← "My Empire for a PR hack" | Return to Main Page | "Saint Schapelle Corby" →

May 31, 2005

You are on the invidual archive page of Gold medal gaols. Click Simon World weblog for the main page.
Gold medal gaols

Today's SCMP:

There is no need to worry about Chinese authorities' censorship of the press, a senior International Olympic Committee (IOC) member said yesterday, citing Beijing's eagerness to ensure the 2008 Games are a success. "There will not be censorship," said Australian Kevan Gosper, a senior member of the IOC's co-ordination commission who was taking part in an inspection trip to Beijing yesterday.

"It is essential that broadcasters and members of the media respect the way this country operates. On the other hand, I believe this country respects the way the media operate in other countries," he added.

Try telling that to Ching Cheong, China reporter of Singapore's Straits Times:
A one-time pro-Beijing journalist was arrested in Guangzhou more than a month ago while attempting to track down a manuscript of interviews with late Communist Party leader Zhao Ziyang in advance of the sensitive June4 anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown.

Ching Cheong, 55, a Hong Kong citizen and the respected China correspondent for the Singapore Straits Times, had insisted on entering China even though he knew mainland agents could be targeting him, his wife Mary Lau alleged Monday. Lau said she had heard from both Hong Kong and mainland sources that Ching could soon be charged with "stealing national secrets,'' a charge frequently levelled against journalists in the mainland.

Ching, a one-time deputy editor-in-chief of the pro-Beijing Wen Wei Po newspaper, was arrested in a Guangzhou hotel on April 22 after receiving the Zhao interview manuscript, which he had been chasing for months.

Richard wonders if this brands China as a police state. Police state or no, China's following the "talk softly but carry a big stick" approach. Sports stories and puff pieces are tolerable. True reporting is not.

But wait, there's more.

What is the esteemed Straits Times doing about the arrest of their reporter?

The Straits Times confirmed the arrest.

"We have been told by a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Singapore that Ching Cheong is assisting security authorities in Beijing with an investigation into a matter not related to the Straits Times,'' the paper's spokesperson said in a statement.

That's sounds OK, doesn't it? But the SCMP points out something interesting:

Ching, who works for Singapore-based The Straits Times, was taken into custody on April 22...His newspaper has not reported the detention.

The Singaporean embassy in Beijing said it was not involved. It is understood Ching held Singaporean permanent residency, but not citizenship.

A source said the newspaper lost contact with Ching in late April. The Straits Times was understood to have tried in vain to secure his freedom.

I understand that papers are put in difficult positions when reporters are arrested. On one hand it is news-worthy, but on the other the reporting of the arrest would likely further imperil the reporter. The New York Times and Washington Post manage to report such arrests of their staff. It's an interesting contrast with the Straits Times approach.

Especially since neither approach has worked.

Other Reading

Asian Gazette's take on the story.
Tomorrow.
Asiapundit.
Singapore Ink.
Imagethief.
Glutter.

 posted by Simon on 05.31.05 at 10:03 AM in the




Trackbacks:

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.mu.nu/cgi/trackback.cgi/83554

Send a manual trackback ping to this post.

ST reporter accused of being a spy
Excerpt: This is not looking good...
Weblog: From a Singapore Angle
Tracked: May 31, 2005 01:27 PM

Interesting Update On Ching Cheong
Excerpt: Yesterday I noted an apparent "cleansing" of the press conference transcripts on the mainland's Foreign Affairs Ministry website of comments on Ching Cheong, the Straits Times of Singapore reporter who has been detained for over a month for trying to obta
Weblog: Daai Tou Laam Diary
Tracked: June 3, 2005 01:29 PM

jude-law-morediscount.info
Excerpt: jude law
Weblog: jude law
Tracked: October 4, 2005 04:27 PM


Comments:

What do you mean China is NOT a police state? What does one have to do to become one?

Not have a free press. Tick

Not have freedom of travel. Tick

Not have the rule of law. Tick

Have one party rule. Tick

Do not allow dissent. Tick.

Crush dissent with violence then hide it and continue to hide it. Tick.

Do not need warrents to search houses. Tick.

Do not have prisoner rights. Tick.

Not have a reliable or transparent juridicary system. Tick.

I could go on and on and on.

Why wonder. Why say no?

China is a Police State because it's a totaliarian regime.

Wake up.

Yan

posted by: Glutterbug on 06.02.05 at 07:36 PM [permalink]

Yan, if you read again I made no judgement whether China is a police state or not.

However in this post today I clearly do state it is a police state. I couldn't agree with you more, in fact.

 posted by: Simon on 06.02.05 at 07:41 PM [permalink]




Post a Comment:

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?







Disclaimer
All content, including comments, on this site operates under a Creative Commons Licence. The content except for quotes reflect my personal opinions and not those of my employer, family, co-workers, fellow Sydney Swans supporters or anyone else. The comments section is open but if you write it, you stand by it. I take no responsibility for comments. I may, at my sole discretion, moderate, alter or remove comments. I reserve the right to unashamedly change the rules as I go along. All emails are publishable unless otherwise marked. If you don't like it, use the little x in the top right of your browser.