before the final invasion and occupation. Parts of the original Tibet is now incorporated into China's Qinghai, Gansu, Sichuan, Yunnan and southeast Xinjiang. The area occupied also included a number of minority ethnic groups such as the Naxi in the southeast in the Three Rivers regions with their own unique language. In state media, the region now generally referred to as Tibet can be described as the Tibetan Autonomous Region, or TAR. Always check on the town to determine which region is being discussed. Check out maps on Tibet that have the historical boundaries and the excised and occupied territories.

Some reports referring to the presence of Tibetans suggest that the locations refer to the TAR and not parts of Tibet's other occupied regions.

To assist in your research of the proposed Brahmaputra Diversion the following may help. Spellings are often corruptions.

In general

He and Jiang can indicate river Chinese
Yalun, Yalung, Yarlung,can indicate river Tibetan
Ngulchu can indicate river Tibetan

Names Other names
Shoumatan Shuotian, Suma Tan, Shuomatan
Nu Jiang Upper Salween, Gyalmo Ngulchu
Upper Mekong Lancang, Zachu
Yangtze Chian Jiang, Ch'ang Chiang, Da Jiang
Upper Yangtze Tibet Jinsha, Drichu,Yalong, Ngagchu,Dadu, Tatu, yarong Ngulchu
Yellow River Huanghe, Machu
Yarlung Tsangbo Yalong Zangbo, Yalun, Yalun Zangbo
Medog Muotuo, Mo'to
Doxong Paiqu

Good luck in your research

Regards

Arthur T

Geez, Expat Journo, Cyclop etc.

What are you on about? I am NOT Chinese. I do not belong to any bloody organisations, CPP rings, propaganda units, or any of the sinister forces to which you attach me. I am not male.

There is a little icon up on the left hand side of the screen. It says "Users" Already on this thread I issued the invitation to press this and check out my history on OLO which goes back some five years to before I even came to live here. Its a simple thing to do, and quite sensible when going onto a new forum and not being familiar with the dramatis personae. Or do you make a habit of not checking out the terrain before you leap into new territory?

I dunno who your friends in China are that can't log onto to OLO, mate, but I can assure you not only that I do so with no trouble whatsoever - as is obvious - but none of my students have ever reported problems to me either. And as I also stated earlier - the sites that were posted by a previous poster are freely available from here as well.

As for the patronising remark that "he", (in my guise of propaganda merchant for the sinister regime) had cunningly chosen such an apt pseudonym? I am second generation Romany and proud of it: its pretty general knowledge on this site.

If this mish-mash of b.s. is any indication of your usual level of information garnering then I think it is your credibility, not mine, which is in doubt.

I also believe you owe me an apology for this nonsense as I have stated more than once EXACTLY what my motivation for posting (and for the articles I write and publish) is. You have ignored this and dismissed me as a liar, a plant and a communist agent. I am very, very angry.

Romany, I suspect that you have been mistaken for someone else and you are owed an apology by the person who wrote that. That being said, the information in it does actually apply to someone, and should not be dismissed lightly. This was aptly shown on tha ABC a couple of nights ago in their piece in "Foreign Correspondent" which I assume will be re-broadcast on Saturday and will ultimately be available on
http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/broadband.htm

David

What a weird thread.

AgScientist, you were immediately hostile to Romany without — as far as I can see it — good cause. You could have easily strenuously disagreed with her, instead, you personally attacked her: naïve, regurgitating what she has dreamt up, reads Dan Brown (the worst insult of all, if you ask me), believes in fairies at the bottom of the garden, etc. Your second email, where you try to claim Romany was pretending to be something she wasn't — "As a senior lecturer with extensive time in China" — was just weird. Who were you trying to convince?

There's a reason people insult others rather than just outline why they disagree with the argument. I don't know what it is, but I'm finding it more interesting than the actual article. Are you immediately aggressive in person? Do you resent Romany because she lives in China and you see that as encroaching on your expertise? (That's how it sounds.) Or, as someone else has suggested, have you mistaken Romany for someone else?

Either way, you are having an emotional response to a intellectual argument. Why not just be honest and upfront rather than assume this odd, defensive, insulting tone? It's not working.

As far as I can tell, Romany's point is that, to demonstrate real expertise, articles on China should be expertly researched and demonstrate a deep understanding of the people on the ground. Why on earth has this got so many of you into a lather?

This thread could be interesting. I know nothing of China and I'm curious. I think it's a pity to derail a thread by indulging in personal slights.

This is a bit off topic

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2115271.stm
Use of the internet in China

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2098530.stm
Blocking foreign websites

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2073388.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2029152.stm
Closure of internet sites

http://www.china.org.cn/
China as seen by the Chinese

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2027120.stm
For a very interesting article on how the party is losing control of news because of the internet in China.

Vanilla, I suggest you Google some topics of interest in China, particularly about water and food shortages and your eyes might be opened.

David

Romany

Do not be angry! you will get used to if you still speak for Chinese.

People in west are difficult (or not willing) to find any positive information from west medias like BBC and CNN, as their researching resources.

For example "...last month the authorities announced plans to close down thousands of unlicensed internet cafes. The government says the move was prompted by a fatal fire at a cafe in Beijing, but critics argue it is an excuse to impose further controls on the use of the net." (from BBC as VK3AUU mentioned resources)

My experienced was, the internet Cafes are asking to open to people who over 16 years old only. Photo ID with the age need to be shown in order to enter. No adults websites and contents can be viewed in Cafe. The vedio cam have to be installed properly. Police will inspect randomly. (That was being told by the owner). This "self-discipline" scheme was suggested by normal people and thousands of parents. But people like VK3AUU can read the further controls on the use of the net from this policy. I have to say they are genius.

As no response has been forthcoming to my previous post I decided to illustrate the point of what I have been saying throughout this thread and others.

Lets start with the words of John Swinton, former Chief of Staff to the New York Times back in 1953: "The business of the New York journalist is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify." Years later this was backed up by John Stockwell, former CIA official and author who stated: "The owners of the Washington Post long ago acknowledged that the Post is the governments voice to the people..."

So far we have China and USA state controlled media just about level pegging.

Now, it seems that this precedent has been continued with contemporary reports that "people using CIA and FBI computers have edited entries in the online encyclopedia Wikipedia on topics including the Iraq war and Guantanamo prison, according to a new tracing program." ( Who’s Editing Wikipedia – Diebold, The CIA, A Campaign John Borland, Wired, 8/2007)
http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/08/wiki_tracker

As Edward Zehr once said: "I wouldn’t call it fascism exactly, but [an American] political system, nominally controlled by an irresponsible, dumbed down electorate who are manipulated by dishonest, cynical, controlled mass media that dispense the propaganda of a corrupt political establishment can hardly be described as democracy either."

For every article posted to damn China it is possible to counter with those damning America: human rights violation, lack of democratic processes, corruption, pollution scandals, blocking news and environmental devastation. It paints a picture of a country who deserves boycotts, protests , and vilification until they see things our way doesn’t it? For anyone who has never been to North America it sounds just like...well...China.

So, what does this prove? I consider Marcus Aurelius said it best almost 2,000 years ago:-

"The opinion of 10,000men(sic) is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject"

Romany

A late response. Currently enroute earning a living and not sitting 24/7 on OLO. This self created profile emerges from your comments on China relevant articles and prompted my response that included describing the opportunities for journalists and teachers with appropriate qualifications and expertise and the possible route in which such job opportunities could take them.

To a surfer of China info your recent numerous comments suggest a person who's in depth knowledge of China supports your right to comment and criticise. Your statement "I teach journalism" claims internationally recognized qualifications in journalism. No mention of living in China and your pseudonym suggests a European, inviting the comment "lecturing in journalism". There is a difference between teaching journalism and lecturing in journalism? Lock that in with your claim of "plenty of life experience in the world's trouble spots" suggests an experienced journalist qualified to visit and report on world trouble spots - not a responsibility to be taken lightly nor tasked to a novice by any media company. Impressive on one's CV.

Your claims to "plenty of life experience in the world's trouble spots" (not one but several) also suggests an adventurous and readily adaptable person travelling through many countries, hence my reference to Romany, the language of the gypsies travelling through foreign lands.

Inconsistencies and confusion. You quickly defend China against criticism and criticize and deride comment by others. Then without first taking the time to check the accuracy of such material you refer to rules of academic debate. Challenged on this profile you respond with "I do not, nor have I ever claimed extensive experience" in China. Again, "I do not work as a journalist here." Based on those two admissions alone, just what is your experience, motive and right to criticise this China material?

Continued

Continuing

You made no return comment on key issues making up the major portion of my comment such as the Central Propaganda Department or on those who have suffered under its oppressive measures. No mention of the Great Famine and its impact on ordinary Chinese and further massive loss of life from dam collapses. Nor of internet and media censorship and action against those who speak out. Are we to believe that you really refuse to accept that these happened or exist?

Even high school students are aware of the blatant credibility problems of CIA reporting and some US media. Why do you have a problem with highlighting their counterparts and abuse in China? Your fixation with spooks and conspiracies and juvenile facetious comment is not professional journalism.

To dish it out and expect all feelgood responses, first remove doubt and confusion and read back through ALL your previous work. I smiled at one suggestion for you that read "digging for facts is better exercise than jumping to conclusions". Only too true when you go back and read your uninformed and emotional diatribe criticising Arthur previous articles. No apology to Arthur? What comes around etc.. In the real world relying on emotion and uninformed criticism without due research only invites just criticism from your peers.

OLO history is irrelevant. The measure of ones work is originality, integrity, balance and quality, not association, number of articles, comments, claimed qualifications, sensationalism or endless use of borrowed quotations of others. Try originality and doing your own non selective in depth research. There is a big difference between the work of wannabe armchair academics and those professionals on the ground.

Apologies unnecessary, you summed it up all by yourself with the quotation in your own last paragraph.

Expat China Journo

Expat Journo,

No, this is only my third year in China so of course my knowledge cannot claim to be as extensive as those who have lived here a lifetime.

Yes, I am a qualified journalist who has lived and worked extensively in South Africa and Papua New Guinea as well as spending time in other countries: my father's work (and no I'm not going to be asked to account for him as well!) was diplomatic and necessitated that I have spent my entire life in the Far and Middle East as well as travelling extensively.

I was asked to join the faculty of a University in China where I teach so my primary function here is education but I still do free-lance work (I am sure I explained this earlier). If my CV is of such importance I will willingly give permission to Graham Young or Susan Prior to confirm the above.

This is now the second or third time you have made remarks about "conspiracy theories" and my obsession with them. Please point out where I have demonstrated my adherence to, let alone and obsession with, such theories? Perhaps you are referring to a post directed to the author where I said that those who don't provide sources etc. laid themselves open to such flights of fancy? It was, in fact, you who came up with the idea that I was involved in machiavellian pursuits.

You misrepresent me entirely when you claim that I consider I know better than others but you show agreement when you give advice about research: that was indeed the sole point I was making and have continued to make on this subject. Rather a simple one really and certainly not worth all the caustic remarks and bluster you have directed at me.

I do not rail or engage in diatribes or even rant as you insist I have done to Arthur. I rather think those who cannot confine their remarks concisely within a 350 word framework more guilty of ranting than I, however.