Censoring Tibet – By Aimee Watts
Background Information:
Until the 1950s, Tibet followed a distinctive form of Buddhism, lead by their religious head, the Dalai Lama. Their cultural and political life was largely based on their faith, which was why the Dalai Lama was the supreme political head of Tibet as well. The Dalai Lama, therefore, was responsible for upholding the relations between China and Tibet. The situation between them was an ambiguous one, with Tibet’s sovereignty shifting back and forth.
Then, in the 1950s, Mao Zedong took power of China and approached Tibet. He and the Chinese government wanted to settle the vague circumstances. Although the initial discussions between the Dalai Lama and Mao Zedong seemed promising, they failed to reach an agreement. As a result, the Chinese army invaded Tibet, trying to exert its control, power and authority. However, they had a difficult time – the Tibetans were resisting. Meanwhile, the Lama fled, establishing the now-exiled Tibetan government in Northern India.
Present Day:
This situation has not changed much over the decades – the Tibetan government still remains in exile, the Chinese government continue to try to exert their control and the Tibetans continue to resist.
Their principle form of resistance is protesting. Their clamours of injustice, their anger and their violence has not shown the Chinese government in a flattering light. The government has responded by repeatedly stating that their presence in the region has lead to higher living standards, health standards, higher incomes and better jobs. These benefits, however, don’t seem to be enough. Indeed, when more than a hundred anguished individuals set themselves on fire in protest, the government felt it was extremely important that their version of events was the dominant one.
The Chinese Government believes they need to censor these events for three reasons. Firstly, they feel their image needs to be protected. Secondly, they believe widespread knowledge of the events will lead to wide-spread anger and resistance. Lastly, the government believes without censorship the information will destabilize their precarious control over the region. As a result, they have put great effort into controlling the stream of information in their favour.
How is the Tibetan Resistance censored?
The Chinese Government has four main strategies to maintain control over sensitive Tibet-based information.
1) The government physically stop people, particularly journalists, from getting into Tibet. This is done by taking extensive security measures both within and around the unstable regions. The entrance into Tibet is dotted with a legion of security checkpoints and marching policemen. A clear example of this strategy can be seen in the video, “Seven Days not in Tibet.”
2) The government stops the spreading of “ming gan” (sensitive) information online by blocking “destabilizing” sites. An example of this was in May 2009, when a user uploaded a video showing a Chinese policeman brutally injuring a Tibetan. This video caused widespread anger in China, and the government responded by blocking the entire site. Facebook, Tumblr and Twitter were also blocked due to similar incidents.
3) When strategy 1 has failed and a journalist is successful in reporting the situation, the government responds by blocking their article from the masses. One instance of this was the Guardian, a foreign newspaper. They had a Chinese version of their site, called 卫报,that had all the original articles translated. Because 卫报 contained Tibet-related articles, it was blocked. The Chinese New York Times and BBC were similarly censored. By limiting stories unlike the government’s version of events, China has managed to keep its story dominant in the minds of most of its citizens.
4) Within the Communist Party and the Chinese Government thrives a immensely powerful, influential faction known as the Propaganda Department. This organization has a representative in all major Chinese media organizations, meaning that the editors and journalists answer to the government. The government’s power and influence is absolute, their word final – if there is a “ming gan” article or story, the Chinese Government or the Communist Party have the capacity to shut it down.
An instance of this was in 2005, when a Deputy Mayor in Henan murdered his wife and rolled up the corpse in a carpet. A Chinese journalist uncovered this huge story, but his editor told him to stop investigating after receiving threats from the Propaganda Department. The journalist was furious that such effort and injustice went unnoticed, and discreetly reported it to the foreign media instead. Although not directly Tibet-related, this event shows how much influence the Propaganda Department wields over Chinese media organizations.
What are the effects of censoring?
Only one side of the story is told, in this case the government’s version. They enjoy a beneficial effect by having their idea of events dominant, without mass resistance and opposition for their controversial actions. It is not beneficial, however, to the Chinese people – they aren’t getting the information they deserve. And censoring has the worst effect on the Tibetans, whose voice has been taken away.
Background Information:
Until the 1950s, Tibet followed a distinctive form of Buddhism, lead by their religious head, the Dalai Lama. Their cultural and political life was largely based on their faith, which was why the Dalai Lama was the supreme political head of Tibet as well. The Dalai Lama, therefore, was responsible for upholding the relations between China and Tibet. The situation between them was an ambiguous one, with Tibet’s sovereignty shifting back and forth.
Then, in the 1950s, Mao Zedong took power of China and approached Tibet. He and the Chinese government wanted to settle the vague circumstances. Although the initial discussions between the Dalai Lama and Mao Zedong seemed promising, they failed to reach an agreement. As a result, the Chinese army invaded Tibet, trying to exert its control, power and authority. However, they had a difficult time – the Tibetans were resisting. Meanwhile, the Lama fled, establishing the now-exiled Tibetan government in Northern India.
Present Day:
This situation has not changed much over the decades – the Tibetan government still remains in exile, the Chinese government continue to try to exert their control and the Tibetans continue to resist.
Their principle form of resistance is protesting. Their clamours of injustice, their anger and their violence has not shown the Chinese government in a flattering light. The government has responded by repeatedly stating that their presence in the region has lead to higher living standards, health standards, higher incomes and better jobs. These benefits, however, don’t seem to be enough. Indeed, when more than a hundred anguished individuals set themselves on fire in protest, the government felt it was extremely important that their version of events was the dominant one.
The Chinese Government believes they need to censor these events for three reasons. Firstly, they feel their image needs to be protected. Secondly, they believe widespread knowledge of the events will lead to wide-spread anger and resistance. Lastly, the government believes without censorship the information will destabilize their precarious control over the region. As a result, they have put great effort into controlling the stream of information in their favour.
How is the Tibetan Resistance censored?
The Chinese Government has four main strategies to maintain control over sensitive Tibet-based information.
1) The government physically stop people, particularly journalists, from getting into Tibet. This is done by taking extensive security measures both within and around the unstable regions. The entrance into Tibet is dotted with a legion of security checkpoints and marching policemen. A clear example of this strategy can be seen in the video, “Seven Days not in Tibet.”
2) The government stops the spreading of “ming gan” (sensitive) information online by blocking “destabilizing” sites. An example of this was in May 2009, when a user uploaded a video showing a Chinese policeman brutally injuring a Tibetan. This video caused widespread anger in China, and the government responded by blocking the entire site. Facebook, Tumblr and Twitter were also blocked due to similar incidents.
3) When strategy 1 has failed and a journalist is successful in reporting the situation, the government responds by blocking their article from the masses. One instance of this was the Guardian, a foreign newspaper. They had a Chinese version of their site, called 卫报,that had all the original articles translated. Because 卫报 contained Tibet-related articles, it was blocked. The Chinese New York Times and BBC were similarly censored. By limiting stories unlike the government’s version of events, China has managed to keep its story dominant in the minds of most of its citizens.
4) Within the Communist Party and the Chinese Government thrives a immensely powerful, influential faction known as the Propaganda Department. This organization has a representative in all major Chinese media organizations, meaning that the editors and journalists answer to the government. The government’s power and influence is absolute, their word final – if there is a “ming gan” article or story, the Chinese Government or the Communist Party have the capacity to shut it down.
An instance of this was in 2005, when a Deputy Mayor in Henan murdered his wife and rolled up the corpse in a carpet. A Chinese journalist uncovered this huge story, but his editor told him to stop investigating after receiving threats from the Propaganda Department. The journalist was furious that such effort and injustice went unnoticed, and discreetly reported it to the foreign media instead. Although not directly Tibet-related, this event shows how much influence the Propaganda Department wields over Chinese media organizations.
What are the effects of censoring?
Only one side of the story is told, in this case the government’s version. They enjoy a beneficial effect by having their idea of events dominant, without mass resistance and opposition for their controversial actions. It is not beneficial, however, to the Chinese people – they aren’t getting the information they deserve. And censoring has the worst effect on the Tibetans, whose voice has been taken away.