Changing media, changing society – the WTO column(later also in
Chinabiz)
Shanghai - One of the key lessons I still remember from the Marxism courses at my old university is that when the economic fundamentals of a society change, it will have profound implications for its culture and political organization. It is one of my favorite topics when a meeting with Chinese official threatens to get a bit dull. In most cases they tell me, that I must have had pretty advanced classes in Marxism and that they have not progressed that far in their compulsory learning sessions.
Unfortunately this theory is only marginally helpful in predicting how those changes in China will take place, which mostly belongs to the domain of fortune telling. When people cling to expectations about future developments, it often says more about their background and expectations than about what really is going to happen.
Look for example at the rapid changing playing field of the media in China. The current media explosion, driven by the need to make money or even profits, has caused the previously moribund media in less than half a decade into unprecedented competition, openness and more quality – although the starting point was that low, quality of the media could only improve.
Western observers have often assumed that those changes in the media would be instrumental for other changes, leading to a more open, multi-party democratization of the country. The longer I’m here, the more uncomfortable I feel with the last part of that prediction. Changes, yes, but why assume it will be a multi-party democracy including nationwide elections? Maybe because most observers cannot imagine how any other system could work.
What I saw in the past ten years is that the whole system has been changing very fast, not only economically, but also culturally and politically. An emerging private economy and civil society are just a few elements of that profound change.
A few years ago Dutch police, urged by concerned animal rights activists, raided a warehouse for traditional Chinese medicine to investigate whether they could find any parts of endangered animals in those medicines. They could not, but the flabbergasted researchers also found out that there was no obvious relationship between the content they investigated and the labels of the packages they came from.
The same is happening to China’s political system: profound changes are taking place, but for those who only read and believe what the labels say, China might look like a stagnating country.
Last
week I discovered in the
Columbia Law Review of January the excellent study of Benjamin Liebman on how the media in China have influenced and changed the legal system. Partly I like it, because it underwrites my observations on what is happening in China. Liebman does it with so much details and thorough understanding of the situation in China, that it is rather refreshing contribution in the international debate.
Liebman describes how the media have gained power in the past two decades partly at the expense of the still hapless legal system. CCTV-journalists tell how they are routinely beaten up when they arrive for shooting in one of the provinces. Locals fear, and for good reason, that the media, who act as watchdog, problem solver, but also often as the leader of a lynch party, are there to create trouble. Courts feel they are forced to hand out harsher sentences, even when it is not according to the law, when the media pack gets involved. Media are more powerful than the courts.
Media have become that influential, because they are perceived and act as an extension of the one-party state, and used their position to gain power, argues Liebman. It is not always a straight-forward relationship, but media who would challenge the one-party state would not only get into trouble, they would effectively undermine also their own power basis.
This very dynamic interaction between the media and the state is a fascinating push-and-pull game that goes beyond the one-liners traditional media can use to describe a country. Such a pity that the truth of often so complicated.
Fons Tuinstra