Is the BBC Anti China?
Last week when I was reading some more about climate change, following the UN summit on Climate Change, I had a look on the BBC website. I noticed in one of their reports that, whilst they had quotes about many of the material facts from the summit, they had mentioned not once, but twice, that the general vibe coming out of the summit was that China was dragging its heels over many of the ideas that had been put forward.
This seemed a little strange, given that every other item covered in the report had been directly quoted, though these ideas – that China was opposed to taking many of the measures – were put forward by “several delegates” and not actually attributed to a person or group in particular.
This report has since been changed, however, and I can’t find it on the website, though it did prompt me to have a look at how the BBC has reported China over the past year or so. It is very interesting…
I’m going to try to base much of this around Climate Change, as it is something I have written much about in the past few months.
Thursday 2 November 2006 – “Addressing China’s Climate Challenge” – in this report, it is claimed that “China is on course to overtake the USA as the worlds biggest greenhouse gas emitter.” So, lets get this straight, China, despite having the largest population, is not currently the worlds biggest problem with regards climate change, the USA is.
As I reported in previous posts, Sir Nicholas Stern, who conducted an 18 month investigation into the economics of climate change, when making his speech to the Australian Press Association, actually drew a direct comparison between China and the USA. He stated that most US new cars were such poor performers in terms of emissions, that by Chinese law, they could not be imported and sold in China! Yet the BBC failed to mention this in any of their extensive coverage of Sir Nicholas Stern’s report. Selective journalism? An anti-China agenda? Who knows, lets go back to the report.
The “Addressing China’s Climate Challenge” report seems at best a naive attempt to assess the level of carbon emissions. There is no scientific evidence or analysis, in fact, there is nothing more than the hearsay of one reporter, who thinks that:
- it is smoggy in Shanghai;
- he can’t breath very easily in an industrial area
My main bone of contention with his report is not the fact that it is categorised under “Science and Nature” (despite the lack of any “science”) though, it is this: David Shuckman, the reporter, speaks of China’s technology and then makes a fairly strange and extremely unscientific claim.
“I hear about the latest boilers at Changshu, designed by the British firm Mitsui Babcock. They burn hotter and therefore produce more power for less greenhouse gas.
The industry calls them “clean”. But I keep watch on the smoke rising from that chimney.”
Ok, so you have damned this power station because you can see smoke coming out of a chimney?! In actual fact, this could be an extremely ‘clean’ power station, however, you have not asked for any statistics whatsoever. I could do the same thing anywhere there is a chimney – where’s the science? Where’s the cutting edge reporting? At least get some industry authority to back up your claim that “Genuinely clean generation from coal is a long way off, maybe 10-15 years.” Otherwise, we might think that you don’t have any.
“The traffic is relentless,” an irrelevant comment, and I fail to see what it adds to the argument that China is any worse than any other country. Has the reporter seen the traffic in most capital cities? When one considers what I state above regarding cars, it may well be that the “traffic” of which he speaks is emitting far lower levels of greenhouse gases than the same in the US, or any other more developed country. However, as is the case with all points in this report, China’s poor performance is hinted at, but there no clear evidence either way.
We’ll move on. In “Climate Change ‘Affecting’ China” Tuesday 6 February 2007, it is reported that “China is the world’s biggest producer of greenhouse gases, after the US.”
I’m not entirely happy with the syntax there. How about ‘China is the worlds second biggest producer of greenhouse gases.’ Or, do we see many reports stating that ‘the US is the world’s biggest producer of greenhouse gases?’ In fact, searching the BBC website for “the world’s biggest producer of greenhouse gas” came up with China in 4 of the top 10 positions.
As I keep saying, they are not the biggest producer, the US is. Why else is this idea explained in this way if not to make China appear to be worse than it actually is? Whether this be for the purposes of a report bashing China’s performance, or for a more across the board victimization of the country as the world’s biggest climate problem (which isn’t, currently, true), the fact is that this reporting is unhelpful, and distorts the true picture somewhat.
Again, China as a growing problem is stressed at the end of the article, “(China) is expected to surpass the US as the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the next decade.” By whom? And could the time-frame be a little more vague?
China has HALF the carbon emissions that the USA does. That’s huge. So who is the real culprit? I appreciate that China isn’t performing as well as she could. However, the main problem; the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases by far; the country which pulled out from Kyoto citing economic reasons: is the USA.
As much, if not more of a problem in relative terms is Indonesia. This country is the third biggest greenhouse gas emitter. Furthermore, there is much reported illegal logging occurring in Indonesia, which is surely impacting Carbon levels adversely too (especially when one considers the amount of burning which goes on) . All this, despite having a population a quarter of the size that China has to contend with.
In conclusion, I think it is fair to say that the BBC does give China a fairly bad rap on climate change. I have read reports about the positive things China are doing – i.e. investing in hydro-power – to reduce their carbon emissions which play down this aspect and concentrate solely on the negative human impact of creating new dams.
In fact, there are hundreds of items on the Three Gorges, and other hydro-dams, all of which show the Chinese government in a negative light. There is not one which states that it will, at least, prevent more coal burning power stations, about which the BBC have told us China is building “a new one every day.”
Nobody reported on the huge numbers of dams which were built in the US in the 1930s under Roosevelt’s various work schemes saying that they displaced many people, which they did. Nobody chastised the British factory owners during the industrial revolution of the 19th century for not being ‘green’.
China faces the unenviable task of trying to rapidly develop its industry to compete with the “west” – in today’s world, where reducing greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is a massive issue. The USA, an already developed country has signalled its intention to continue with the status quo for the time being, and it is producing twice the amount of carbon emissions that China does. Yet, the BBC reports seem to point the finger of blame very squarely at China.
All of which points to the fact that the BBC has an anti-China agenda.
RSS
Myspace
LinkedIn
Twitter
Subscribe by Email
I just read yet another anti-China article from the BBC entitled “China ‘to be largest energy user’”. No sh*t sherlock. China has by far the largest population on Earth. If it is the largest polluter by even a small margin, it is doing well.
If it is the biggest energy user, then fair enough. Using energy does not preclude the country from being green. If the whole of China’s electricity were supplied by solar power, it would still be the “largest energy user” but so what?
The BBC needs to get off the backs of developing nations that are doing far better per capita than any Western state. Were the USA to measure its emissions per head of population, it would be the biggest polluter for the next century. Not to mention that it still is until these woefully-worded predictions actually come true.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7507461.stm
And they are trying to blast Chinese athletes for working too hard in preparation for the Olympics. Uh, WTF mate? Everyone works hard to win at the Olympics, that’s the point of competition, no?
China just can’t win with them, if they lose, they lose, if they win, they still lose because “oh well, they trained too hard” Can you be any more biased and sour?
That’s just one example of about…I would guess 2 anti Chinese articles a week. This is just a very obvious example, where in most other articles, they try slip in a jab here and there.
I agree with you Ethan – the Olympics have become less about sport, however, and more about finding individual tales of hardship and woe under the Chinese government.
[...] at The World’s Greatest Blog, we told you of a perceived anti-Chinese slant in BBC online reporting in the past couple of year’s lead up to the Beijing Olympics, and since that time have been [...]
I certainly agree with the proposition that the BBC is anti-China. I know because I have been working in China for two years and have read many articles on China on the BBC website; nearly all these reports about China are in some way biased and negative.
There is a disgusting ANGLO, JAPOREAN and Li/Lin people “the taiwankie Japwanabe’s” at a site called chinasmack.com
The really scary thing is that most of these web bloggers are also living in the Central Nation “zhong guo / CN” as soo called F’king foreign educators to young people.
Can not wait till the people’s republic brings the smack down on these pedophiling pedators and molestors.
Hey infact their site looks very similar to this ANGLO site . . .
Da**
scary
sick
That’s a pretty frightening response, which I was going to remove, but I thought I’d let it publish to offer anyone the opportunity to explain what you mean. I get the hatred part, I’m just not sure where you are directing it…
Further, describing a whole group of people, based upon nationality, as “just pure evil” is completely illogical: Nationalism and a racism such as yours are about the only things I WOULD describe as evils.
[...] for the BBC – the anti-china, out of touch, patronising, cash-haemorrhaging BBC (unsubstantiated?!) – it is they who is in [...]
When the british school kids were quarentined in China for suspected swine flu, the Sophie Rayworth even asked in a tone that was negative like it was the strangest thing to do. If swine flu spreads as quick as it does, in the most populous country, I would want them to be temporarily quarentined, but to be criticising a commonsense thing is again THE BBC Opportunism playing its hand on the slightest news. Everything China related is skewed to some tone of doubt or criticism, however small. So much for IMPARTIALITY, bbc, read your mission statement BBC.I want my news IMPARTIAL, thanks, it reduces BBC credibility.
the bbc is absoloutely anti China. im Chinese but class myself as more British than anything so this isn’t coming from any biased sort of view. But i find that generally the media in this country are very likely to add some degree of negativity into their articles regarding China. Most, if not all of the print journalists that write about China here have at best visited China with a your guide and interpreter and generally do not have an actual clue what it is really like over there. Some pieces i have read make China out to be on a par with North Korea in terms of its influence on the everyday life of civilians. It’s tiny things like this article im reading now, about an ancient map commisioned roughly 500 years ago by the emperor which has China as situated in the middle of the map. what is the title the bbc runs with? “Ancient map with China at the centre of the world”.
Are you kidding me? The BBC is the most trustworthy news agency in the world. Have you ever watched CCTV? That is what you call bias and anti-world. All reports on CCTV and Zinhua are the problems of other countries while everything in China is hunky dory, mate! You are obviously pro-china and depend on the yuan to live your life, ignorance and false capitalism make a lethal mix my friends.
It just happens that there is so many negative thing happening in china every day so the BBC have no choice but to report it. That is what a responsible news agency does.
What about all those people who are locked up without a voice? Are you happy for their situation, I guess so, if you can bring yourselves to sympathize with a regime that will kill any opposing voice.
Jean Paul, you are missing the point.
If you are biased in your reports of some things about China, then when you comment on the things that are truly wrong with China, your position is weakened by what has gone before. I’m sure you are familiar with the boy who cried wolf.
And this is the real problem here.
All the Chinese administration must do is say “look what crazy things the BBC says about X” and that will actually rally support for their own Government against the external threat (The BBC is usually described as “The British Government” in Chinese reports).
But of course, if you want to lump everything China does together an report all of it negatively, you are welcome to do so, just don’t call that responsible journalism: it promotes the Chinese Government to its people.
Thus, in exhibiting such bias, the BBC is making things worse.
It isn’t just bias that is the problem, however, it is a lack of research and knowledge when writing stories, or putting pictures of tibet on stories about nepal. This stuff is yet more food for the Chinese machine to pull out when the BBC (and other western media) hits upon an accurate point – i.e. well, they can;t tell the difference between two countries, so don’t believe THIS…
lol at Jean Paul completely missing point. Can i ask where you live Jean Paul? Have I ever watched CCTV and Xinhua? yes I have. CCTV reports on worldwide issues as local news is broadcast on local channels. You are the perfect example of someone who has been fed so much bullsh*t by the western media that you believe everything and anything they tell you.
go back to your student protests. You make me laugh. or better yet, get a job at the BBC!