Beijing Newspeak

There was a endearing clumsiness to Xinhua’s propagandic treatment of International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking (which fell yesterday by the way). On the eve of the big day, eight stories on the topic passed through my office. It wasn’t enough of course. Yesterday, an additional four stories came our way - and that was by the time I crawled out of the compound at 8:30 pm. It’s the kind of thing you can guffaw raucously (with a rabid tinge) about with a colleague but if you were polishing solo, so to speak, the only option would be to alter your mind with Class A drugs purely out of spite.

We were particularly entertained by the some of the honesty that sprung out of the copy such as:

BEIJING, June 25 (Xinhua) — The Supreme People’s Court (SPC) on Monday announced its approval of the death penalty for seven drug traffickers, a day before the International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking.

Let’s not beat around the bush - this is a politically motivated announcement, it concedes. However, it’s not as blunt as this one:

Chinese and South African police yesterday announced the arrest of four Chinese men who tried to smuggle 2.5 million pills of the drug methaqualone worth US$26 million into South Africa.

The announcement of arrest, which occurred in November, of the four men surnamed Wu, Zeng, Pu and Xu comes a day before the International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking.

Actually, “which occurred in November” was removed by an eagle-eyed apologist but the Chinese version had that snippet of information. There’s nothing like tinkering with the justice system for promotional gains. Luckily, the eight drug traffickers seized by Chinese and Filipino police in another story only had to sit tight for a few weeks for the announcement of their arrest to be made. They timed it well. An arrest just before International Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking Day cuts down on all that waiting around.

Criminals in China should really make sure they carry around a calendar of these “international days” which promote the fight against one crime or another. Those on death row, such as the three drug dealers who were executed in Fujian on Monday, would have a clearer idea of the date of their day of reckoning. And for gangster celebrities such as Li Bin, the self-proclaimed “King of Shanghai’s Underworld” (or as one translation put it, “No 1 Rogue of the Bund”, which would look good emblazoned across a billboard on the banks of the Huangpu River), their fate is just downright predictable. Sentenced to death on October 25 last year, the sentence was upheld by a higher court yesterday. I hope he knows he has 364 days of living to do until the next International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking.

Another “international day”, another saturation of Chinese government press releases (also paying tribute to Myanmar’s relentless effforts etc). Although, the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, which fell on the same day, seems to have slipped by unnoticed. My main regret is that I was on holiday when World Press Freedom Day fell on May 3. Still, I shall look forward to World Population Day on July 11 when I shall learn a lot more about the one-child policy.

I have never worked for a foreign media organization in China so I’ll have to write this post in ignorance.

I can’t help but feel the brick kiln slavery scandal (Jeremiah at Jottings from the Granite Studio has some great stuff here and here) has been a missed opportunity for quality, in-depth reporting from the field by foreign media based in China. After all, it is the news story in China at the moment. 

Since the first story about the child slaves in Shanxi was uncovered (the story on how it was revealed is on ESWN - along with some must-read material - here) by Henan TV Metro Channel reporter Fu Zhenzhong, I have hardly seen any significant reporting by international media from Shanxi and Henan. Xinhua and China Daily are being relied upon to provide updates on arrests and the number of people being rescued. Fu Zhenzhong said that he had heard of 1,000 families looking for lost children. The latest figure from Xinhua is that 12 children have been discovered working as forced labourers in brick kilns in Shanxi. We know that these reports will only include a certain amount, and type, of information as dictated by this notice released by the CPC Central Office of External Communication which asked the media to place more emphasis on the “forceful measures” imposed by the central government to implement some form of justice.

As a result the story is gradually fizzling out when there is still a huge number of unanswered questions. Howard French of the New York Times said it himself:

SHANGHAI, June 20 — There is a certain ritualistic aspect to stories in China like the one this past week about the hundreds of people, many of them teenagers or even younger, who were forced to work under slavelike conditions in the brick kilns of Shanxi Province. First, Chinese readers are horrified by a picture of their country that many say they hardly recognize, then a villain is rounded up, and finally, after a torrent of unusually blunt and emotionally charged news reports and editorials, the matter drops from view, ensuring that the larger issue goes unresolved.

The villain in the case was Heng Tinghan, the manager of the brick works, who was arrested Saturday and promptly cemented his bad-guy image by protesting that it was a “fairly small thing” to beat and abuse underage workers, and to deprive them of pay. With his arrest, and the urging of the Central Office of External Communication of the Communist Party, the story then died away. But Chinese newspapers are constantly peppered with accounts of the death and injury of child laborers, and of disputes that arise because of unusually low wages, or the withholding of pay, with no region of the country exempted.

Commentaries from state media have been quoted by some international news sources with phrases like “in a rare strongly-worded commentary from …” etc. Some of these commentaries have limited importance. This one released in English by Xinhua was the opinion of one journalist in my department who wanted to express her disgust (which of course is a praiseworthy thing) and a couple of lines thrown in from me, the polisher, rather than a government opinion. I have never been a fan of Xinhua releasing commentaries - the nature of the agency as a political tool implies that an opinion piece originates from the Publicity Department rather than one journalist with a view.

I suspect there are several reasons why the bulk of the foreign media have not been covering the story from the scene of the scandal. Apparently, AFP wanted to send someone to cover it but were too short-staffed. I believe a few China correspondents may have been on a reporting trip to Taiwan when the incident came to light. Others probably thought they would spend hours travelling to Shanxi and Henan and get little out of it. The new regulations vaunted as increased freedom for reporting by foreign media in China do not seem to have changed the situation a great deal. Best to stay in Beijing and wear out the phone. Still, this would be an ideal chance to test those regulations out. If a foreign journalist meets with instant opposition then at least the world can learn the value of the regulations.

The true scale or impact of the incident can not be conveyed from Beijing or Shanghai. What is the effect on the local community? Have they heard of collusion between the police and brick kiln owners? What about the parents who haven’t been able to find their children? Have there been similar incidents, on a smaller scale, in the past? What do people living in Shanxi feel about the central government’s lack of control over local officials? It could go on …

Surely there is a lot to be said from being immersed in the emotionally charged aftermath rather than detached, on the other end of a telephone. In a recent post, I included a link to an article written by Jim Yardley of the New York Times about child abuse in Gansu back in 2005. This story was the only one about this incident and was filed from the village where the crimes were perpetrated, which is what sets it apart from the norm.

Maybe the fault lies with the foreign news desks around the world. They want the initial gory details and, as far as they are concerned, that’s that.

I could never get into the X-Files. I found the lack of continuity between episodes incredibly frustrating. Maybe it was the desperate-to-be-romantic in me - the series arrived at that difficult early to mid teenage phase. Just as the sexual tension between Mulder and Scully threatened to bubble to the surface, the episode would end and when the next one was beamed in a week later, it was like the lingering stare had never happened. (End of over elaborate analogy).

Xinhua is rather like the X-Files. Not in the paranormal sense. Ahem. Xinhua, and indeed other state media, often release stand-alone episodes in which there is no recognition of the fact a particular topic has previously been touched upon. An example is the rural healthcare issue. After Xinhua released a couple of stories about how people on low wages in the countryside were finding it impossible to afford hospital fees, even driving people to suicide, we still received reports proclaiming the virtues of the rural healthcare system with absolutely no caveat in sight.

So it was with unsurprised annoyance that I saw a story being released earlier in the week lauding the birth of 84 tiger cubs at the Harbin Siberian tiger artificial breeding base/park/farm. The report was an advert for the success of the park’s breeding program. I have covered this topic before, highlighting a piece of good journalism by the Xinhua journalist in the Harbin bureau, which revealed that the primary concern of Liu Dan, one of the park’s top brass, was the abolition of the ban on the sale of tiger parts rather than coming up with ways in which tigers bred in captivity can be released into the wild. He has complained in the past about over population and the need to exercise birth control because the park is becoming too crowded. Clearly, he felt it was best not to mention this aspect this time around - maybe it will come later in the year in an another statement of complaint.

These two stories were written by the same writer, who told me a few months ago that she believed the Hengdaohezi Feline Breeding Center (to quote the Harbin park’s full name) should technically be referred to as a farm. Oh well, at least duplicating a press release is another notch on her monthly quota.

Only a day later, another X-Files moment. China Daily had this story, quoting the State Forestry Administration, which began:

China will not promise to maintain a 14-year ban on the trade of bones from captive-bred tigers for traditional medicine, a senior official said yesterday.

“The ban is in place,” said Wang Wei, deputy director of the department of wildlife conservation of the State Forestry Administration in an exclusive interview with China Daily. “But the issue is open for review.”

He added that the administration will make a decision after conducting comprehensive studies on whether the lifting of the ban would reduce poaching and help conservation of tigers in the wild globally.

“The ban won’t be there forever, given the strong voices from tiger farmers, experts and society,” Wang said.

This story had no mention of the China Daily report from May 31 - by the same writer - which, quoting the State Forestry Administration, had begun:

Forestry authorities have pledged to maintain the 14-year-old ban on trade in all tiger derivatives despite intense lobbying from commercial groups to lift the ban.

Liu Xiongying, spokesman for the State Forestry Administration (SFA), said the government remains committed to the policy, introduced in 1993 to wipe out the market for traditional medicines made from tigers.

“China will strengthen the crackdown on illegal trade of tiger parts and forge cooperation with other countries to protect tiger habitats,” Liu told China Daily.

I can imagine it now. Harbin park witnesses the birth of 84 cubs. What the hell are we going to do with them?! Liu Dan phones up the park’s well connected investors who are fed up of losing money. They call the State Forestry Administration, who appeases them with a ”never say never” statement to the press. And the whole saga starts again.

Every so often a report on some sickening crime that has been committed somewhere in China lands on my desk for editing. In the majority of cases, there are hardly any details, similar to this offering of three paragraphs I received last week.

Xinhua, Lanzhou (June 13) - A Chinese teacher has been sentenced to death for raping 18 female primary school pupils in northwestern Gansu Province.

Cheng Laifu, a teacher at a school in Changhe Township of Tongwei County under the jurisdiction of Dingxi City, was convicted of raping a total of 18 grade three and four - aged nine to ten years old - pupils on 70 separate occasions between September 2001 and March 2005, according to the Dingxi Municipal Intermediate People’s Court.

Cheng forced or lured the children into his dormitory or office under the pretext of tutoring them before committing the crimes, the court said.

Such a horrific event, so little effort in conveying it to the world. Pressing the journalist for more information on this story brought to light some opinions I found very difficult to accept and which luckily are not held by anywhere near the majority of journalists in my department.

The journalist in question began his case as to why he could not possibly get more information by bemoaning the lack of substance to a Sichuan newspaper report, which had just been copied down by a Xinhua journalist in the Lanzhou bureau. This is something I do symphathise with, but it is the English-language’s journalist to push them to find out more details. Then he decided to raise his hand, shield the side of his mouth nearest to his colleagues, and whisper, “This kind of thing is quite common in rural areas. People there are very uneducated.” He moved on to say how he didn’t want to exaggerate the story for the sake of the children who had suffered and that they should be allowed to forget. The final excuse was predictable and one I suspected was coming all along. “It would not be good for China’s image.”

I found it particularly worrying that this reasoning was coming from a young journalist of his own accord. It certainly wasn’t the opinion of the department and one of the more senior editors encouraged him to make a couple of phone calls. This was the version that was released and subsequently picked up by AP.

Xinhua, Lanzhou (June 13) - A Chinese teacher has been sentenced to death for raping 18 female primary school pupils in northwestern Gansu Province.

Cheng Laifu, a teacher at a school in Changhe Township of Tongwei County under the jurisdiction of Dingxi City, was convicted of raping a total of 18 grade three and four - aged nine to ten years old - pupils on 70 separate occasions between September 2001 and March 2005, according to the Western Economic Daily based in Gansu’s provincial capital of Lanzhou.

Cheng forced or lured the children into his dormitory or office under the pretext of tutoring them before committing the crimes, the report said, citing a statement released by the Dingxi Municipal Intermediate People’s Court.

Cheng even raped several girls at the same time, the court document said. “Cheng’s crimes have had an extremely negative impact on society,” the statement said.

But an official with the county education bureau, when contacted by Xinhua on Wednesday, refused to provide more details about Cheng and the name of the school. Sources said the the court had conducted a closed-door trial.

In July 2005, school teacher Li Guang, also from Changhe Township, was sentenced to death for raping 23 pupils in grade four and five between September and November in 2004, which led to the resignation of the director of the county education bureau surnamed Cui.

But the local education official would not say whether the two cases happened at the same school.

This was probably the best that could be hoped for from a brief search on the Internet for the local newspaper article from Lanzhou, in which a crucial piece of background information came up, and a phone call to an untalkative local education official. Anything less would have been an insult to the children and their families.

Unfortunately, given the story was written for the overseas service in English, the children and their families will never know about it. Xinhua did not release this story in Chinese. The report about the death sentence was buried, as usual, on page four or five of the local newspaper. Presumably a clear report on the crime would be regarded as a negative impact on society and would reflect badly on local education officials and teachers.

But how can the downplaying of this kind of crime be considered a safeguard of social stability? The facts are there in the story to suggest censorship in this case can cause more suffering. Back in 2004 another teacher from the same township raped 23 primary school girls. Presumably this crime was permitted a similar amount of media coverage because at the same time, another teacher - and it even hinted in the report that he could be from the same school - got away with his abuses for several more months (although there is the possibility that Li Guang was arrested after Cheng Laifu committed the last of his crimes in March 2005).

It appears there could be 41 kids in the same township who were raped by their teacher. The effects on that community must be devastating. However, the families have to make do with a snippet of justice on page five and no public promises from local education officials to stop it from happening again or to tighten supervision of teacher recruitment.

UPDATE: I missed this New York Times story at first - credit to Jim Yardley for travelling to this village in 2005 to report on the previous incident mentioned in the Xinhua story in which Li Guang was found guilty of raping 26 (Xinhua appears to have been wrong by saying 23) girls. It appears this story was treated to the same restrictions:

It is the sort of horrific case that in many countries would be a national scandal but in China has disappeared into the muffled silence of state censorship. That silence matches the silence at the heart of the case: the fact that students considered a teacher so powerful that they did not dare speak out.

and:

Local education officials as well as prosecutors refused to be interviewed about the case, other than to confirm that the trial would be forthcoming. China’s state-controlled news media have remained silent, except for a short initial newspaper article that reported Mr. Li’s arrest.

First the “Great Leap Forward”, then the “Cultural Revolution”, now the “Thousand Cities, One Face Policy”. Ok, maybe not as catchy but I’m not going to take Mao on at the soundbite game. At least it beats “One World, One Dream”.

It was a pleasure to see vice-minister of Construction Qiu Baoxing letting off some steam at a recent urban culture and city planning conference. His speech, well reported by China Daily, lambasted local officials for their “senseless actions” that have “devastated” historical sites and cultural relics in the name of renovation. But, that was just a prelude to his disdain. In an act of PR genius, he compared the current situation of urban redevelopment and the resulting loss of cultural heritage to the two most disasterous periods of modern Chinese history.

The country’s historical and cultural heritage is facing a third round of havoc since New China was founded in 1949, he noted.

The first two occurred during the “Great Leap Forward” movement in the late 1950s, and the “cultural revolution” (1966-76), when huge numbers of relics and sites of historical value were demolished, he added.

Some may argue that the need for concrete government policies is far greater than strong words with which to impress the world. As a humble polishing slave I have only ever met the man in print but he does seem one of the more progressive officials in China. Admittedly, he is addressing issues that, for the most part, have been allowed to be subject to open criticism for a few years, during which the situation has been slow to improve. But there is a certain genuineness to his language, far removed from the set phrase repertoire of the Politburo Standing Committee.

“Some local officials seem to be altering the appearance of cities with the determination of ‘moving the mountain and altering the water course’… They are totally unaware of the value of cultural heritage.”

Qiu also slammed the “blind pursuit of large, new and exotic” buildings by some local governments.

“This is leading to a poor sight - many cities have a similar construction style. It is like a thousand cities having the same appearance,” he said.

This is by no means the first time he has banged the drum. Back in November, 2003, China Daily reported:

Vice-minister of Construction Qiu Baoxing yesterday said important villages and towns of historical and cultural value are being threatened by urban sprawl .

“Generally, protection work nationwide has stagnated as urban expansion and migration increasingly threaten national treasures inherited from our ancestors,” Qiu told China Daily.

… “It is a shame some local officials just focus their energy on economic development and lack heritage protection awareness,” said Qiu.

He has sneered at image-obsessed local governments. Although he used to be mayor of Hangzhou, which by its own definition (international tourism city), is all about image. At least there is a reason for new public squares in Hangzhou - people actually go there. This is from AFP, via the Tapei Times, in 2004:

Many of China’s 660 cities have projects — such as business development parks or large squares — which serve no purpose other than boosting the image of the city and its officials, said Qiu Baoxing, vice minister of construction.

“A large number of so-called `image projects’ or `achievement projects’ that waste manpower and money have been undertaken only to project the image of a city or the achievement of city officials,” Qiu told reporters.

 He also appreciates bikes (probably not as much as Audis when it comes to personal travel preferences). This is from the Daily Telegraph last year:

“Some Chinese cities are cutting back on bicycle lanes to make more room for cars, just as some western cities are beginning to build more of them,” the unusually environment-conscious vice-minister of construction, Qiu Baoxing, told a planning conference yesterday.

While I’m not going to sell all my material possessions and become Qiu’s loyal disciple, I do regard his latest comments as highly important in the long-run. Unfortunately, the limits of Qiu’s sphere of influence are cruelly evident if he pops out of the Great Hall of the People on his lunch break and walks south for five minutes. If I can just go back to the redevelopment of Qianmen …

I think what has happened in Qianmen was perfectly summed up by a line from Tong Mingkang, deputy director of the State Administration of Cultural Heritage, at the same conference as Qiu Baoxing (also reported by China Daily):

“It is like tearing up an invaluable painting and replacing it with a cheap print.”

And why has the Beijing government done it? “They are totally unaware of the value of cultural heritage,” was Qiu’s words. Which brings it all back to the Cultural Revolution. When I was researching a story on the redevelopment of Qianmen, I spoke to Professor Yu Kongjian, the head of Turenscape, an urban design and landscape architecture institute affiliated to Peking University. He believed money was of course a major factor but it went deeper than that.

“It is a question of what you value. The Beijing government believes the old parts of the city are poor, cranky, unkempt. They want to build new things because they believe it will make the city look more beautiful. The slogan is New Beijing, New Olympics. They want to build a monument so they can say it is beautiful. But Qianmen is a living community and is becoming unliveable.

“Technically we can solve the issue, but it is not a technical problem. It is a political issue, a social one. The Cultural Revolution has a lot to do with it. A whole generation has not been educated in how to value. We haven’t learnt from the experiences and mistakes of the West. We haven’t had time. We wasted ten years during the Cultural Revolution, we didn’t cultivate a civilised sense of what a city should be.

“The Chinese system is one of the most powerful systems in the world in terms of being able to destroy a city overnight. But this kind of system also has a great power to protect.”

1) Set a blurred scene in which a senior official - a member of the Politburo Standing Committee is ideal - implores an unspecified layer of society to embrace an abstract noun. Note: always start the report with the official’s name and clarify that he is a member of the CPC and not any other party.

Jiamusi, Heilongjiang Province, June 9 (Xinhua) – Wu Guanzheng, the top discipline official of the Communist Party of China (CPC), has called for earnest efforts to protect the interests of the people.

2) Quickly bestow upon the official his full title and sum up his recent inspection tour by providing a wide range of destinations under which most places in the area could be classified - “administration center” is always welcomed.

Wu, member of the Standing Committee of the CPC Central Committee Political Bureau, visited state-owned farms, enterprises, villages and administration centers in the northeast Chinese city during a tour from June 5-8.

 3) Provide the official’s second full job title and hint at some recent unsavoury events that have occurred in the region, which have in some way had a negative impact on the local people.

The senior Party official, who is also secretary of the CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, was in the city to inspect how local authorities have dealt with some incidents involving illegal activities detrimental to the interests of local people.

4) Imply that local officials have not been doing enough for the people under their jurisdiction. Paint a picture of the senior official slapping the back of his subordinates’ hands with a ruler. Make sure the senior official talks about “people” a lot even if it means awkward repetition. Reiterate “life” so readers think of death. Indicate that local officials have not been taking social problems seriously. Throw in the vague notion that local residents have suffered some kind of loss and that problems remain.

Wu urged local officials to pay attention to the life of people and try to improve the life of the people, so as to build up closer ties between the Party and the people. He urged local officials to be serious in resolving protruding problems that have brought losses to interests of the people.

5) List a series of problems which are seemingly unique to this particular region. Confirm that rural people have suffered losses as a result of fraudulent activities.

Special programs should be launched to check problems regarding food security, labor safety and fraudulent activities that brought financial losses to local farmers.

6) Detail three main areas in which there has been a lot of illegal activity. Chuck in an “-ism” to finish.

The senior official pledged to severely punish illegal activities in the fields of education, medical service and environmental protection. He also told officials to avoid formalism and bureaucracy.

7) Look back at the finished article, take stock and choose a nondescript headline (preferably one that has been used before - check on Google) which will ensure it is completely ignored by everyone except the People’s Daily.

Senior official calls for protecting people’s interests

It was probably just a routine inspection during which Wu Guanzheng said the same thing as he would have done if he was visiting the opposite end of the country in Yunnan. But the ability to suggest something more sinister through the use of obscure language is remarkable.

Unlike my colleagues who have to translate this kind of report, I have the luxury of slapping “NOT POLISHED - ADVISE AGAINST RELEASE” on the front cover followed by “this report does far more harm than good etc”. Unfortunately if the story involves one of the members of the Standing Committee there is often no choice for the senior editors but to release it.

Although, last week I did manage to reject a similar report concerning Jia Qinglin, Chairman of the People’s Political Cosultative Conference. I’m not sure what that says about Jia’s waning political influence ahead of the upcoming Party congress … Absolutely nothing actually (depends on the senior editor’s identity and mood) but just thought I’d mention it.

You can always tell when the Information Office of the State Council is pissed off. Particularly when it is 11pm on a Friday night and all the wordsmiths want to do is get to the KTV bar and rap along to Ice-T’s Freedom of Speech. Often the most important news events covered by Xinhua are relayed through their shortest reports based on meaningless collections of abstract nouns from the Information Lords. This one made me snigger for the sheer begrudgingness (yes I’m taking liberties with the English language but I work at Xinhua so I demand more freedom of expression) of it all.

Song Pingshun, chairman of the Tianjin Municipal Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in the northern port city of Tianjin, was found dead on Monday.

A police investigation showed that Song had committed suicide.

Relevant departments said that they had received reports accusing Song of corruption and an investigation is underway.

Clearly having had no intention of reporting this occurrence, I bet the Information Office was delighted to see Song’s colleague had been blabbing to Reuters to guarantee news of Song’s suicide was in the public domain. Reuters goaded them with the highly effective line “China’s state-run media has remained silent on the issue” and the terse statement is handed to Xinhua complete with the irritated signature of its author. Better than nothing I suppose.

For more than my fleeting comment on this story, Rob at Black and White Cat has many more details and he managed to quote the Xinhua story correctly (unlike me, who despite polishing the stuff, still couldn’t remember the three pars off the top of my head).

In some mildly deranged kind of way, I admire the Chinese Foreign Ministry. It has the ability to release brief statements with more holes than a Connect Four board, often appearing as if it has achieved the intellectual ideal of not caring about what other people think. Well why should we explain the situation, these are the facts that involve China if you are interested, it says with a shrug. Xinhua’s diplomatic desk dutifully translates the statements and reports like this one on June 4 are released:

The Chinese Foreign Ministry on Monday confirmed that no Chinese people had died in a ship collision involving illegal Chinese immigrants off the coast of Nicaragua.

The Chinese Embassy in Mexico said that it had heard from the Nicaraguan authorities that no Chinese had been killed in the ship collision, said a statement posted on the Foreign Ministry website.

A ship carrying dozens of illegal Chinese immigrants collided with another vessel near Nicaragua on May 25.

A total of 38 illegal Chinese immigrants on the ship, who were detained in Managua, capital of Nicaragua, are now in good conditions, the statement said, adding that the officials from the Chinese Embassy in Mexico had visited them.

As China and Nicaragua have no diplomatic relations, the Chinese Embassy in Mexico has been working with the Nicaraguan side to properly resolve the issue, the statement said.

Good news, it would seem. But what about the previous media reports on this incident? The one from Reuters on May 28 that said:

Nicaraguan police have arrested 69 illegal Chinese immigrants trying to get to the United States after the boat they were traveling in collided with another craft, an migration official said on Monday.

Police also arrested 14 undocumented Ecuadorean migrants who were on the other vessel, the officials said.

“We have 14 Ecuadoreans, seven women and seven men, and from China we have 69, 15 women and the rest male,” a spokeswoman for Nicaragua’s migration office, Magdalena Reyes, said.

The collision, which happened on Friday just off Nicaragua’s largely undeveloped Caribbean coast, left five people dead — three Chinese, an Ecuadorean and a Nicaraguan who was organizing the immigrants’ passage.

Three other Chinese were still missing.

Yet at the time, as Reuters pointed out, Chinese state radio had reported the arrests of only 38 Chinese immigrants.

On June 3, another FM statement was released which put the nationalities of those that died in doubt. The figure of 38 remained firm and the FM was quoting “Nicaraguan sources”.

 China is working with Nicaragua on identifying the five people killed in a ship collision involving illegal Chinese immigrants, according to Chinese Foreign Ministry.

It was reported that a ship carrying dozens of illegal Chinese immigrants collided with another vessel near Nicaragua on May 25, said a statement posted on the Foreign Ministry Web site (www.fmprc.gov.cn).

Five people, whose citizenship cannot be identified, died, while 38 of the survivors were confirmed to be illegal Chinese immigrants, the statement said, citing Nicaraguan sources.

China’s Foreign Ministry had tried various means to confirm the information since the accident took place, the statement said.

“However, we have not confirmed whether the dead are Chinese or not so far,” the statement said.

 The following day, the number of Chinese that died was zero. There is no mention of the discrepancy in figures: 69 vs 38. Nothing about the nationalities of the people who actually did die. The report about the three missing Chinese was ignored. Not a sausage about Ecuador. The source for the report was “the Nicaraguan authority” who told the Chinese Embassy in Mexico. Why should there have been any more details? No Chinese died. The FM had done its job. Unfortunately, Xinhua was the only news agency reporting the incident but, in this case, its role was not to provide a news story. The international media had lost interest in the event and the Xinhua statement was ignored. The only information on the accident was coming from a Foreign Ministry that does not have an embassy in Nicaragua (as Nicaragua recognizes Taiwan).

I’m bored of the way my mind tries to concoct reasons for this type of confusion that happens so regularly. Just leave it. The Chinese FM has had the final say. Why dispute everything it reports? But it still bugs me … did the Nicaraguan immigration official report the wrong information to Reuters? How did the Nicaraguan immigration office get the figures so wrong? Is there any reason why the Chinese FM would alter the figures? Is it anything to do with Nicaragua’s choice of Taiwan aid over diplomatic ties with China? As the Reuters report said, this does complicate issues such as repatriation. Were the people that died actually from Taiwan?

 I have no idea but I do know that I’m fed up of spewing forth conspiracy theories every time I have to edit a FM statement that poses more questions than it provides answers. But then why should it care.

The word count of the “comments” pages on China-related blogs is about to nose dive. Prolific and erudite blog commenter “Cat“, who often comes with up theories and revelations that are more interesting than the original blog posts (speaking from experience), has opened up a place for his musings - Black and White Cat. Although, in his first installment, he does find the time to tell us there are 133 cleanings in a 140g tube of Colgate so hopefully the comments will keep on coming. Enjoy.

Avoiding “loss of face” is a pesky little preoccupation, particularly for state media editors. It seems to have the power to cloud common sense with regular ease.

The Academy of the Great Wall of China has a problem. The “New Seven Wonders of the World” are about to be decided and the Great Wall is currently languishing outside the top seven in the public vote. The academy needs public panic. It needs 1.3 billion Chinese people across the nation to scream “Shit, the iconic symbol of our nation is going to be denied wonder status. Let’s vote!” China should be able to do this. There are enough people with access to the Internet in order to vote (144 million of them) and enough mobile phones to send votes by SMS. A dollop of urgency is all that is required. And a full-on media frenzy of course.

Step forward an editor with pride issues. I have no idea who is responsible for the following decision but all the Chinese stories on this issue that I have seen fail to mention that the Great Wall is not currently in the top seven. This is deliberate. Apparently, telling the Chinese people that their Great Wall is outside the top seven would be denigrating to the nation. It would be better off if the story says, “Guess what everybody, the Great Wall is in the top ten “Wonders of the World” and could be in the final seven! Wahoo!” This explains the following story on CCTV-9, which was taken directly from the Chinese version:

The stage has been set to hold a global vote to determine the New Seven Wonders of the World. The Great Wall has long been a famous symbol of China. And now, it’s in the running for this prestigious, worldwide honor. Public voting is now open for an array of ancient historic sites.

The Great Wall is considered by many as a symbol of China’s ancient civilization and its peoples’ ingenuity.

And now, this 2,600-year-old fortification is in the running to become one of the new Seven Wonders of the World. Many Chinese are expressing their confidence ahead of the competition. That’s because, they say greatness defines itself.

Xie Jiuzhong, spokesperson Badaling tourist district, said, “Last year I went to Italy and Greece and toured around the sites there. But it only impressed upon me why the Chinese are so proud of the Great Wall. No other cultural heritage sites can compare with the Great Wall in terms of length, magnitude and the man-power required to build it.”

The Great Wall’s magnificent features are attracting tourists from across the world. So far, the Badaling section alone has attracted over 130 million tourists. (Singing) For these visitors, this is the best way to express their excitement.

Erin Manning, choir member, said, “Well, it’s definitely true but it just, the words and everything and the pictures don’t capture it all, it’s just amazing, it’s really beautiful, just the landscape and everything.”

But the Great Wall of China is facing fierce competition from the other 20 UNESCO listed nominations. Among them the Eiffel Tower of France, the pyramids of Egypt, the Colosseum in Rome and the Taj Mahal in India.

Public voting is now underway online at www.new7wonders.com . The final results will be announced during a ceremony in Lisbon on July 7th this year.

What? “Greatness defines itself”? It’s a lovely line but where is the call to arms? The academy needs votes! The Great Wall needs YOU! Luckily, clear thinking in the English department prevailed (especially after I banged my head on my desk seven times, cackled manaically and swore like a trooper) and we released the right story which Reuters picked up. But what a hopeless task the Academy of the Great Wall faces. News of its last-minute campaign to rally voters was suppressed and now they have to rely on foreigners to step in. (Vote for the Great Wall on www.new7wonders.com - yes it stinks of gimmickry but at least it is an attempt to celebrate the world’s cultural heritage).

A final observation. This quote made me chuckle:

“China’s Great Wall missed an opportunity 2,000 years ago when the Greeks named the Seven Wonders of the World. It would be extremely regretful if it became an also-ran this time,” the academy said in a statement.

Damn those bloody ancient Greeks!