MCLC: China reacts to Barbosa's Pulitzer Prize

[Denton, Kirk]

MCLC LIST
From: kirk (denton.2 at osu.edu)
Subject: China reacts to Barbosa's Pulitzer Prize
***********************************************************

Source: The Atlantic (4/17/13):
http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/04/china-reacts-to-david-barb
ozas-pulitzer-prize/275060/

China Reacts to David Barboza's Pulitzer Prize
The news that The New York Times reporter -- who reported on the massive
wealth of former Premier Wen Jiabao -- won the Pulitzer has sparked a
divided reaction on the Chinese internet.
By MINAMI FUNAKOSHI

David Barboza, the Shanghai Bureau Chief of The New York Times, won the
2013 Pulitzer Prize for international reporting for exposing the wealth
amassed by the extended family of former premier Wen Jiabao. The report
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/business/global/family-of-wen-jiabao-hol
ds-a-hidden-fortune-in-china.html?ref=davidbarboza&_r=0>, which tackles
head-on the politically sensitive topic of corruption by high-level
officials, led the Chinese government to block Web access to both the
English and Chinese versions of the New York Times entirely.

On Sina Weibo, China's Twitter, a popular user with the handle "Pretending
to be in New York" (@ 假装在纽约 <http://weibo.com/sudd>) posted the
following 
comment on April 15th, the day the Pulitzer Prizes were announced:

<<The Pulitzer Prize for reporting just released: the New York Times
claims four awards, one of which was awarded for that well-known
China-related report. That piece won the prize for international
reporting.>>

Although the user was careful to avoid mentioning Wen Jiabao's hidden
family assets, Chinese censors apparently found it unacceptable
nonetheless. Within 24 hours, the tweet was swept clean off of Weibo.

Tea Leaf Nation collected some of the comments the thread gathered before
its deletion. Though few, and perhaps not fully representative, they
provide a brief insight into Chinese online reaction to this topic.

Some Web users saw the incident as an American conspiracy to undermine
Chinese leadership through news reporting. "China is resolutely opposed to
any country, any person, using the Pulitzer journalism prize to interfere
with China's internal affairs and defile its former leaders," commented @小子
子懒到死 <http://www.weibo.com/1878083285>. "This is definitely an American
imperialist [conspiracy]," wrote @ 鸟博9 <http://www.weibo.com/3181242325>.

Some, on the other hand, congratulated David Barboza and the New York
Times. User @彥Ianni <http://www.weibo.com/yanianni> wrote, "That famous
NYT article received special mention -- congratulations! A Pulitzer Prize
in international reporting! What a courageous journalist." @ Salt_Lee
<http://www.weibo.com/leeyanwes>wrote,"Congratulations on that famous
report!"

Others responded in genuine -- or perhaps feigned -- confusion, pointing
out how common such scandals are in China. "Which report [did the NYT
receive the award for]? The one about amassed wealth? Or the one about
swimming pigs?" asked user @柠檬树559 <http://www.weibo.com/lemontree559>,
referring to the recent flood of dead pigs in Shanghai's Huangpu River. "I
would like the source for that report. It's the one related to high-level
government corruption, I'm assuming?" wrote @别打马赛克啊
<http://www.weibo.com/3305665505>.
For Chinese netizens, censorship is a fact of life. Over the years, they
have found ways to circumvent the regulations, such as inventing codes to
discuss sensitive topics
<http://www.tealeafnation.com/2012/11/six-tips-to-stay-out-of-trouble-in-sp
artan-beijing-before-the-18th-party-congress/>. In order to gain access to
David Barboza's censored report, some users requested links or
screenshots. Besides demonstrating netizen ingenuity, this also suggests
that there are many Chinese citizens who may have heard about, but have
never actually read, the report in question.

"They censored the article before I had the time to read it. I remember
thinking at that time that the reason I couldn't access it is because the
snowstorm in New York interfered with their internet," wrote @忠于原味wer
<http://www.weibo.com/2467314243>. "Even if you give us the link, we
probably can't open it. Please post an image of the report so that we can
all see it," requested @特种大猫 <http://www.weibo.com/1411831122>.

Many web users prophesied the expurgation of the tweet posted by
"Pretending to be in New York" as well -- yet another sign of increased
netizen familiarity with the un-written codes of online censorship.

"'Pulitzer Prize' will become a sensitive term," forecasted @双宿
<http://www.weibo.com/guhongrui>. "I reckon the Chinese government will
announce tomorrow that the 'Pulitzer Price has no public credibility.' But
they can't force other people's mouths shut, and we can't cover our own
eyes. Our government is truly foolish," criticized @风莽莽
<http://www.weibo.com/1705999660>.

However, despite such predictions, the news itself is not completely
off-limits on the Web. "Pulitzer Prize for reporting" is one of the
trending topics on Weibo, and some posts that explicitly mention David
Barboza's name remain untouched. Most such posts, however, do not touch
upon the actual content of Barboza's report.

Still, there are some daring posts that, surprisingly, are uncensored on
Weibo. User @高万喜 <http://weibo.com/u/1879445942> wrote, "The NYT
journalist David Barboza wins this year's Pulitzer Prize for international
reporting for his report on the $2.7 billion fortune of 'the clan high up
in the starry heavens.'" The "clan high up in the starry heavens" is a
code for the extended family of Wen Jiabao.

Another user, @colin在重庆 <http://weibo.com/u/2253171192>, also skirted the
censors by tweeting the news in English:

<<Awarded to David Barboza for his striking exposure of corruption at high
levels of the Chinese government, including billions in secret wealth
owned by relatives of the prime minister, well documented work published
in the face of heavy pressure from the Chinese officials.>>

Why are these posts not censored, while the post by "Pretending to be in
New York" is? Perhaps the user "Pretending to be in New York" was censored
because of his status as a widely followed, vocal social critic
<http://www.tealeafnation.com/2012/06/netizens-reflect-as-one-chinese-woman
-touches-heaven-another-hell/> on Weibo. Perhaps the other posts escaped
deletion through their ingenuity, or sheer good luck.
And, perhaps, it is just a matter of time until the censors hone back in.