資料來源：Freedom House
The Long Shadow of Chinese Censorship: How
the Communist Party’s Media Restrictions Affect News Outlets Around the
World provides a survey of this phenomenon and its recent evolution as it
pertains to the news media sector, though similar dynamics also affect the
film, literature, and performing arts industries. Specifically, this report
focuses on six types of media outlets based outside mainland China that
together reach news consumers in dozens of countries: major international media;
local outlets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America; mainstream media in Hong Kong
and Taiwan; exile Chinese outlets providing uncensored news to people in China;
and media serving Chinese diaspora communities around the world. -
See more at: http://cima.ned.org/publications/long-shadow-chinese-censorship-how-communist-party%E2%80%99s-media-restrictions-affect-news-out#sthash.JiRrvBxP.dpuf
資料來源：Freedom House
Washington／October 22, 2013
Chinese Communist Party media controls are
increasingly constraining news outlets based outside China. This is the key
finding of a report released
today, authored by Freedom House research analyst Sarah Cook and published by
the Center for International Media Assistance at the National Endowment for
Democracy.
“The dynamics are subtle, but the reality is
that the ‘China Factor’ exists in newsrooms around the world, be they
internationally renowned outlets such as the New York Times and
Bloomberg, a local newspaper in Nepal, or a Chinese radio station in Los
Angeles,” said Cook. “The Chinese government’s efforts to influence reporting
by foreign and overseas Chinese news outlets have intensified and expanded over
the past five years.”
The new report -- The
Long Shadow of Chinese Censorship: How Chinese Media Restrictions Affect News
Outlets around the World -- examines this phenomenon across
foreign and Chinese-language media outlets based outside mainland China and
that reach audiences worldwide.
The study finds that Chinese officials have
directly impeded independent reporting by media based abroad, barring foreign
correspondents from sites of important incidents or pressuring senior
executives not to publish content deemed politically undesirable to the regime.
More prevalent — and often more effective — are
methods of control that subtly induce self-censorship among media owners and
outlets. Indirect pressure has also been applied via proxies — including
advertisers, satellite firms, and foreign governments. These international
actors have boycotted disfavored outlets, cut transmission signals, or arrested
activists disseminating news critical of the Chinese Communist Party.
The content targeted for censorship includes
topics that may have global implications, such as human rights abuses,
high-level corruption, and environmental pollution. Most frequently targeted
are reports that touch “hot button” issues like the persecution of Tibetans,
Uighurs, and Falun Gong practitioners, as well as Chinese-language commentary
challenging the legitimacy of one-party rule.
Despite these trends, there are clear limits
to Beijing’s influence. Journalists, activists, owners, and independent courts
outside China have pushed back against pressure and scored some important
victories. The result is a complex, nuanced, and ever-changing negotiation over
where the “red line” lies.
“Much is at stake in this global contest
between the Chinese government’s power and media freedom,” said Cook. “China is
too important a country for the world not to be fully aware of what is
happening on the ground and for Chinese people to lose vital sources of
independent information and commentary.”
Key
findings by media type
International
media: Chinese authorities employ various
measures to obstruct frontline journalists and retaliate against news companies
for critical reports. Physical attacks, visa restrictions, and website blocks
have increased, while cyberattacks have expanded from individual journalists to
the global servers of leading outlets.
Offshore
Chinese media: Chinese officials have taken
especially forceful measures to obstruct the operations of media outlets run by
independent-minded Chinese expatriates and that collectively reach audiences
numbering in the millions within China. In several cases, foreign companies and
event organizers — ranging from Apple to Eutelsat to NASDAQ — have assisted
government efforts to obstruct reporting and content dissemination.
Local
media in Asia, Africa, and Latin America: Local
government officials, particularly in Asia, have occasionally taken steps to
restrict or punish reporting that is damaging to China’s reputation, either at
the behest of Chinese officials or to preemptively avoid tensions with a large
donor and trading partner. In Africa and Latin America, promoting the Chinese
government’s view appears to be the dominant tactic for influencing the public.
As Chinese government-linked entities buy stakes in local media,
self-censorship pressures could emerge.
Hong
Kong, Taiwan, and the Chinese diaspora: Co-opting
owners of media outlets in order to marginalize dissenting reporting and
commentary has been a key strategy. Beijing’s efforts to influence newsroom
decisions in Hong Kong have intensified, expanding to topics touching on the
territory’s internal politics. In Taiwan, self-censorship on topics deemed
sensitive to Beijing is increasing, as media owners seek new sources of revenue
from mainland entities.
Freedom House is an independent watchdog
organization that supports democratic change, monitors the status of freedom
around the world, and advocates for democracy and human rights.
資料來源：Freedom House
INTRODUCTION
Since coming to power in 1949, the Chinese
Communist Party (CCP) has constructed a multi-layered system for censoring
unwanted news and stifling opposing viewpoints within China. Over the
past two decades, this domestic apparatus has spawned mechanisms that extend
information controls to media outlets based outside China.
This study provides a survey of this
phenomenon, finding that over the past five years, its nature and scope have
intensified and expanded.
In many cases, Chinese officials directly impede
independent reporting by media based abroad. However, more prevalent – and
often more effective – are methods of control that subtly induce
self-censorship or inspire media owners, advertisers, and other international
actors to take action on the CCP’s behalf.
These efforts – ranging from discreet to
blatant – are successful in some cases, and encounter significant pushback in
others, with journalists and activists at times scoring important victories.
But whatever the outcome of each
contestation, the “China Factor” is palpably present, be it at the
internationally renowned Washington Post, a local newspaper in Nepal,
or a Chinese radio talk show in Los Angeles.
This report was authored by Freedom House
researcher Sarah Cook and published by the Center for International Media
Assistance at the National Endowment for Democracy on October 22, 2013.
Combining case studies, interviews, and
original analysis, its chapters focus on six types of media outlets based
outside mainland China that together reach news consumers worldwide: major
international media; local outlets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America;
mainstream media in Hong Kong and Taiwan; exile Chinese outlets providing
uncensored news to people in China; and media serving Chinese diaspora communities
around the world.
＃＃＃
