Background: the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) created the new leadership.
When it comes to this kind of political news, the international media would like to show their own views on the same issue. However, some media act as the tools for their countries while others might "criticise" it by themselves.
A basic notion in Chinese journalism theory is that the official media should guarantee they stand by the same line of the government when they make voices for the international political issue. Therefore, like the two stories from the official media Xinhua news agency said, they delivered the official opinions from the leaders, such as the President Hu - "CPC (Communist Party of China) to strengthen ties with DPRK's new leadership", and the senior official of the CPC - "China ready to work with new leadership of DPRK ruling party".
In western media, the situation does not look like the same. The Voice of American dug the inside and outside of North Korea about the next leader, and concluded that North Korea already "clears way for a third-generation Kim". The Reuters deeply analysed the issue by asking question like "what role might the conference accord Kim" and "how will North Koreans react" to the new leader's rise. Similarly, the Guardian explained why the former leader choose his "youngest son as successor" and how the Workers' party impacts on this issue. All kinds of opinions are gathered on media from the western countries, no matter they are the attitudes of their own countries.
As a Chinese, I admit the journalists of the official media tend to lose their own voices in this kind of political issue because of the control of the government and party. In spite of that, it does not mean they cannot be the independent observer as a journalist. They just stand by the neutral position at this moment, and they will post their own views in the future. Believe it or not? Let's wait and see.
Related links:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-10/02/c_13540074.htm
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-10/01/c_13538842.htm
http://www.voanews.com/learningenglish/home/North-Korea-Clears-Way-for-a-Third-Generation-Kim-as-Leader--104186829.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68Q0UW20100927
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/21/north-korea-kim-jong-un
Oct 2, 2010
keep skeptical and avoid clichéd
The 2010 Shanghai EXPO is coming to the end. While a lot of media focus on the investments and tourist industry profits from this event, this story written by an American journalist attracts my eyes by discussing the actual contents and impacts on the US Pavilion. It evaluates the public concerns and points out the skeptical opinions which is unique among so many reports.
Firstly, the headline is enough attractive. She expressed her view clearly and strongly by saying that "US Pavilion falls flat with skeptical Chinese audience". Not like some other western media who always show their powerful and supreme position in the world, this article truthfully told the public how Chinese people question the American and the originality ideas of its Pavilion.
Secondly, the journalist wrote in the first person. She humourously said she "expected to feel some glimmer of national sentiment", but she found she cannot get the ideal results. Also, she use the sentence " the Chinese audience would have a similar reaction" to keep the Chinese audience close.
In addition, the journalist use several separate films to demonstrate the ways the American designers "to flatter the Chinese". She made the story vividly and made the audience to feel like YOU just participated in those moments. From her own feelings, the readers know both the pro and con impressions from the Chinese visitors which support the article comprehensively.
However, Chinese media always concentrated the achievements of the Shanghai Expo 2010 especially because of China National Day. The Chinese typical stories from the official media were all talking about how this event "made history and set new standards for World Expo", how it "thronged with record number of visitors" and how the "series of activities held to mark" the special day.
Instead, in my opinions, just like the American journalist said in her stories, the journalists should insist a skeptical attitude rather than follow "the clichéd attempts at sentimental propaganda".
Relative links:
http://opinion.globaltimes.cn/foreign-view/2010-09/577799.html
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/news_digest/Swiss_Pavilion_chairlift_goes_back_into_action.html?cid=28453816
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Dragon-wants-to-dance--like-the-elephant/Article1-606663.aspx
http://www.english.globalarabnetwork.com/201010017487/Economics/china-morocco-participation-in-shanghai-expo-to-foster-bilateral-ties.html
http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/views/liverpool-daily-post/2010/10/01/pavilion-adventure-poised-to-pay-off-92534-27377228/
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-10/01/c_13538587.htm
http://www.china.org.cn/travel/expo2010shanghai/2010-09/24/content_20994386.htm
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90783/91300/7156153.html
Firstly, the headline is enough attractive. She expressed her view clearly and strongly by saying that "US Pavilion falls flat with skeptical Chinese audience". Not like some other western media who always show their powerful and supreme position in the world, this article truthfully told the public how Chinese people question the American and the originality ideas of its Pavilion.
Secondly, the journalist wrote in the first person. She humourously said she "expected to feel some glimmer of national sentiment", but she found she cannot get the ideal results. Also, she use the sentence " the Chinese audience would have a similar reaction" to keep the Chinese audience close.
In addition, the journalist use several separate films to demonstrate the ways the American designers "to flatter the Chinese". She made the story vividly and made the audience to feel like YOU just participated in those moments. From her own feelings, the readers know both the pro and con impressions from the Chinese visitors which support the article comprehensively.
However, Chinese media always concentrated the achievements of the Shanghai Expo 2010 especially because of China National Day. The Chinese typical stories from the official media were all talking about how this event "made history and set new standards for World Expo", how it "thronged with record number of visitors" and how the "series of activities held to mark" the special day.
Instead, in my opinions, just like the American journalist said in her stories, the journalists should insist a skeptical attitude rather than follow "the clichéd attempts at sentimental propaganda".
Relative links:
http://opinion.globaltimes.cn/foreign-view/2010-09/577799.html
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/news_digest/Swiss_Pavilion_chairlift_goes_back_into_action.html?cid=28453816
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Dragon-wants-to-dance--like-the-elephant/Article1-606663.aspx
http://www.english.globalarabnetwork.com/201010017487/Economics/china-morocco-participation-in-shanghai-expo-to-foster-bilateral-ties.html
http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/views/liverpool-daily-post/2010/10/01/pavilion-adventure-poised-to-pay-off-92534-27377228/
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-10/01/c_13538587.htm
http://www.china.org.cn/travel/expo2010shanghai/2010-09/24/content_20994386.htm
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90783/91300/7156153.html
Oct 1, 2010
choosing different resources but be fair
News Background: Bill Gates and Warren Buffett host a charity banquet on Wednesday (29th Sep) with China's super-rich in Beijing.
That's the Chinese news when you see the sentences like this - "Charity banquet of China's super-rich opens east-west dialogue". A typical Chinese media usually use the official language to point out the meanings of an event directly, even the event is not a political one.
Obviously, every media interpret this news differently by using different resources from the meeting and interviews.
In Xinhua news, it used the interview materials from the son of Warren Buffett. And in the second half of the news, the journalist demonstrate the different attitudes from Chinese super-rich people. All the contents showed the different opinions from the east and west cultures, which matched the angle it said in the headline.
The AFP news gave the headline "China's super-rich banquet exceeds hopes" by quoting the saying of Buffett. And the entire article is made up of the sayings from Buffett and Gates. Some quoting terms were revised and reconstructed by the journalist. The last sentence selected from the state-run Global Times showed the attitude of this media as well.
The BBC news showed its rigorous style of work. As the spectator, the journalist use "perhaps" to express the objective of this dinner. And he use the materials from "one of those invited to dine". So this article is like a profile story from the angle of Chinese philanthropist.
The AP making this news much more comprehensive. The journalist use the resources from the Buffett and Gates, and the different part of Chinese people whatever they attended the dine. Therefore, it represented some of the attitudes from the American sides, and offered the Chinese opinions as well.
Not like the TODAY news which just use the interview materials from one person - the CEO of Far Eastern Group, the only goal is to express the idea about "China not so charitable about Buffett, Gates". So even the journalist use the records from the Xinhua news agency, the Global Times and the state media, they all serviced for this angle. Although that's good for promoting a story, I don't think it is enough objective.
Anyway, every journalist can make their own story by choosing different resources. But I should mention that, fairness and objective would be the most important elements they should consider about firstly.
Relative links:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2010-09/29/c_13535364.htm
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g7K0jscDmeKr1xSno8V0c6Z54z1Q?docId=CNG.164caa25dc9f9cd73359c4be468ff1ec.6e1
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hN2WLoWY2aKjHObeYbB9EWr15P1AD9II33480?docId=D9II33480
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11429141
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/world/asia/01china.html?src=mv
http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC100930-0000099/China-not-so-charitable-about-Buffett,-Gates
That's the Chinese news when you see the sentences like this - "Charity banquet of China's super-rich opens east-west dialogue". A typical Chinese media usually use the official language to point out the meanings of an event directly, even the event is not a political one.
Obviously, every media interpret this news differently by using different resources from the meeting and interviews.
In Xinhua news, it used the interview materials from the son of Warren Buffett. And in the second half of the news, the journalist demonstrate the different attitudes from Chinese super-rich people. All the contents showed the different opinions from the east and west cultures, which matched the angle it said in the headline.
The AFP news gave the headline "China's super-rich banquet exceeds hopes" by quoting the saying of Buffett. And the entire article is made up of the sayings from Buffett and Gates. Some quoting terms were revised and reconstructed by the journalist. The last sentence selected from the state-run Global Times showed the attitude of this media as well.
The BBC news showed its rigorous style of work. As the spectator, the journalist use "perhaps" to express the objective of this dinner. And he use the materials from "one of those invited to dine". So this article is like a profile story from the angle of Chinese philanthropist.
The AP making this news much more comprehensive. The journalist use the resources from the Buffett and Gates, and the different part of Chinese people whatever they attended the dine. Therefore, it represented some of the attitudes from the American sides, and offered the Chinese opinions as well.
Not like the TODAY news which just use the interview materials from one person - the CEO of Far Eastern Group, the only goal is to express the idea about "China not so charitable about Buffett, Gates". So even the journalist use the records from the Xinhua news agency, the Global Times and the state media, they all serviced for this angle. Although that's good for promoting a story, I don't think it is enough objective.
Anyway, every journalist can make their own story by choosing different resources. But I should mention that, fairness and objective would be the most important elements they should consider about firstly.
Relative links:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2010-09/29/c_13535364.htm
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g7K0jscDmeKr1xSno8V0c6Z54z1Q?docId=CNG.164caa25dc9f9cd73359c4be468ff1ec.6e1
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hN2WLoWY2aKjHObeYbB9EWr15P1AD9II33480?docId=D9II33480
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11429141
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/world/asia/01china.html?src=mv
http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC100930-0000099/China-not-so-charitable-about-Buffett,-Gates
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)