The International Olympic Committee has acknowledged that it acceded to Chinese government demands that some Internet censorship be kept in place during the Olympics, The New York Times reported Thursday.
Nevermind that IOC promised journalists could "report freely" from the games. Still, is this really a problem for reporters?
Long story short: this isn't much of a problem. Journalists arriving in Beijing without regularly being stationed there have already spent however much money to get to China and stay in hotels. They can afford a VPN service, which will completely circumvent the government restrictions--that is, if their newsroom doesn't have one already. Journalists will just have to learn how to use the Internet under less-than-ideal circumstances.
The long story: for the unaccustomed, the restrictions will be a pain in the neck. Certain things will be blocked in certain places. You'll never know exactly why something was stopped. Not-so-savvy reporters or those with old computers may have trouble using proxies and VPN.
But this doesn't really stop reporters from "reporting freely."
What would stop that is denial of access, denial of free travel, and threats or actual detainment or deportation after publishing something the government doesn't like.
I can say from personal experience that certain towns in the northwestern province of Xinjiang were being treated as off-limits to foreigners and some Chinese from out of town as recently as 10 days ago. We've already seen Beijing police acting violently against reporters from Hong Kong and breaking camera equipment at an Olympics news event.
Reporting freedom will not be complete in Beijing, but Internet censorship is not the reason. When foreign journalists are the target of restrictions, that's not much of a civil liberties problem for Chinese people, who face a restricted internet whether or not a bunch of reporters get a free pass this summer.
Perhaps reporters should get over their own selves and write more about Chinese people.
UPDATE July 31, 2008 17:23 GMT: The AP reports that an official who guaranteed free access to journalists was surprised by the shift:
Gosper said he first learned of China's backtracking on Internet access when Beijing organizing committee spokesman Sun Weide announced Tuesday that journalists would have only "sufficient" -- not unrestricted -- access to the Internet.
Since then, Gosper said he has felt "a bit isolated" within the IOC and was surprised at being left out of the loop.
The English-language China blogosphere is crowded, interconnected, and decidedly lacking in jocks. All the more reason to see what Olympic athletes have to say about their experience in China this summer. Luckily, the IOC, after forbidding athlete blogging in the past, has lifted its ban. Kudos, but a little more vision would really bring the Olympics into the digital age.
Imagethief, whose post reminded me of the news, says, "It will be interesting to see if this becomes a route to expression for athletes who have something controversial to say but don't relish the idea of a 1968-style from-the-podium hell-raiser." Indeed, though it's hard to tell whether officials on the Beijing side were involved in this decision, the possibilities for under-the-radar controversy will be much greater with blogs. I'm sure most athletes won't want to jeopardize their ability to compete by prodding at China, but some very well might.
The IOC, however, seems more concerned with maintaining its stranglehold on images of the games, something like Major League Baseball's ritual admonition that you can't even think about baseball without their express written consent. Blogging by "accredited" individuals--athletes and officials--is "personal expression," they say, not journalism, and the people under IOC's jurisdiction are forbidden to show any sporting action from their own eyes.
I just think that's a pity. Imagine if IOC decided to host athlete blogs instead of simply allowing them, including pictures and video of gymnastics floor routines shot by rivals and teammates! Imagine the page-views! Meanwhile, this means that a valuable perspective is consigned to being filtered through journalists. If athletes could just post their commentary, why would all these reporters really be so necessary? I work as a journalist so perhaps I shouldn't undermine my colleagues, but I'd rather hear from the athletes themselves.
- prev
- 1
- next
