dck
加入时间: 2004/04/02
文章: 2801
经验值: 4649
|
|
|
作者：dck 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
焦国标照片： 纽约时报终于报道焦国标笔伐中宣部
http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/05/02/international/03china.jpg
尽管亚洲的媒体在反对新闻检查方面打过几场胜仗，但是有评论认为，这个地区的大部份媒体，特别是中国大陆的媒体，在纪念星期一“世界新闻自由日”的时候，却没有什么值得庆祝的理由。美国纽约时报在世界新闻自由日的当天发表长篇文章，介绍北大教授焦国标讨伐中宣部的一篇檄文。纽约时报认为，中国仍然是中国，在言论开放和新闻自由等方面，中国仍然存在着滞后的现像。
自由之家：亚洲新闻自由倒退
据马尼拉时报报道，亚太地区的人口只有百分之7享有新闻自由。总部设在美国的一个学术组织“自由之家”的调查统计表明，亚洲在新闻自由的变化方面，出现开倒车的现像。
纽约时报在星期一世界新闻自由日的当天，刊登一篇和中国新闻自由有关的文章，对胡锦涛是否愿意给中国人民开放更多的言论自由提出疑问。
介绍焦教授网上文章
纽约时报还刊登了北京大学新闻与传播学院副教授焦国标的彩色照片，并且介绍了焦国标最近在网上发表《讨伐中宣部》一文。尽管这篇文章受到中国官方的禁止，然而，文章在网上广泛流行，并且在中国新闻界引起轰动。
纽约时报摘要地介绍了焦国标教授的文章。焦国标在《讨伐中宣部》一文把中宣部和第二次世界大战期间的德国纳粹的宣传相提并论。该文指出，中宣部以罗马教皇的不可动摇的地位自居，50年代中宣部隐瞒中国几千万人被饿死的事实，今天仍然隐瞒萨斯疫情。
北大学者严词猛批中宣部
焦国标在《讨伐中宣部》一文中指出，中宣部动辄以稳定压倒一切为由，限制新闻报道、封杀媒体。中宣部是当下中国社会文明发展的绊脚石，为邪恶势力和腐败分子撑起最大、最有力的保护伞。焦国标说：“谁都知道中国不是新闻自由太多，而是新闻自由太少。中宣部以新闻自由为敌，连‘新闻自由’四字都不许随意使用，这分明是对最起码文明准则的公然践踏。”
焦国标说：“中宣部已经堕落为当下中国最愚昧落后势力的堡垒，在他们弄权得到快乐和贿赂的同时，党和政府的形象、国家的文明进步因此都付出惨重的代价。如果听任其横行不法、擅权祸国下去，不仅它自身沉沦、万劫不复，便是中国改革发展的大业也将被大打折扣，中国的政治文明进程将被大大延迟。”
纽约时报：胡锦涛等更严控新闻言论
象焦国标这样公开大胆地表达不同政见的现像在中国是非常罕见的，但是他的观点并不是孤立的。在18个月前，当胡锦涛等新一代领导人接管了中国的权力的时候，很多中国的知识份子寄希望于中共新的年轻的领导班子，认为他们会在言论自由方面更加容忍，然而事实恰恰相反。纽约时报指出，胡锦涛等上台之后，对言论自由和新闻自由施加了更加严格的控制，有些中国知识份子认为，这种控制甚至达到1989年镇压天安门广场学生民主运动后的程度。
纽约时报注意到，中国警方加强了对因特网的监视，逮捕并且起诉了一些在互联网上交流信息以及发表政府认为对自己不利的信息的人士。中国警方还骚扰讨论中国修宪的知识份子。上个月，北京表示反对香港人民自己选举领导人和议员，很多香港民众认为这一举动背弃了1997年中国收回香港主权的时候对香港人民做出的承诺。
中国季节性政治气候变化
北京的政治环境反映出每年中国季节性的政治气候变化。每年春天，中国共产党和中国政府都会拧紧言论控制的螺丝，特别是今年是中国镇压天安门广场学生民主运动的15 周年。
不过，一些中国问题观查家担心这些征兆并非是在六四前照例的收紧。他们认为中国领导层仍然对自由讨论政治问题以及独立报业持有天然的偏见和敌视。
纽约时报指出，胡锦涛和温家宝上台之后努力扮演亲民的形象，特别是希望能够获得中国农民的认同。然而最近两个安徽的作家写的一本“中国农民调查报告”的书籍却成了禁书。中国政府还针对中国互联网加强了控制，要求上网必须注册登记，并且对网上发表的文章和意见进行监控。
焦国标可在中国报刊发文
北京著名持不同政见独立知识分子刘晓波对美国之音记者说，他本人写的所有文章，在中国大陆一概不能发表，而北京大学教授焦国标的文章，则可以公开见着报端，所以，焦国标针对中宣部而发表的大胆言论格外引起海内外的关注。
刘晓波说："我和焦国标通过一次电话。他是北大新闻系的教授。我和他的情况不同。他的文章可以公开发表，所以这次影响面比较大。我的文章全部被禁，只能在境外的互联网上发表。”
中宣部权力大而透明度小
焦国标教授在他文章的结尾，注意到一个很有趣的现象。他发现虽然中国努力和国际接轨，已经进入数字化时代，然而找遍北京的街道，你看不见“中宣部”的招牌；拨北京的114查号台，你查不到中宣部的电话；网上搜索“中宣部”，你得到的是空白。
焦国标教授不禁问到：这到底是“地下党，还是黑社会组织？它为什么胆敢这么无视公众对中宣部的知情权？”焦国标教授呼吁道，由于中宣部拥有对全国庞大的新闻业说一不二的“叫停”特权，中宣部每发一号，施一令，都必须建立在严格科学理性的基础上。他说，保守的，历来以极左闻名的，继承了冷战思维的中宣部，该彻底清算了！谁左谁当宣传部长的恐怖时代该终结了！
报道称，在公开批判中宣部后，焦国标仍如常在北大教书，但校方已找他恳谈，要求他顾全大局，有人建议他出国暂避。据称他已做好心理准备，若丢了教职就回河南老家种田。 (美国之音)
Let Freedom Ring? Not So Fast. China's Still China.
http://nytimes.com/2004/05/03/international/asia/03chin.html
Let Freedom Ring? Not So Fast. China's Still China.
By JOSEPH KAHN
Published: May 3, 2004
BEIJING, May 2 - During the Cultural Revolution, China's propaganda department often made hyperbolic charges against intellectuals - capitalist roaders, enemies of the people - accused of betraying Mao Zedong.
So when Jiao Guobiao, a journalism professor at Beijing University, was searching for words to describe China's still all-powerful censors and standard-setters more than 30 years later, he borrowed from its lexicon of vitriol.
Advertisement
The department is spiteful like the Nazis, he wrote in a recent essay. It thinks itself infallible like the pope. In the 1950's it covered up the starvation of millions of people. Today, he charged, it lies about SARS.
"Their censorship orders are totally groundless, absolutely arbitrary, at odds with the basic standards of civilization, and as counter to scientific common sense as witches and wizardry," he wrote in the article - which has been widely circulated by Internet in Beijing despite, not unpredictably, being banned by the Communist Party's propaganda department.
Such explicit outbursts of dissent are still rare in China. But Mr. Jiao is not alone in expressing frustration that, even after a long-awaited transition to a new generation of leaders some 18 months ago, China's political scene remains stultifying. Intellectuals, Mr. Jiao said, are "supposed to act like children who never talk back to their parents."
The leadership team headed by the president and party chief Hu Jintao that many hoped would tolerate more open debate has instead slapped new restrictions on free speech and the press that some say remind them of the repressive years after the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown.
State security agents have been scouring the Internet and pressing charges against people who use it to distribute information or express opinions deemed unfavorable. The authorities harassed scholars who took part in a debate about constitutional changes, disappointing some who believed that Mr. Hu had once invited discussion about how to strengthen the rule of law.
Last month, Beijing decided against allowing universal suffrage in Hong Kong, even though many in the former British colony felt they were promised that right when China assumed sovereignty in 1997.
The political environment may reflect a seasonal shift to tight controls during the spring Communist Party meetings and a state of high alert ahead of the 15th anniversary of the June 4, 1989, crackdown.
But some see worrying signs that the leadership remains instinctively hostile to political discussion and more independent news media. Scholars say they now suspect that Mr. Hu is not as forward-looking as they had once hoped, and at any rate he must still defer to Jiang Zemin, the military chief, who handed the formal reins of power to Mr. Hu in late 2002 but by many accounts remains a domineering influence.
"I don't think we had a real transfer of power or a turning point in leadership," said He Weifang, a law professor at Beijing University. "There was a moment after Mr. Hu took control when people were optimistic, but now things are even tighter than before."
The most conspicuous sign of that tension is in the media. In recent years many newspapers, television stations and Web-based media have flourished in a more market-driven environment. Diversity and competition seemed to foster more open discussion of delicate topics, including corruption, legal reforms, foreign affairs, crime, business abuses and other matters that were once taboo.
But pressure to conform to political norms, which never went away, has been strongly reasserted in recent months, people in the industry say.
Propaganda officials have increased their presence inside news, culture and entertainment organizations, and have refined a system for pre-censorship that leaves less discretion in the hands of editors.
"It used to be that they would punish people who made too many mistakes," said the editor of a leading political magazine. "Now, you don't have the leeway to make mistakes."
Among topics now considered off limits, the media are no longer permitted to investigate corruption without approval. That limits what many had seen as one of the few effective checks on official wrongdoing, reporters and editors said.
Mr. Hu and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao have been promoting themselves as populists determined to address poverty in the countryside. But when two writers in Anhui Province wrote an in-depth critique of the handling of such problems, called "An Investigative Report on Chinese Peasants," the book was banned and the publishing house that issued it came under pressure, possibly because the book argued that the most severe problems had been caused by officials.
Authorities also stepped up their scrutiny of Web-based news and discussion groups, closing the most popular forums and imposing registration and monitoring requirements on others. The move came after people participating in Web discussions forced officials to act against abuses by the police and the judicial system in cases that had not been extensively covered in the mainstream press.
Mr. Jiao, a trim, intense man with close-cropped hair and wire-rimmed glasses, was a reporter himself for a few years before becoming an academic. He was not known as a critic of the government before he wrote his essay on propaganda controls. But it quickly became a samizdat sensation, not only because it expressed openly what many journalists and intellectuals say privately, but also because he did so as pungently as possible.
"I chose a sharp way of saying things because that's their own language from the Cultural Revolution," Mr. Jiao said in an interview. "If it's too soft and measured, they'll just ignore it."
His treatise mocks the 10 "forbiddens" and 3 "musts" style used in propaganda orders and describes "14 diseases" and "4 cures," one of which is abolishing censorship.
Among his criticisms: propaganda officials "protect thugs and corrupt officials" by banning reports on corruption. The reason, Mr. Jiao wrote, is that the propaganda officials "use the media administration power granted them by the Party to enrich themselves" with bribes.
During SARS, Mr. Jiao wrote, propaganda officials used the excuse of "social stability" to prohibit reporting about the disease. In fact, he argued, social stability was threatened because reporting was so inadequate, panicking people who felt they could not trust official sources of information.
"There's not a shadow of scientific rigor in their brains,'' he wrote. "They simply follow their own ignorant feelings.''
Mr. Jiao said he suspected that his phone was being tapped and complained that a publishing house dropped plans to publish two of his books. But he said he and his family had not suffered other reprisals.
Some experts say the resort to tight controls on President Hu's watch should not be mistaken for a long-term policy. With the economy booming and social freedoms more evident, politics will sooner or later have to follow, they argue.
In fact, one close scholar of the political scene at People's University in Beijing says recent efforts to tighten the screws on expression are signs of weakness. The authorities are annoyed about being increasingly forced to react to public opinion, and are resorting to old methods to defend themselves.
"When you see them using these old-style methods, it's a sign that they cannot just set the tone and rely on people to carry it out," said the People's University scholar, who asked to remain unidentified. "The current leaders are lacking in confidence, and their power is weak."
Still, many complain about the glacial pace of change, which they say has bred malaise in intellectual circles. Some say they are worried that discussion of topics not considered off-limits in the recent past has now been restricted.
Mr. He, the legal scholar at Beijing University, said he had written a book review for a leading newspaper mentioning the need to make China's Constitution binding on the judicial system so that protections the Constitution offers would have legal standing. The newspaper struck the reference, saying it was forbidden to discuss the Constitution when the Communist Party was amending it, he said.
Hong Kong also offered a sobering example, Mr. He said.
The former British colony has all the prerequisites - income, stability, education - that Communist officials often say are necessary for democracy on the mainland. And yet in Hong Kong the country's leaders have indefinitely delayed its introduction. "If Hong Kong isn't ready yet,'' Mr. He said, "who can tell how long before we get any here?"
作者：dck 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
焦国标照片： 纽约时报终于报道焦国标笔伐中宣部
