Who Are You Crusading Against, Howard?

Feng's profileNon-violent ResistancePhotosBlogLists

< Previous Next >

13 January

Who Are You Crusading Against, Howard?

I don't know. But since my last post about Howard French's China media story in the New York Times, some friends who know French personally have assured me that he's a nice person, great reporter, and that parts of that story may be just the work of of some over-zealous editorial assistant. Furious as I am, I am not going to deny he's a good reporter.

But today I see this, Letter from China: Big Brother is playing a game he can't win from the IHT:

......

In Zhu's curious new upside-down universe, welcoming things sometimes means wiping them out, as happened to the site of another well-known blogger who wrote about the events at The Beijing News, Zhao Jing, or Michael Anti by pen name, only to have his site shut down. Anyone who remembers bombing villages in order to save them will instantly savor the perversity of this logic.

......

Just to make sure I don't take his words out of context, read the whole thing. After doing which myself, I couldn't help but conclude that this is someone who gets high beating up Chinese journalists, describing painstakingly to his Western readers what a bunch of chickenshits Chinese journalists are.

I would be foolish to still be talking about "common courtesy" to a fellow journalist. Apparently enough to French, Chinese journalists don't deserve that name, and there's no way he's going to respect them as colleagues.

Readers of my blog will know better than mistaking me for someone rooting for the OTHER SIDE. To a large degree, I and people like French often feel frustrated and angry about the same things. (Yeah I know, I am a darned chickenshit for not naming THEM.) I don't have that much to say against the body of French's column either.

What I hate is his way of opening it, his choice of the villain, or rather, the lackey. Chinese journalists are certainly an easy target. In theory they should be better informed than the general public, and hell, they do speak to French on record (I presume), don't they? They are not some dark force in control of everything but eternally hiding from behind an unlisted phone number, that everybody curses at but nobody could name or quote on record, not even the New York Times.

So when French gets frustrated at the situation and needs to find someone for a public spanking, he picks Chinese journalists who dare to speak to him, use their names, and exposes them for such brainwashed cowards.

I am not even going to speculate on how French got poor Zhu Yonghong to speak to him, and what consequences the guy faces now that his name is in the Times. It doesn't take a seasoned China correspondent of the New York Times to instantly figure out why Zhu "changed his tune". We have all been there. Got the phone call, gone to the little rendezvous, sat in the lecture, weathered the veiled threats and ultimatums. It is selfish, and as much as I am myself, shameful, to cave in. But does that give French the moral high ground, or rather, the arrogance, to be talking about "the curious new upside-down universe", "the perversity of the logic?" --- Just because I am an expat journalist and the worst thing I could get is a kick in the butt and a stamp of "persona non grata" in my passport so that I am better than all of you local wretches?

No thank you. Whoever you hate, just don't take it out on Chinese journalists. Why do you think Zhu put the "Prague Spring" stuff on his Web site in the first place? Whatever you choose to write, just don't make it seem YOU are the only one standing up against it. That would be the peak of hypocrisy. Whatever compromises we Chinese journalists have to make and whatever setbacks we suffer, we are still here, trying to do our job. We are not counting on your solidarity and certainly don't need your lecture and your cynicism. If you feel angry and frustrated, well Howie boy, you ain't seen nothing yet.

17:06 | View trackbacks (5) | Blog it

Comments (4)

To add a comment, sign in with your Windows Live ID (if you use Hotmail, Messenger, or Xbox LIVE, you have a Windows Live ID). Sign in

Don't have a Windows Live ID? Sign up

	zenoyan wrote: Let it be. You do your job and the people will support you. Who cares about what Howard said? Damn him. 21 Jan.
	Joshua Xanadu wrote: I couldn't agree more with your assessment on Howard French. Of the 3 major NY Times reporters on China (Jim Yardley, Joseph Kahn and French), French is afflicted with the most obvious signs of expat chauvinism. While all three parrot the NY Times official editorial stance on constantly criticizing China, Kahn and Yardley offer valuable and sympathetic information on the social ills, while French seems to pretend he's a wannabe Nicholas Kristof, assiduously glorifying himself. I remember one of French's earliest (if not first) article about a year ago on China. He inserted himself as a confidante to a 'beleaguered'' group of Chinese female flight attendants. He portayed the Chinese fliers as uncouth and uncivilized, establishing a clear tone that those stewardesses delighted in the 'luxury' of conversing with your American correspondent. However, unlike Kristof, French comes off as nothing better than a stereotypical Western asiaphile, the imagined lead in a James Cavell novel as a heroic Western man with superior morals, justice and humanism. Unfortunately, the NY Times and the American public prefer their reports on China from this less objective reporter, especially as French's articles serve to reenforce positive images of Americans for themselves, not as genuine attempt at understanding China. 18 Jan.
	eswn wrote: 顶! 15 Jan.
	Schwinglo95551 wrote: Well said. (And thanks, also, to MSN Spaces for allowing you to say it, by not deleting your account.) 14 Jan.

Trackbacks (5)

The trackback URL for this entry is:

http://uleewang.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!AACA57371EDC8398!655.trak

Weblogs that reference this entry