Talk:2015 Tianjin explosions/Media, censorship and propaganda

Media, censorship and propaganda
Media in China is tightly controlled by the government. See People's democratic dictatorship for general policies and Inciting subversion of state power for policies related to speaking out against the state.

Chinese professional media coverage
Tianjin authorities banned editors and reporters from sharing information about the disaster on Weibo and WeChat, and websites were ordered to follow state media.

The Tianjin Internet Police warned social media users to use only official casualty figures.

Citizens complained that eight hours after the explosion, Tianjin Television was still not reporting live or updating on the event, showing instead soap operas, although the channel had reported the explosion on their early morning news at 7:00 am.

Chinese social media coverage
A great deal of specific information on the event, including the majority of early stage video has been first released over social media sites, and in particular Weibo which operates much like Twitter. Major media has drawn heavily from social media sources, greatly widening the audience. The Economist noted: ''Social media fills in the blanks left by official narratives of the Tianjin disaster. The most remarkable feature of the aftermath of the explosions in Tianjin, in northern China, has been the extraordinary contrast between the official reaction to the crisis, which has been profoundly flawed, and the online reaction, which has entirely dominated the agenda''.

Background
There is a long history of Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China which continues. (See for example: Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China, Golden Shield Project, Great Firewall, Great Firewall of China, Censorship by Google, and Censorship_of_Wikipedia). Likewise the central government of China spends considerable sums trying to shape public opinion positively towards its government. (See for example: Propaganda in the People's Republic of China and especially for this event, 50 Cent Party)

Inside China several websites are totally blocked from use including: Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Twitter, Instagram, New York Times, and Bloomberg. This is to eliminate undesired content from entering the country and to shield domestic Internet businesses from international competition. Likewise several thousand key words and phrases are blacklisted and automatically blocked as part of the overall censorship program.

According to The Economist: ''China’s communist rulers spend millions on a sophisticated operation to control and influence internet and online traffic. The aftermath of the Tianjin explosions shows that social media are nevertheless China’s main public square for debate and that government attempts to influence the narrative of the disaster have failed completely''

Censorship of explosions
Journalists and bystanders alike were restricted to 3 km from the explosion site.

Chinese authorities reportedly attempted to censor professional and social media reports. The censorship rate increased tenfold on the social media site Weibo, with users reporting that their posts regarding the blasts are being deleted, with the words "Tianjin" and "explosion" being the most censored.

In a statement on 15 August, the Cyberspace Administration of China announced that it had shut down 18 websites and suspended 32 more for spreading false information. More than 360 Weibo and public WeChat accounts, which had been actively spreading such "false rumors", have been "punished according to laws". Of these accounts, over 160 were closed permanently, the rest only temporarily.

Foreign coverage
BBC, AP, UPI, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and many other major media have dispatched journalists to Tianjin.

A CNN correspondent was interrupted by bystanders and forced to leave during a live report outside TEDA Hospital. A journalist from the Beijing News reported that he and two other reporters were chased by police, caught, searched, and made to delete photographs from their cameras and computers.

Human rights, corruption, accountability, and rule of law
The Conversation reported: "President Xi Jinping has urged authorities to learn “extremely profound” lessons “paid for with blood” from the accident. The fact that regulations were already being flouted should mean a crackdown on corners being cut. The president’s comments indicate that this disaster will lead to greater change than previous ones. Unlike with previous incidents, the information about the explosion has been relatively transparent and public criticism has been allowed. Chinese premier, Li Keqiang, has even encouraged it."

The strict control of information, the sheer scale of the disaster, and public distrust of officialdom led to rafts of speculation about the ownership of the port business and their likely political connections.

UN Commission for Human Rights Reporter Baskut Tuncak (Turkey), issued an official statement noting "under international human rights standards, the State has an obligation to generate, assess, update and disseminate information about hazardous substances, and businesses have a responsibility respect human rights, including effectively communicating information. This chemical disaster serves as yet another tragic example of the need of information about hazardous substances to protect, respect and realize human rights,the lack of information when needed—information that could have mitigated or perhaps even prevented this disaster—is truly tragic. The reported restrictions on public access to health and safety information and freedom of the press in the aftermath are deeply disturbing, particularly to the extent it risks increasing the number of victims of this disaster." A special report is scheduled to be given to the UN Human Rights Council on 16 September.