China Environmental Law

Following up on my post  about the coverage of domestic environmental issues by the Chinese press, I draw your attention to a press release from Internews headed “China’s Top TV Journalists Learn to Report Green: Internews’ Earth Journalism Network [EJN] Trains CCTV in Environmental Reporting.”

The Internews EJN team and US trainers “currently and formerly based at CNN” [would that be the same CNN of anti-CNN.com fame?] in conjunction with Environment News Trust (ENT) led a workshop in March in Beijing for 40 Chinese TV journalists, including “journalists from CCTV Channel 1, CCTV-2 (Economic Affairs), CCTV-9 (International Affairs, in English), CCTV-10 (Science and Education), CCTV-12 (Society and Law), from the TV news magazine World Insight and from GreenSpace, a half-hour primetime program on the environment.” Strangely, “some of the journalists produce news stories on the environment and other issues that are broadcast directly to the Communist Party leadership [CPL], and not made available to the public.”

The participants

received training on environmental issues such as biodiversity and pollution, along with journalistic training on topics such as the use of sources. Participants learned various techniques to create compelling stories and discussed the elements of good and bad stories. They also explored how to confront the challenge of the Internet to the mass media and how to use it to the advantage of TV journalism.

Here are the most interesting parts of the press release to me:

The most riveting debate focused on the content of the pieces, since they often covered issues that are sensitive on Chinese television. A piece on the Three Gorges Dam, for instance, discussed some of the negative impacts and also featured an interview of anti-dam activist Dai Qing. An extended excerpt from CNN’s Planet in Peril, meanwhile, showed graphic footage of the use of endangered wildlife for traditional medicines and the impact industrial pollution is having on people’s health.

Reaction from the CCTV journalists was mixed. Some were clearly shocked by, for instance, the wanton disregard of environmental health captured by the CNN piece. Others said they had already seen the show, even though it was not aired publicly in China. The Three Gorges Dam story drew criticism that it was too one-sided against the dam, although Strieker commented that he had also been criticized by Western environmentalists who felt the piece was too pro-dam.

The piece also helped reveal some of the preferences of Chinese TV journalists. Several felt that the opinions of an educated urbanite such as Dai Qing carried more weight than the pro-dam views of local people interviewed near the dam. But as one of the Chinese participants noted, “Foreigners may value local views over those of remote experts.”

Some participants also complained that the US-produced stories contained “too much emotion.” They felt it was wrong to link environmental issues to human rights and argued for a more factual, scientific presentation of the issues.

This faith in science among China’s governing circle to resolve public policy issues has always seemed to me a little naive (scientific “experts” can, and frequently do, draw diametrically opposed conclusions from the same data) and also potentially dangerous because I have no sense that it is tempered or governed by any ethical constraints. UPDATE: since I wrote this last sentence, I have talked to a Chinese law professor who believes that in the environmental context at least “science” is used as code for “sustainable development,” and is meant to counter calls for purely “economic” development; interesting take on the issue.

But enough of that, its getting late and I think I’ll catch the showing of Lost Horizon tonight on the CPL channel.