follow up to previous post on media bias

After thinking about it, I realize that this is a general phenomenon: the media reports about something that you are familiar with and you realize how distorted it is from your own interpretation of what actually happened.  Therefore, the frustration among “pro-China” folks is very understandable.  My point in my last post was that freedom of the press does not mean objectivity in the press.  It means that news media outlets have the right to report on issues however they choose and are not ordered to report a certain way.  The right to free speech is an active right that does not translate to the right of citizens to “objective” news coverage.  That is not to say they are not influenced either directly or indirectly by individuals within the government, but they are not bound by the government’s orders.  If the government had its way, the Abu Ghraib scandal or the illegal wiretapping would never have been reported at all.

The few times I have been involved in something that was reported upon, it was immediately obvious that the news companies were not accurately portraying the situation.  For example, after the protests in San Francisco before the Iraq War, the news were reporting that the protests were anti-war demonstrations. The reality was that the demonstrations were about many, many issues, not just about the war. It was much less focused than the news media said it was.

welcome to western media bias

The following is in response to an unknown faculty member at UC Davis. He wrote it during one week when several Chinese students/faculty were using the department email to express their views on China, in particular with frustration about how so much of the western media was reporting on the China’s government response to civil unrest among supporters of Tibetan independence. Their reporting was “biased”. My response comes first, followed by the original email.

Incidentally, there is much media coverage nowadays of the power (or lack thereof) of media relations and China’s image. Here is a good one highlighting the value of coordinated media relations for independent Tibet supporters.

Zhenhong,
First off, I did read your whole email regarding China, media bias, and Tibet. I particularly appreciate that you do not take a “pro-China” stance, but merely shed light on an important bias. However, the CEE email list is *not* the place for disseminating your views. There are thousands of ways to express your thoughts and views. In fact, I would encourage you to publish this in one of the school papers. There are many issues in the world that people care deeply about; you are free to express those views. But do you see people just yelling their views via departmental email all the time? No.

Your criticism of what you call the “Western media” is warranted. I’m glad you are finally paying attention, now that the media coverage is about something that concerns you. The corporate Western media is, simply, not to be trusted–at least they should not be used as the sole source of information. Many within the United States have been saying this for years. It is the dominant Western media that, after Sept. 11, 2001, bowed down to the U.S. leaders and gave the green light to invade Iraq by doing little to no investigation of the facts. Using them as a source of either unbiased news or (with Hollywood) as a source of cultural aspiration will, in the end, lead to disappointment at best. It is too bad that it takes media coverage only about the issues one cares about to realize this. I hope that a greater level of scrutiny of both the dominant Western and Chinese media will be a positive result of 2008, the Year of China, although in the end there is no such thing as objectivity in the media. What is objective to you is biased and unfair to someone else.

I do have to disagree with you on one point. You state “the Western world is not interested in human rights, freedom or democracy for Chinese”. This depends on which part of the “Western world” you are talking about. If you mean the Western governments or corporations, no, they certainly do not care at all about freedom or democracy. They care about power and profits–everybody knows this. And now, finally, you are up to speed as well. However, if you mean the Western people, the average citizens, I would say that they–we–genuinely do care about human rights, freedom and democracy and certainly care about the Chinese people. I frequently go to China and have met many wonderful people there but am distrustful of the Chinese government–just as I am of the U.S. Government. My hope is that the Chinese people will make the same distinction between the Western governments/media and the Western people, as I’m sure you are beginning to.

As to the decision of whether or not to use vast amounts of natural resources in pursuit of the American Dream in China, I leave that to the Chinese to decide.

Regards,
DR

—– Original Message —-
From: Zhenhong [email omitted for privacy sake]
To: [many emails]
Cc: [many more emails, including UC Davis Civil & Environmental Engineering Department groups]
Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 11:12:18 PM
Subject: Implication of Tibet issue for transportation, oil price and climate change

Dear colleagues:

One of the important hypotheses on the oil demand in China is that the trend
of motorization in China, which drives demand for gasoline, is due to not
only the rise of income but also the desire of Chinese for an American
lifestyle including owning a car. Most Chinese learn about America from
Hollywood movies and the famous Voice of America radio (little known in US
because it is banned in the US even though it is funded by the US
government). Chinese dream for an American lifestyle probably due to the
thirst for and fantasy of American freedom and democracy.

However, the recent Tibet issue may eventually become a historical moment
where many many Chinese lose their faith in or desire for the Western media,
freedom of speech, democracy and even lifestyle. For example, a Chinese
student from Tsinghua University in Beijing creates the www.anti-cnn.com
website and list the evidences of how the Western media bluntly manipulates
the “facts” of Tibet. The website is named as “anti-cnn” mainly because CNN
deliberately chopped a picture in support of its story-telling against
China, but it also includes distorted reporting by many other main stream
medias on the Tibet issue. Now there is a popular saying in China called
“don’t be too CNN”, meaning “don’t lie” or “don’t lie stupidly” or “don’t
lie while declaring integrity”. The evidence on this website may have
convinced many Chinese of what the Chinese government failed to sell
(because Chinese to some extent don’t trust the government): the Western
world is not interested in human rights, freedom or democracy for Chinese;
they are just using them as excuses to block the growth of China. Some
Chinese said they finally “wake up” from the fantasy about America.

Another event that plays a key role in the recent outrage among Chinese is
the creation of the video called “Tibet WAS,IS,and ALWAYS WILL BE a part of
China” by another student on Youtube.com (the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo). It has been viewed by almost
2.5 million times so far. If you also read the comments, you can feel the
emotion and arguments by many Chinese. Note that this video was created
before the domestic Chinese recently started to have access to Youtube.com.

Your reaction may be what you have chosen to believe for a long time:
Chinese are mostly brainwashed by their government and still don’t have
access to the truth. Will you have a second thought if many of these
humiliated Chinese are students or scholars who study or work for years in
the US or Europe, who agree and understand the values of freedom, democracy,
and human rights, who have every access to information that Americans have,
who understand the existing problems in China and do not necessarily agree
all the policies by the Chinese government, who now live in the US and do
not have any pressure of speaking out for or against the Chinese government,
who feel they should be an unbiased source of information about China but
frustrated that no media come to them, who is disappointed by a recent
anti-China & pro-Tibet-independence article by Dateline UCDavis that does
not interview even just one of the thousands of Chinese students in UC Davis
(link: http://www.dateline.ucdavis.edu/dl_detail.lasso?id=10196), and who
feel so helpless that they have to use some academic context to have their
voices heard?

The research questions are: will the distrust by Chinese in the Western
media lead to loss of faith in common Western values? Will this further lead
to less desire for a American lifestyle and slower down the motorization
trend in China? Or in opposite, will Chinese revenge by behaving
deliberately against what the Western world wish for and drive more and
consume more oil? What are the implications for oil supply, environment and
climate change?

I understand this email may inevitably seem political to some of you. And if
I say I intended to respect the purpose of this email list by focusing on
transportation and related issues, you may accuse me as too CNN. I apologize
if you are offended.

As a by-product of this academic discussion, please note that you are
helping the 1.3 billion Chinese people just by reading this email and
listening to some voices you may have never heard. Please be proud of it.
Please talk to any Chinese students around you if you can.

I appreciate your attention.

Sincerely,
Zh

on supermarkets in Davis

There are four different supermarkets in Davis, although some have two branches so the actual number is higher. And there is another one (Trader Joe’s) coming to town soon. These four are markedly different in their respective approaches to selling food and related goods.

First, there is the most “conventional” supermarket: Safeway. I’d say the majority of people shop there. It is where they actively market the mainstream brands such as Doritos for chips. There is a “Natural Foods” aisle at Safeway, as opposed to everything else in the store. I shop there in emergencies or if I happen to be near it. Fortunately it is somewhat far–more than a 5 minute bike ride away.

Second, there is the very budget-friendly copy of Safeway, Save-Mart. Just its name tells you everything about it. Off-brands, cheaper prices, lower quality. The one time I went there I tried to use my Safeway card, having not noticed the name of the place. “This is Safeway, isn’t it?” I asked. “No, this is Save-Mart” answered the woman, making it clear she is sick of people making the same mistake. According to Davis Wiki, “this store has gone through several name changes”. Clearly, it doesn’t belong.

Next–and these are in no particular order–is Nugget. This is one of the more interesting, upscale, and obnoxious supermarkets I have been to. The outside of the store is lined with ridiculous Romanesque statues of women holding baskets of presumably fresh fruit over their heads. Although it’s prices are comparable to other supermarkets, it clearly caters to the wealthier segment of Davis. Indeed, it is closer to the golf course than the others. No doubt, they sell great smoothies and fresh fruit juices and sells some great wines and excellent chocolates, but the place suppresses that which in this day and age a supermarket, of all places in an upscale setting, should be emphasizing: organic produce and reduced consumption of things like plastic bags. Before even entering the store you are surrounded by huge mounds of extra-large, shiny, tasteless produce. After walking through all this you finally get to one small organic section where the fruits and vegetables are usually half rotten. And upon leaving, no matter how little you are carrying, the question they ask is: would you like paper or plastic?

In refreshing contrast to the previous three places, there is the Davis Food Co-op, a member-owned supermarket specializing in good food. It is not particularly more expensive than any of the other places. In fact, just the opposite: because you can buy much of your groceries in bulk, the food can in the end be much cheaper than even Save-mart. But more important than price: the store is located near the center of town, so you don’t have to drive there, and they sell much more organic produce than “conventional” produce. You can buy any kind of grain or pasta or spice or nut you can imagine in bulk, among other things–like tea. I suspect Safeway shoppers do not like variety. The breads are fantastic. The beer selection is one of the best I have ever seen in any supermarket. I simply do not understand why people would prefer to shop at any other place. And when you check out, the question is: Do you need a bag? I bring my own.

Kim Jong-Il vs. the magic of macy’s

The other day I was shopping at macy’s the large, somewhat upscale national clothing and household items retailer, and noticed their symbol: a big red star. Somewhat hard to miss actually. The funny thing is, through the 20th century and up to today the red star has been associated with socialism throughout the world. For example, the red star is on the national emblem of North Korea.

vs.

So a logical question to ask is, what is macy’s doing peppering their shopping bags with this abused symbol? Can the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea sue macy’s inc.?

hua zang si

I was visiting a friend of mine in san francisco and she live’s 1/2 block from a buddhist temple called hua zang si (the first part is like your name wah), so we went in. It was very interesting–converted from a catholic church in a poorer yet very international part of town. within 5 minute walk you find all kinds of latin american and other restaurants ranging from el salvadoran to vegetarian japanese to california cuisine, several churches, unique stores (like a greek goods store), community and cultural centers–even a polish cultural center, etc.

We were fortunate to step inside when after the sunday activities were finished, but the monks and a translator were still around. We talked to two monks who took a lot of time to explain everything to us, but to be honest I get overwhelmed by the stories of the buddhas and the other dieties. They all speak mandarin there.

Inside, this temple is worlds away from what is going on outside. On the first floor is a meditation hall with a giant statue of the seated buddha–4m tall?–flanked with other lesser buddha, such as one for protection.  Offerings of various edible things such as oranges and crackers were laid out in front of the main buddha. On one wall hangs the photos of various masters related to the center on one side. On the other wall hangs paintings which are quite bizarre. They are flat paintings done in a 3D style–I mean, they look 3D to the human eye due to some technique–of living beings in seemingly out-of-place locations. For example, there is one with bright pink flamingos in a dense jungle.

On the second floor, another buddha sat in the same pose. There were a couple more 3D paintings, as well as some unusual sculpture in the center, a big block with a strange cavern-like interior seemingly made of melted plastic by one of the masters. There was much more in both the rooms than is possible to describe here. But of course, there was the buddha nectar, such as Long Life Nectar, which the masters (buddhas?) miraculously produce upon achieving enlightenment. These nectars, the production of which is conveniently recorded on film, supposedly prolong life for the lay eater or toucher, among other benefits.

Overall, it was a very interesting visit. Afterwards we went to the gelato shop across the street for an afternoon dessert.

see here:
http://www.huazangsi.org

Clinton, fear-mongering

I have not written in a while, but feel compelled to write something on the current election. The following is from the AP about a story that developed a while ago:

The former first lady has sharply criticized her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination for saying during a televised debate last summer that he would be willing as president to meet with the leaders of Cuba, Iran and other hostile nations without preconditions. He reiterated that willingness last week.

“We simply cannot legitimize rogue regimes or weaken American prestige by impulsively agreeing to presidential talks that have no preconditions,” Clinton said. “It may sound good, but it doesn’t meet the real world test of foreign policy.”

While I cannot say whether talking to the president of North Korea is a good idea or not, Hillary’s response is exactly why she should not become the leader of the United States. This notion of hers that there is a “real world” out there that is somehow separate from the actions of the United States leadership is, basically, more fear-mongering, more of trying to maintain the status quo, trying to tell Americans that they are little people that need to be protected from that “real world”. Hillary, the United States should not be sitting back and saying well, that’s the way things are done, so lets do them that way. We need a leader who will try something different. Something who will have the courage to change perhaps simply for the sake of trying a new approach, a kind of adaptive leadership where you learn by doing. America, of all nations, creates its own foreign policy. Hillary, of all people should know that our foreign policy is not independent of what the leaders of the United States make it to be. In fact, not testing new strategies, sticking to the same old ways trying to instill fear in Americans by talking about the “real world” out there that we need to be protected from–this is not leadership. This is cowardice.

weather report

heading out to western Massachusetts in a few days. here’s today’s weather report:

Today

Cloudy. Periods of freezing drizzle…a
chance of freezing rain…sleet and snow this morning…then a slight
chance of rain…snow and sleet this afternoon. Highs in the mid 30s.
Northeast winds around 5 mph…becoming northwest this afternoon.
Chance of precipitation 40 percent.

If we make peaceful revolution impossible, we make violent revolution
inevitable.
- John Kennedy

poor penmanship and bad spelling

I have lapsed on writing due to the time-consuming nature of youth-robbing academic pursuits such as theorizing about the social implications of the mushrooming use of social networking websites such as facebook. Ok, that is a blatant lie. facebook itself is the guilty one, drawing me away from the world of writing. Back to writing: by hand and by keyboard. So, with that, I’ve been writing by hand much more. Yet, to my dismay, my very own handwriting is as wretched as ever, definitely not the kind of impression I’d want to leave of the mind behind the pen. How bad is it? “…cacography,” I wrote. Unsure was I (is that even grammatically correct?), however, that I had even spelled that word correctly. Since google has the answer to everything, I googled (verbs are so easy to make…a great thing about English) that word (”cacography”) to see if it was spelled correctly (whoa, there, fella! easy on the parenthesizin’!). It was. But, more importantly, in the results I came upon a writeup of the word.

Cacography. We should use the word more, it’s too useful and relevant to let it fade away

p.s. (parenthesizin’) is from a Brown online paper by Ben Yaster and describes such excesses as

… more than a little distracting. It is hard to read these sentences and ignore the punctuation littering the paragraph like beer bottles and peanut shells idling beneath seats after a baseball game.

Why We Fight

Why We Fight

watch on YouTube:
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

you
must
watch
this
film