And back to the main article: any amount of investment in Xinhua and CCTV will not change the perception of China in the World, and China will never have soft power this way. The main reason is not Human Rights (see the USA is killing way more innocent civilians per year than China and gets away with it) the main reason is one of credibility.

China and its media will NEVER be credible until they allow disenting opinions and stop their ridiculous censorship and monopoly of information.

Freedom of speech is not only a human right, it is also a proof of courage, honesty and common sense from the authorities. Without FOS China will never have soft power.

If you take all reporting on all issues I don’t think the “western media” has a single voice against china, but on key issues like Tibet that is certainly the case. As this article mentioned, it just so happens that the Tibet/Xinjiang conflicts are the two of most dominating issue when it comes to the “western media” discussing China. For Tibet and Xinjiang riots, the EastSouthNorthWest blog has an excellent collection of reporting from alot of the big names such as NYTimes, WaPo, Latimes, GuardianUK, TelegraphUK, Speigal(german) etc. You can read through them yourself, compare and see if you can find the views from the “western media” which deviates from the popular “China should stop dominating Tibet culture and get out of Tibet” angle. There are a few, but very rare (maybe 10:1).

I also don’t see how an article about the positive aspects of China’s economy balances out the views of an article about Tibet Independence. These are two completely different issues. A counter point to China’s booming economy would be the negative aspects of China’s economic growth, and there are plenty of articles about that. A counter point to the idea of Tibet Independence would be the reasons why China should not give up Tibet, but that is an angle which the Western media is afraid of explore.

But back on topic. Another key item which people don’t often talk about is the popularity of the Chinese government. Someone mentioned about PEW polls, PEW has also done polls somewhat recently which show some 80%+ Chinese believing their nation is going in the right direction. Personally I think as long as the Chinese government keeps the economy going at 8% its propaganda will work for a single reason: food on the table. Of course, this brings in another concept which a lot of people simply don’t get: many people in 3rd world nations are happy to trade basic human rights for stability. I think one would need to experience living in the 3rd world as a citizen (and not as a visitor from a developed nation) to know what I am talking about.

@AT- I couldn’t agree more. I think, to some extent, some Chinese readers have this attitude because popular newspapers like 环球时报 almost always include a particularly offensive op-ed from somewhere in the “Western” press, and then present it to readers as what the so-called monolithic “West” and the anti-China crowd is saying about China. Also, I think another factor might simply be about how the human brain is wired. We have a “negativity bias” in our brains, which means that we pay much more attention to negative and possibly harmful or threatening information than we do to positive ones. Neurobiologists estimate that five positive encounters is roughly equivalent to one negative encounter. If true, this means that even if many articles in the West are broadly praising aspects of China and describing its rise, it’s natural for Chinese readers to more vividly remember the unfair and biased articles (which there certainly are), just as it would be for any other nationality.

But anyway, it might be good to look at recent Pew poll (from the Economist):

“Only 21% of Council on Foreign Relations members, fewer than in 2001 (38%), see China’s rise as a major threat to the United States. The general public is warier: 53% say that China is a major threat. And America’s recession has apparently magnified China’s economy in the eyes of Americans: 44% of the public now think that China is the world’s leading economic power, and only 27% name the United States (in fact, America’s economy is at least twice the size of China’s).”

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=15065772

From this, we might be able to say that: 1) the vast majority of well informed people on China don’t see it as a threat, but 2) a larger percentage of the average public does. 3) People, if anything, overstate the size and importance of China’s rise and economic growth.

What is interesting to me is the gap between the CFR experts and the general public. (You could argue that the public might actually have more common sense than the experts, but personally, I’d be inclined to side with the CFR majority opinion). The question then seems, what could explain the gap? One of the most crucial factors, I think, is the importance of media outlets like Fox News, and talk radio like Rush Limbaugh and other conservative radio hosts. Well-educated American liberals may scoff at or characterize these opinion makers, but they are very important if you look at news ratings, voting patterns, or even education levels of the listeners.

To bring this back to the original point of soft power, and 被挨打’ed, I wonder to what extent China’s vision of its international media operations that it wants to create is a bit outdated (after all, CNN isn’t doing too well in the ratings, and yet it seems to be seen as the de facto American media outlet by some Chinese observers). In the US at least, media is becoming more fragmented and ideologically divided, and I would assume that the Internet will force similar dynamics in other countries. Under these circumstances, is the government’s soft power outreach vision a bit like trying to do surgery with an ax when it should use a scalpel?

That said, I do find it odd for the “west” to continue to insist on how and what should China do with its internal policies. China can definitely learn alot from the “west”, but external pressures from the “west” in the form of continued bashing in the Op-eds will do nothing except to put the majority of the moderates in China in the defensive and eventually alienate them. Put it this way, at work if your peer and not your manager, insists on how you should do your job without you soliciting for help, what would you think? You would think that this guy is an arrogant jerk.

Of course, it would also help a lot more if the advices from the “west” were seriously taken by the “western nations” themselves. Particularly on the issues of human rights, the concept goes out the window as the US/British invaded Iraq. It’s also no secret that the “western nations” have been and is still supporting some of dictatorships in Latin America and mid-east.

Finally there is the issue of racism, Tibet, Uighur, and Taiwan(to a lessor extent in the recent years). I believe this is perhaps the most divisive issue. To put it simply, it is not in the interest of many Chinese people to see China broken up into pieces and puppet states. It’s simply not going to happen that anyone could convince any reasonable minded Chinese that China should simply allow its western regions to be independent. Sure, given reasonable exchanges moderate Chinese probably would want to have better relationship with the minorities. Yet even on this front, there is not much value from any types of advices which the “western nations” could give because race relationships is a joke in the West. Sure, Obama was elected, but looking at simple statistics such average wage, unemployment rates, high school drop out rates, incarceration rates, life expectancy, etc. and you can conclude that African Americans are doing far worse than other races in the US. In Europe it’s the same situation with SE Asian immigrants and Muslims from the mid-east. And most importantly, the parties from the Tibet and Xinjiang championed by the “west’ are extremely hostile to Han Chinese. Again, this will only push away any type of support and even attempts to understand by your average moderate.

At the end of the day, I think it would be the most appropriate for the “west” to offer help when and where it is being asked in order to build good will. It may take decades but it certainly can be done as Chinese people are easily one of the most adaptable people in the world. Until there is a good will at least among the moderates any attempt at forcing China’s internal politics by the “west’ will simply to be seen further bullying by the arrogant “west”.