If western media were to sayFreedom of the pressIn recent days, deputy director zhang danhong of the chinese ministry of german voice has been ordered to “sealed” because of his reporting of a “manifest pro-china” tendency, and they themselves have lifted the last veil and exposed nakedly the hypocrisy of the so-called “freedom of the press.”。
People really wonder, what exactly is “freedom of the press”? Does it count as “freedom of the press” that zhang danhong and diet henesh expressed their views on china about what they saw? If it's like this, you get fired, you get laid, you lose your job, where's the press freedom? What is freedom if “freedom of the press” is to “scold china” and not to speak justice for china? Does “freedom of the press” mean “the death of those who follow me and those who oppose me”
While it cannot be denied that, in western societies, the media, as a social management tool, can, to some extent, serve as social watchdogs by criticizing government and social phenomena. But at the same time, the western media themselves are part of western society. How can they be independent? Moreover, they are closely linked economically and with various social interest groups, including political parties, political parties or corporate consortia, and many of them play a direct role as advocates of interest groups. Thus, the western media, both in theory and in practice, have never and never been able to achieve what they call full “independence and freedom”。
It is impossible for western media to explicitly acknowledge their role as “representatives”. In order to be “neutral”, it is necessary to mark itself with “freedom of the press”, which is of universal value, in order to find a basis for defending the interests of its own group, excluding and combating the development of others. Perhaps because “false lies become truth once and for all”, for a long time they truly think they are “freedom of the press”, in fact, deceiving themselves and the world。
Western media are more accustomed to seeing a conflict society. While they also have a conflict of interest when speaking on behalf of their respective interest groups, as a matter of common interest, they tend to work together to speak out for western mainstream society in the face of other interest groups outside the western system, which, with its powerful political and economic influence, is displaying alarming “insolence and prejudice”. They want western values to be used as a yardstick to look at every country and nation on earth so that, despite the facts, humans and the worlds, the negative coverage of the non-western world is spread out。
However, the chinese language is well spoken, “it is better to see”. During the beijing olympic games, many foreign media and tourists from china called themselves to see a completely different china. As has been commented, this collective “impressive subversion” occurs because there was a collective “impressive scam”. The vast majority of westerners who have not come to china have in mind that china is an image woven by western media, and that the manufacturing process is a “measurement” of western values that screens, knits, and even fabricates chinese reality。
In fact, china is seeing the world in an open-minded manner, as it has achieved remarkable development gains. China's leaders are committed to the concept of “harmonization” both in promoting domestic economic growth and in developing international relations. China’s media, when presenting western societies, tend to emphasize “the power of the west, and the evil of the west,” sometimes even portraying the western world so well that many chinese may feel, more or less, at odds when they enter western society to be exposed to something negative。
And what about "open" the west? They did not reflect on, understand and view china's economic progress from a positive perspective, turning a blind eye to the improvement of the standard of living of the chinese people, turning a blind eye to the real efforts made by the chinese government to develop and safeguard people's rights, simply knowing that the cold war mentality, which continues to be characterized as “necessary” and remains accustomed to pointing the finger at others under the pretext of differences in the political system. Indeed, it is well known that the economy is inextricably linked to politics. Without political progress, where does the economy go? On the other hand, economic flight is a strong proof of political progress。
With the multipolarization of the world landscape and the trend towards global economic integration, and with more and more western journalists and western citizens coming to china to feel and understand china first-hand, they believe that china’s development should be seen in an updated perspective, and that positive and positive reporting on china’s achievements should be given, but in a conservative social environment they are often seen as “others, not as progress, but as “the first ape to walk straight down”。
Indeed, the conservative and arrogant value system of western mainstream society is constantly exerting a powerful influence on “freedom of the press”, which is always the “subordinate rule” of the western media. It was reported that during the 1999 conflict in kosovo, the british government had repeatedly and strongly denounced bbc journalist john simpson in belgrade for “failing to meet the standards that an old journalist was supposed to be”. In the “iraq war”, the united states military intervened more frequently in the work of the media, not only “playing a guide” for every journalist, issuing a 15-page “war field interview” but also warning journalists that they would be “cleaned out” if they were to comply with the “three nos” reporting requirements. “the authorities control the information disseminated by the media, while the journalists become their `stenographers'”。
At a time when the twenty-first century is virtually no longer known in human history as the “new century”, the western media must recognize that peace and development are the real themes of the world and that multipolarization and globalization have long become an irreversible tide of times. It is impossible to have a proper understanding of the future development of the world and the growth of the non-western world if western societies also hold the “cold-war thinking” that emerged in the middle of the last century as a dominant value, and if western media are narcissistic about themselves in the siege of “free press”. While negative coverage of the non-western world now caters to some groups, history will surely prove that “open thinking” is the key to modern media competition, who has “open thinking” who wins and who has “open thinking” who leads the media competition. Otherwise, they will be “cleaned out” by the times, not by united states troops。
