Tibet and "Tibetan Issue" in the Eyes of US Media

FAN SHIMING

EDITORS NOTE: As most ordinary Americans lack knowledge of developments outside their own country, what their media says greatly influences public opinion. The following article is what the US media say of Tibet and the "Tibetan issue."

Although most Americans rely on TV, instead of newspapers, for news, I still use the New York Times as a representative sample. I do this because it is more convenient for me to gather materials from newspapers than TV. Moreover, the New York Times is representative of American media reports on Tibet. All the quoted articles come from the Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, and cover the period July 1, 1998 to July 1, 2000.

Basic Information

I found 210 stories which contained the word "Tibet". Of these, 78 stories concentrated on Tibet. This shows that reports on Tibet and the "Tibetan issue" appeared on average every nine days during the period in the New York Times.

Proportions. These 78 stories can be separated into five categories:

(1) "News" in the "Foreign Desk," "National Desk" and "Metropolitan Desk" sections: 43 stories (55 percent of the total);

(2) "Editorial," "Commentaries" and "Readers?Letters" of "Editorial Desk": 13 (17 percent);

(3) "Cultural Reports", "Arts/Culture" or "Leisure Desk": 11 (14 percent);

(4) "Book Review/Movies" and "Performing Arts Desk": 8 (10 percent); and

(5) "Travel Desk": 3 (4 percent).

For "news", the 55 percent is not a high proportion. However, it is beyond my expectation to see cultural reports and book reviews account for 24 percent. This shows movies, books and art works as well as cultural activities are important for Americans to understand Tibet and the "Tibetan issue."

Topics and Contents. The 43 news reports can again be separated into six basic categories in term of topics and content:

(1) 10 on the Living Buddha Garmabas action in fleeing to India, declaring that the Chinese Government was "very much embarrassed" by his action;

(2) 5 on the 14th Dalai Lamas visit to the United States, reporting the Chinese Government resolute opposition;

(3) 4 on diverse views on loans provided to Qinghai to aid the poor;

(4) 12 on Chinese policy on Tibet, including 2 which can also be classified into (1) and four others into (5);

(5) 5 on the search for the soul boy of the late 10th Panchen Erdeni, including four which can be classified into (4), which say the Tibetans do not accept the 11th Panchen Erdeni "named or selected by the Chinese Government;" and

(6) 13 others, which say things unfavorable to China. (2) and (3) are comparatively okay for China in content, but news reports highlighting the supposed Chinese threat to, and undermining of, Tibetan culture, Chinese suppression of Tibetans, contradictions between the Han and Tibetans, Tibetan opposition to Chinese rule, and the 14th Dalais care for the world and advocacy of non-violence, are obviously unfavorable to China.

There are three editorials, three commentaries and five letters from readers. They talk about Tibet in three fields: (1) Tibetan issues touched off by President Bill Clintons visit to China. One readers letter accused Clinton, the Dalai Lama and Beijing of neglecting the existence of people when discussing the future of Tibet; one readers letter says the Dalai Lama has never recognized Chinese sovereignty over Tibet; (2) World Bank loans to the poor areas in Qinghai. Two editorials and one commentary say the World Bank has failed to consider the protection of Tibetan culture when making decisions. Instead, they say, the World Bank has indirectly accepted the "suppressive behavior"; (3) Chinese suppression of Tibet, undermining of Tibetan culture, and Chinese colonial rule in Tibet. Two commentaries and three readers?letters express the above views. There are 19 items that are book reviews, movie critiques and reports on other cultural activities. They show the Wests "care" for Tibetan society and culture. This finds expression in movies or documentaries created in the 1990s, including Kundun, Seven Years in Tibet, Little Buddha, Free Tibet, The Jew in the Lotus, In Search of the Panchen Lama, In Search of Kundun With Martin Scorsese, The Lost Horizon, Wind Horse, The Saltmen of Tibet, and The Cup. Obviously, Hollywood has emerged as the "production base for the image of Tibet."

Source of Information

The US media stands for the separation of facts from comments. Although reporters are not encouraged to comment while reporting facts, they tend to explain the facts by making the source of information provide the necessary comments. As a result, the audience pays much attention to the source of information when seeking facts from the media. Of the 43 news reports on Tibet and the "Tibetan issue," 31 were written by the newspapers staff reporters, 10 came from AP, one from Reuter and one from AFP.

They contain 132 direct or indirect quotations: (1) 11 quote the 14th Dalai Lama, and 12 the Dalais "government" officials (including "Tibetan exiles," "Dalai government officials," "officials of the Tibetan government in exile," "Tibetan officials" and "pro-Dalai elements"); (2) 10 from organizations standing for "Tibetan independence" and their members, and 2 from lobby groups; (3) 41 from Tibetans residing overseas (mostly monks and Tibetans students, herders and handicraft workers in the United States and India); (4) 13 from Chinese Government officials (including those from the Xinhua News Agency); (5) 4 quoting ordinary Chinese; (6) 4 from US government officials; (7) 10 from Tibetologists in the United States; (8) 12 from ordinary people in the West; (9) 6 from World Bank officials; (10) 2 from unidentified critics? (11) 4 quoting UN spokesman, Indian government spokesman and others.

A comparison of these shows that quotations in (1) are numerically more than in (4); and quotations in (3) are more than 10 times greater than in (5). Actually, 41 quotations that laud the 14th Dalai Lama and express Tibetan dissatisfaction over Han rule come from Tibetans in and outside China; four quotations come from Chinese residing overseas. No quotations come from people of the Han ethnic group in China! In the United States, there are more people of Han Chinese origin than Tibetan. And the West asserts that there are many, many people of Han Chinese origin in Tibet. Ridiculously, however, the media in the West never quotes ordinary Chinese in the stories. Obviously, the New York Times is not providing a fair platform for ordinary Han Chinese and Tibetans to speak on the "Tibetan issue", which is a sensitive one today. This does not conform to the concept of fair journalism in the West.

A close look at these stories shows many overseas Tibetan organizations have been quoted, including the Tibetan Information Network, Students for Free Tibet, the International Committee of Lawyers for Tibet, the International Campaign for Tibet, and the International Tibetan Youth Congress. Activities reported were mostly launched by such overseas Tibetan organizations as the Tibet Center and Tibet House. They spoke more radically than the 14th Dalai Lama. Comparatively speaking, only official Chinese sources were quoted as saying that China works for unity between the Han and the Tibetan; no other sources standing for the same proposition are quoted. In the eyes of Westerners, government statements are often greeted with suspicion, however!

New York Times Framework

How does New York Times explain the "Tibetan issue"? Reports from staff stationed in China. Seth Faison, one of the New York Times reporters in China, went to Tibet and the Tibetan-inhabited areas in Qinghai and Sichuan on three occasions. Based on this experience, he produced seven stories that make up seven-ninths of the stories coming from those stationed in China (Of the 12 stories released, three lengthy ones were released by AP). These claim that Tibetans revere and cherish the memory of the 14th Dalai Lama, asserting "the Dalai Lama means everything" and they "live just to see the Dalai Lama". There are also stories that claim Tibetans are dissatisfied with the Chinese, and this even finds its way into economic reports. Take the story titled Buddha VS Beijing: a Special Report: Booming China Threatens Spirit of Tibet. The author does not mention how the Chinese Government works hard in the interests of Tibetans; instead, he asserts that "the Chinese Governments efforts for economic development in Tibet will serve to undermine the Tibetan spirit". Political bias also finds its way even into cultural reports! The 11 stories released in the two years are short, but they show the authors?"unique"?concern for "Tibetan culture under threat".?

The above shows the Western medias preoccupation when reporting about Tibet. They tend to use "invade" to describe the peaceful liberation of Tibet in 1951, "repression" or "invasion"?when mentioning the Chinese suppression of the armed rebellion that killed many Tibetan civilians in 1959, and "destroy" to describe the cultural ties between the Chinas hiterland and Tibet. They do so to build up bias among people in the West.

Conclusion

At this point of time we see a politically oriented media in the United States. It does not provide a fair platform for both sides of the people in a given field such as the "Tibetan issue." Their reports are steeped in political bias. A case in point is the New York Times! And such bias is subject to the internal contradictions within the United States, and it will not undergo any change in a given period of time. What is certain is that such reports have a negative impact on stability in Tibet, and to the relationship between China and the United States. It is the Chinese view that the media in the United States goes against what US journalism supposedly encourages and stands for. From this point of view, most US reports on Tibet or the "Tbetan issue" have been created out of political need.