New York Times in perfect harmony after translation - Black & White Cat
Black and White Cat (BWC) took the time to compare an original English language article in the New York Times entitled “Beijing Puts on a Happy Face for Games, without Wrinkles” and a translation/redaction of the article by Beijing Evening News (zh). (h/t to China Bystander, China Law Blog, many others). BWC author Rob then translated back the Chinese article and compared against the original. In summary, according to Rob, this is what happened:
However, caveats aside, one overwhelming fact remains: every single statement that could possibly be seen as negative - and there’s quite a lot - has been expunged from the [translated] article, and almost every nuanced phrase that carries any neg4tive connotations has been turned into one of unqualified praise. In some instances, this can simply be error (as with my own unfortunate mistakes). But genuine errors cannot always be in one direction. The New York Times article expresses admiration for some aspects of [the city's] preparations, disapproval of other aspects and also a slightly disoriented mixture of the two. There is no way the [translated] article could in any way be said to have remotely reflected this. And it cannot be called a summary if it does not actually summarize the original.
It should go without saying that similar examples of misrepresentation can be found in European and American reports.
The non-keyword parsable visual image of Rob’s post tells much of the story.
Excerpt 1: New York Times in perfect harmony
The main point of the original article was to point out the impression of “unnatural youthfulness” left by the staffing strategy of the Beijing Olympic organizers–relying on volunteers mostly in their 20s. The article makes the point of this being a “carefully stage managed” event, and talks about it as if it were a big Hollywood production or a massive Disneyland in Beijing.
But then the BJ Evening News modified it into a piece praising the youthful vigor of China. So why did they do this?
- Perhaps the editors of BJ Evening News felt that it was important to help Western reporters not embarrass themselves by inadvertently insulting the Chinese people, the volunteers, and the Olympic organizers with these points.
- Perhaps the editors feel that its counterproductive for the Chinese readers to view Western media as biased and anti-China. Achieving the goals of peaceful, productive integration between China and “the rest of the world” can only be helped by Chinese people having a positive impression of others, and if Chinese people believe others have a positive impression of them.
- Or maybe the boss just wants to avoid difficult phone calls on their mobile phones at inconvenient times from regulators.
But an unintended side-effect of these state-encouraged efforts to shape popular opinion has resulted, according to John Kamm in the Washington Post, in a growing disconnect between how Chinese think “the world” views them and what “the world” actually thinks. The point that Kamm made from the Pew Global Study is right on target: major disconnect between Chinese self-perception and Western perceptions. Smoothing out the rough edges in Western media accounts to present a more positive, respectful, harmonious face, may be one reason why this disconnect exists. But does this disconnect make the difficult task of governing China easier? I’m sure there is plenty of private debate around this issue.
Excerpt 2: So what really happened to all the 40 and 50 year old people?
One of the most interesting points that was eliminated in the translated version was the part about why there were so few middle aged volunteers. Compared to Western Europe and the United States, the experience of one generation to the next in China is much more different. The original article hints at the practice of selecting employees by age, gender, and attractiveness which is more common in China (and many other parts of the world) than in the US (where it is illegal). And its possible that the competitive selection process favored younger applicants because English-language proficiency was a factor. So maybe the “front-office” volunteers were young but the “back-office” volunteers (hidden from view) were middle-aged. Not sure why the issue of generational differences is so sensitive (actually I have some theories). But I believe that this issue is one of the factors that Westerners interested in China really need to spend time to understand: generational differences in attitudes, beliefs, and experiences. I’ll put it out there: In general, I feel more comfortable doing business with someone in the early 30s, than someone in their late 40s in China. The world of the generations born in the 80s and 90s is much more open, global, and (dare I say) Western…then the world of those born in the 50s and early 60s. Yesterday’s Red Guards are today’s beautiful Olympic cheerleaders. It seems that it was impossible for Western visitors to Beijing to even glimpse any of that complexity of generational differences, at least during the Olympics.
Thank you Rob for highlighting this example. Here were my two key takeaways:
- Always be on the lookout for differences in perception between you and your partner in China. Dig beneath the surface of what is said and done to understand what might be more fundamental differences in worldview.
- Understand how fast China is changing and how diverse people’s opinions, attitudes, and behavior are…from a generational basis.
I hope to strive for, as Paul Denlinger of ChinaVortex says, “one level deeper” in my own personal understanding of these issues. Interested in your thoughts and comments too after you read the original post.
UPDATE 9/1:
Tim Johnson, McClatchy Beijing bureau chief and blogger at China Rises, provides another example of Xinhua polishing his story. He includes the redacted story and his original so you can make a side-by-side comparison. The effect, according to Tim, is as follows:
This serves several purposes for Xinhua and its readers. For masses of readers, it makes them think that foreign journalists are completely admiring of modern China and have nothing negative to say. A slightly more discerning reader may think foreigner reporters are saps. They know that China has warts, and may wonder why the foreign journalists don’t see them.
Only very savvy readers know that Xinhua guts the negative from stories.
I guess with all the “polishing” and creative editing, Chinese people who can’t read English really don’t know what to believe when they read the official media.
10 Responses to “New York Times in perfect harmony after translation - Black & White Cat”
I never stopped to wonder why so few volunteers were middle-aged. Perhaps it’s due to the fact that most people aged 25 and over were too busy working to volunteer, while most college students were on break and looking for something interesting to do. Then again, there were plenty of older Chinese (complete w/ t-shirts and red armbands) involved as public security volunteers throughout Beijing.
I was less freaked-out by the volunteers than I was about the silly, smiling women handing out medals - or the fact that all the men involved in the opening ceremony (i.e., the drumming, moveable type, and martial arts guys) were 1.7 meters tall and members of the PLA.
In the end, I’m just glad the Olympics are over. Now the authorities can return to being only moderately paranoid.
Why are some people so fussy about PLA performers in the opening ceremony? The whole China and all Chinese people were geared toward a successful Olympics. It was no surprise at all to have PLA make a few contributions to the game.
Look at all the good things foreigners are saying about us. We are really awesome.
vs.
Look at all the good things foreigners are saying about us. Gee, they’re really nice people.
Yeah.
I’m curious to think which statement represents the desired opinion that policy-makers want to foster. I would argue “both.” Last time I was in Beijing I found it odd that taxi drivers would refer to foreigners as “foreign friends.” Hadn’t heard that term before. I think the intent of creating a sense of friendship and amity with the world is a policy goal for those in charge of propaganda and media. Don’t you think?
That’s actually what I found rather interesting about your post. I think many foreign observers of China, whether from within or without, have long regarded the first as the default motivation for all the propaganda. It is, certainly, the easiest and likely conclusion. The second is far more subtle, requiring a few more steps in the thinking process to grasp why it could be.
I think the EFFECT of the propaganda may result in both, but I’m far less inclined to argue that there is a concerted, conscious, and reasoned effort towards fostering a positive impression of foreigners CAUSING this sort of propaganda. I simply think Occam’s Razor applies here. There just aren’t that many intellectually wily people involved in the apparatus that produces this stuff.
Furthermore, you cannot look at this without taking into account the tons of propaganda that tends towards fostering antagonistic attitudes towards foreigners. I believe there’s more negative news about the West than there is good news about the West, which is often the basis for a lot of exaggerated conceptions of Westerners and life in the West (i.e. violence and promiscuity, etc.).
In light of all this, I personally think it is too big of a leap to believe the main motivation for this misappropriation and misrepresentation of a Western article was to engender positive feelings towards foreigners. It is, to me, what it looks like on the surface: an intellectually dishonest attempt to validate, legitimize, and promote the government’s Olympic project. “We, the government, did something good for China again! See, even the foreigners said so!”
Yeah.
I think the government did a good job, not perfect, but I really do not think they need to whitewash everything to this degree.
Thanks for the posting. The “one level deeper” thinking approach should be applied not just on understanding China but many other things as well.
Yeah, it is illegal to select employees by age, gender, and attractiveness in the US. I am just wondering why there are so many fake boobs and plastic surgery stuff in Hollywood.
Because appearance is actually part of the job in that industry. The laws accounts for that.
There is a bigger question which needs to be asked, and that is whether the laundering of the Chinese version of the NYT article is a simply anomaly caused by an overzealous editor, or is it a sign of things to come?
If the former, it is not significant, but if the latter, it is something to be concerned about, since it represents an attempt to present a sanitized outside view of China to a domestic Chinese audience. This would be dangerous, not so much for the west, but for the Chinese, since it could lead to a distorted worldview.
Looking back at the major conflicts of the 20th century, many of them occurred when a new rising power attempted to upset the prevailing world order. WWI was about a newly industrialized Germany attempting to muscle its way into power. The conflict with Japan in WWII was about Japan trying to exert a sphere of dominance in Asia. Germany under Hitler was about putting continental Europe under German Nazi influence.
In all cases, there was a serious misreading of signals and miscalculations of intent on both sides. This lead to nationalism on the side of the new rising power, and translated first into sharp elbows, then later into aggression and conflict.
Let’s hope that the Chinese leadership is wise enough to learn from these mistakes. China is a big country and the Chinese are entitled to their own worldview.
But it must be grounded in reality and not fantasy.
Paul, I think quite a few people feel this is neither an anomaly nor a sign of things to come but rather yet another example of a persistent propaganda policy. It was suggested only recently that government controlled information is distorting the average Chinese person’s perceptions of how the world, well, perceives China.
Personally, I just find such wholesale misappropriation for misrepresentation to be embarrassingly shameless, intellectually dishonest, and pathetically insecure. I really want to believe that China and the Chinese can do better than this.