how censorship and propaganda obstructed the truth

Chinese political leaders hope that when concerns about the coronavirus begin to dissipate, memories of state failures at the start of the epidemic will also be erased. They will be especially eager for people to forget the anger that many felt after the death of Covid-19 from Dr. Li Wenliang, the doctor censored for trying to warn colleagues of the epidemic. After the death of Dr. Lis, the phrase We want freedom of expression to even tend on Chinese social networks for several hours before the messages are deleted.

On December 30, Dr. Li spoke to fellow healthcare professionals about the new virus in a focus group. It was accused of rumor and officials ignored or minimized the risks until January. If officials had leaked information about the epidemic earlier, Dr. Li told the New York Times, I think it would have been much better. There should be more openness and transparency.

I am currently researching the efforts of Chinese States Parties to increase legitimacy by controlling the information that reaches its citizens. The lack of openness and transparency in this crucial first phase of the epidemic was partly due to the fact that officials met for the annual meetings of local legislative assemblies led by the Communist Party, when the services of propaganda ordered the media not to cover negative stories.

(integrated) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aar7DP0lqs (/ integrated)

However, the censorship of this period also reflects an increasingly tight control of information in China. As Chinese media expert Anne-Marie Brady Remarks, since the beginning of his presidency, Xi Jinping It was clear that the media should focus on positive articles which support unity and stability and are encouraging.

Limit media freedoms

The deterioration of limited media freedoms under Xi Jinping was highlighted by a media visit he made in 2016, declaring that all Party media carry the Party surname and demand loyalty to the the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

There have been a series of good quality investigative reports, including through trade publication Caixin, the authorities having fully recognized the virus. As a political scientist Maria Repnikova supports, providing temporary space for the media to report more freely can help the party-state project an image of managed transparency. However, the crackdown has undoubtedly had a significant effect on the media's ability to provide effective investigative reports, particularly at the start of the epidemic.

Online, there have been a series of measures to limit the speech that the party considers a threat. These include laws that signify the threat of prison for anyone convicted of spreading rumors. In an authoritarian regime, stopping rumors limits people's ability to raise concerns and potentially uncover the truth. A point raised too clearly by the Dr Lis case.

The party focuses its censorship on issues that could undermine its legitimacy. Part of my ongoing research on information control in China includes an analysis of leaked censorship instructions collected by the United States China Digital Times. This shows that between 2013 and 2018, more than 100 disclosed instructions concerned issues of the environment, food security, health, education, natural disasters and major accidents. The actual number is likely to greatly exceed this figure.

For example, after an explosion in a petrochemical plant, the media we said to censor negative comment related to petrochemical projects. And after parents protested the tainted vaccines, the media was charge that only information provided by official sources could be used on the first page.

State media play a key role in the CCP's efforts to put the agenda online. My research shows that the number of stories with environmental issues and disasters Peoples Daily newspaper on Sina Weibo (Chinese equivalent of Twitter) dropped significantly between 2013 and 2018.

About 4.5% of all the messages published by People Dailys Weibo between 2013 and 2015 concerned the environment, but in 2018, they were only 1%. Likewise, around 8% to 10% of all newspaper articles were about disasters and major accidents between 2013 and 2015, but this figure fell below 4% in the following three years.

The party wants people to focus on things that it believes will strengthen its legitimacy. The number of nationalism-focused Peoples Daily publications doubled to 12% of the total in 2018.

Citizen journalism responds

In addition to investigation reports of the epidemic in some parts of the media, some Chinese have also made great efforts to communicate information on the virus and conditions in Wuhan. However, authorities have regularly silenced important critical voices and step up their efforts to censor other content they deem particularly unnecessary.

(incorporated) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5fsidSOJMw (/ incorporated)

Censors don't stop everything, but like Chinese scholar Margaret E. Roberts suggest, porous censorship can still be very effective. She points out that Chinese authorities' efforts to make it more difficult for people to access critical content that makes it online, while flooding the Internet with information that the CCP wants them to see, can always be very effective.

When a problem cannot be avoided, my research shows that propaganda authorities try to control the narrative by ensuring that the media focus on states' efforts to tackle the problem. After a landslide at a mine in Tibet, the media was invited to cover disaster relief quickly and extensively. Peoples Daily's coverage of these disasters focuses on images of heroic rescuers.

This same propaganda effort is now evident. As the Media projects in China David Bandurski Remarks, media coverage in China increasingly seeks to portray the Chinese Communist Party as the catalyst for miraculous human prowess battling the virus.

After the Death of Dr. Lis, CCP Leaders sought to blame local officials to warn him. However, the measures taken against Dr. Li were fully consistent with Partys' approach to controlling information under Xi Jinping.

It is impossible to know how many people died or could die in the future, because people decided to censor themselves, rather than risk being punished for spreading rumors, or because the authorities have sought to prevent information from reaching the public. The coronavirus epidemic highlights the risks of a system that places social stability and the legitimacy of the ruling party above the public interest.