超级军网【瑞士《Rainbowbuilders》】中国怎么做会改变西方媒体 ...
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/25 10:06:25
What can China do to improve the Western media coverage?
中国怎么做会改变西方媒体的报道？
【链接】
原文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
译文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
【作者】
Otto Kölbl 奥多考波
Otto Kölbl graduated from the Lausanne University (Switzerland) in German language and literature and worked for four years as an assistant there. During that time, for research purposes, he travelled several times to China, where he worked in various schools from kindergarten to university. In 2005, he taught German and linguistics at the Northwestern Polytechnical University in Xi'an (PR China) during one academic term. He is currently a researcher at the Lausanne University and a German teacher. He is the founder and webmaster of this website and is legally responsible for all what the content, except of course for the contributions in the comments and the forum.
【正文】
The huge majority of the Chinese are outraged by the way in which the Western media report about their country. Some tried to get their voice heard, but generally without much success. This lack of success is probably due to a large extent to cultural differences, which make communication about sensitive topics difficult.
大部分中国人都会被西方媒体对中国的报道所激怒。其中有一些人尝试让别人了解自己对此的意见，但是基本上都失败了。这种失败很大程度上归因于文化差异，正是这种差异使得中西双方在关于敏感话题上的沟通很困难。
The Chinese use mainly three different arguments:
中国人主要表达了三个不同观点：
●The Western media report only about the negative aspects in China, they don't live up to their standard of balanced reporting.
●西方媒体只报道中国的负面新闻，他们并没有达到他们自己制定的应该客观公正的报道准则。
●The Western media have made obvious errors, especially in their coverage of the unrest in Tibet in March 2008.
●西方媒体的报道有明显的错误，尤其是关于08年XZ暴乱的报道。
●When talking about "human rights abuses", the West is not in a position to criticize China, because the Western countries have got various problems with their human rights standards too. Furthermore, human rights are an internal affair, and "meddling in the internal affairs" of another country is explicitly prohibited by international law.
●在谈到人权问题的时候，西方媒体并没有资格批评中国，因为西方国家的人权标准也有很多问题。再者，人权是一个国家的内部事务，而"干预其他国家的内政"是被国际法明令禁止的。
However, Western journalists will not accept these arguments, for reasons related to basic Western values and to the Western concept of the role of the media. On the other hand, there are other arguments which are much more likely to inflect the Western journalistic methods in a durable way. They are based on a fact-based critical comparison of the actual reporting with the Western ideal of good journalistic practice.
然而，基于西方的价值观和西方人对媒体作用的定义，西方记者不会接受这些观点。另一方面，有些其他的论点更有可能长期性地改变西方媒体的报道方式。在对媒体实际报道和西方新闻工作的理想标准进行比较之后，可以得出这些基于事实的批判性的论点。
"Only bad news is good news"
"只有坏消息是好新闻。"
The Western media consider themselves to be a countervailing power (see our article The Western media – Power without countervailing power?). This role consists in closely watching each move of the authorities and other powerful actors, in order to report all possible abuses. This role is considered to be fundamental to the good functioning of democratic as well as authoritarian societies. Therefore, reporting about problems and abuses is fundamental to the self-understanding of our media, whereas reporting about things which work well is not considered to be vital.
西方媒体认为自身是一种对抗的力量（参见本站文章"西方媒体-没有对抗力量的力量？"）。这种力量体现在：近距离观察权力机构和其他有权利的角色的每个举动，以便于报道出所有可能的权力滥用。这种作用的体现，无论是在民主社会还是专制社会都被认为是社会良好运转的表现。因此，在我们的媒体看来，对于揭露问题和批判的报道是自己最基本的任务，而对于发展良好的事物的正面报道却并不重要。
Another factor is the commercialization of the Western media. Western consumers tend to be more interested in reports about abuses than in reports about nice progress and positive development. This has not always been the case. In the 1950ies and 1960ies, Western newspapers and magazines had a much more optimistic tone, and this was generally appreciated. Things started to change with the 1968 movement, the 1973 oil shock and with the various economic crises which followed. More recently, the 2001 World Trade Center attacks and the recent loss of Western influence in the world have amplified this tendency.
另外一个因素是西方媒体的商业化。相对于描述进步与发展的新闻报道，西方媒体的消费者对批评的报道更感兴趣。在五十和六十年代，情况并不像现在这样，那时西方的报纸杂志都表现出一个更加积极的论调，而且那时的读者也都喜欢这样的论调。1968年，在欧美大国都掀起了革命浪潮，比如美国的反越战浪潮，德国的反纳粹浪潮等等。这之后，1973年又爆发了石油危机，并随之引起了大范围的经济危机。这一系列事情的发生之后，媒体的报道方式与受众的关注点就开始转变了。而距离现在更近的911恐怖袭击以及西方国家对世界影响的减弱也扩大了这种变化。
Therefore, Western media reports are generally more "negative" in their tone and in the selected subjects than Chinese media. This does not justify the abuses of recent Western media reporting about China, because even criticism must be fair. However, only a systematic comparison between solid data and a large quantity of newspaper articles can allow us to point out problems.
因此，西方媒体的报道在论调和选题上一般都比中国媒体要消极和负面。但是这些并不能证明西方媒体近期对于中国的批评是完全有理的，因为即使是批判也需要公正。然而，只有系统地比较了真实可靠的数据和大量的报刊文章之后我们才能指出问题所在。
Amnesty International, a well-known human rights defense organization, publishes every year a report denouncing human rights abuses in almost every country on earth. This report is not exactly part of what we call the "media", but it has a great influence on newspapers and TV news, and its structure makes it especially suitable for such an example. There is one article per country; they have got all the same structure. This makes a systematic comparison much easier.
著名的人权保护组织大赦国际每年会针对几乎每个国家做出一份报告，抨击当地的人权侵犯问题。这份报告并不是我们所说的"媒体"，但是它对报刊和电视新闻都有很大的影响力。而且它的形式很适合被媒体引用，因为针对每个国家的报告都是相同的形式结构，这样如果要系统比较的话就容易得多。
The 2010 report mentions among others the "lack of access to adequate health care" in the article about China (p. 104). The only other country where access to health care is described as a general problem for the whole population is Afghanistan. This is in obvious contradiction to the data provided by the World Health Organization and the Child Mortality Estimate organization.
在2010年关于中国的报告中提到了"不能获得足够的医疗保障"这一条（第104页）。而在他们的报告中，除中国以外，只有阿富汗的医疗保障被视为全国性的普遍的人权问题。这明显和世界卫生组织以及儿童死亡率评估组织（Child Mortality Estimate organization）提供的数据相矛盾。
According to their figures, China ranks 60th out of 156 in terms of infant mortality relative to the standard of living (in all the rankings, rank 1 stands for the positive end of the scale, i.e. here for a low infant mortality rate). It does even better in the recent decrease in infant mortality, where it ranks 17th out of 156 (see our article The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?). Infant mortality is generally considered to be a good indicator of general access to health care.
根据这两个组织的数据，在由婴幼儿死亡率所得出的生活水平上，中国在156个国家中排名第60（所有排名中，第一名为情况最好的，在这个排名中，意为婴幼儿死亡率最低）。而在近期婴幼儿死亡率降低的排名中，中国排名则更加靠前，在156个国家中排名第17名。（参见本站文章The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?)。婴幼儿死亡率被普遍认为是判断医疗保障优劣的基本指标。
These good results in recent years are confirmed by a series of articles in the prestigious medical periodical The Lancet. The volume 372 (November 2008) was dedicated to the recent health reforms in China. Therefore, Amnesty's accusation that China shows a "lack of access to adequate health care" is totally unfounded, the contrary is true: China provides a far better access to health care to its population than the international average.
英国著名医学杂志《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）刊登了一系列文章肯定了以上数据所表现出的积极结论。2008年11月发行的第372期杂志全刊介绍了中国近期的医疗改革。因此，大赦国际所说的在中国"不能获得足够的医疗保障"是没有根据的。相反的，中国的医疗保障比全世界的平均水平要好的多。
Newspapers are of course much more difficult to analyze; this is the more true for TV and radio. Each year, many articles are published in each newspaper about every major country in the world. Only a quantitative analysis of all the articles or of a random sample using adequate statistical tools allows a meaningful comparison.
对报刊进行分析已经比较难，而电视和广播就更难了。每年，每种报刊都会刊登关于每个世界大国的无数文章。只有运用适当的数据工具，对所有文章或者科学选取的随机样本进行数量分析，才能做出有意义的比较研究。
From my personal experience, such an analysis would certainly reveal a heavily biased reporting about corruption. According to Transparency International, China ranks 78th out of 178 countries listed in the Corruption Perception Index 2010, therefore doing better than average. Despite this relatively good score, corruption is mentioned almost systematically when talking about the Chinese political system or China in general, much more so than in other countries where corruption is much more widespread.
根据我的个人体验，这种分析一般会体现出对于贪污腐败的大量报道。根据国际透明（Transparency International）2010年的全球贪污指数报告，中国在178个国家中排名第78名，比平均水平要好。尽管有相对好的排名，中国政治系统或者说整个中国在被提到的时候，总是与贪污联系在一起。比起那些实际上贪污情况严重的多的国家，中国被提到的更多。
Only such systematic research in this and other similar questions could provide the necessary data to confront the media and show them that their reporting about China does not correspond to their own quality standards. It could prove that the feeling, widespread among Chinese, that our media are "biased against China" is caused not by cultural differences, but by objectively measurable problems in their coverage. Unfortunately, Western media researchers will never engage in this kind of research methodology (see our article What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?).
只有这样针对问题的系统研究才能提供指正媒体的必要的数据，并且让媒体知道他们关于中国的报道与他们自己制定的标准相悖。这也能证明，很多中国人认为西方媒体"对中国有偏见"，并不是因为文化差异，而是由于媒体报道中客观显著的问题。不幸的是，研究西方媒体的学者都不研究这个问题（参见本站文章What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?）。
Obvious errors in the reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008
关于2008年XZ动乱的错误报道
In 2008, many websites were filled with reports about the errors made by the Western media when reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008. However, there are two fundamental problems with this way of criticizing our media. First of all, the fact that the media make errors from time to time is well know and well documented; this procedure will not lead to a fundamental questioning of their working methods. Second, criticizing a few details shows that all the rest is correct.
2008年，很多人在各种网站上登出文章，列举西方媒体对XZ动乱报道中的错误。然而，这些批评西方媒体的文章有两大基本问题。第一，媒体时而出错的事实是被广泛接受和记录的，这样挑错的批评并不能引导出对媒体工作方式的广泛质疑。第二，挑一小部分错，就证明了其他大部分都是正确的。
The Western media report not only about the world, they report about their own errors too. They do not always do so properly, but quite often they will use reports about their own errors in order to increase their credibility: "You see, we make errors, this is unavoidable, but we recognize them and inform about them." In the case of Tibet, they had a good excuse for these errors: If the Chinese government had not barred them from reporting from the region, they could have offered better information about these events.
西方媒体并不仅仅报道世界新闻，他们还报道自己犯的错误。他们并不总是正确，但是经常用承认自己所犯错误的方法来提升自己的信誉："你看，我们犯错，犯错不可避免，但是我们认识到错误并且公开承认。"关于XZ，他们有一个很好的犯错借口：如果中国政府让他们进入XZ报道，他们就能提供更准确的新闻。
However, there is a much more general problem with pointing out precise details which are incorrect: it confirms that all the rest is correct. It shows that even those who don't like what the media say can only criticize minor details and don't have any arguments against most of the information given by the media.
但是，列举出细节上的错误带来一个更大的问题，那就是：这样就肯定了余下的大部分内容都是正确的。这显示出，即使是不喜欢这些媒体所报道的内容的人，也只能批评一些小细节，而不是针对这些媒体所描述的大部分内容。
Recently, I talked with a Swiss media specialist about the problem of incorrect media reporting. He confirmed the impression that I got from reading several books about the topic: most researchers believe that false information appears in the media from time to time, and can be transmitted from one journal or TV channel to another with incredible speed. However, these cases are believed to be discovered quite quickly and corrected, even if the media do not always recognize their errors publicly.
最近，我和一位瑞士媒体专家探讨了媒体报道错误的问题。他肯定了我从一些关于媒体的著作中得到的印象：大部分学者认为，错误的信息不时出现在媒体上，并且以不可思议的速度在报刊电视中迅速传播。但是，大家也认为，即使媒体不一定每次都公开承认错误，这些错误都会很快被发现并且纠正。
Proving them wrong is not an easy task, and it takes much more than pointing out a few details. Here again, we arrive at the conclusion that systematic research is necessary, in which media reports are compared with independent sources. In particular, most of the background information about Tibet, as it is presented in the Western media, is in stark contradiction to historical events as presented in Western history books. However, since not that many people read them, this fact will generally go unnoticed.
证明他们错了并不是一件简单的事，远比指出几处细节错误要难的多。再一次，我们可以得出结论，将媒体报道和独立可靠的数据进行比较的系统的研究是很有必要的。特别是西方媒体描述的关于XZ的背景资料，都和西方历史书中的史实有明显的矛盾之处。然而由于并没有很多人读历史书，这个事实也就被忽略了。
Human rights: internal affairs or global scrutiny?
人权：是一国内务还是全球审议？
Each time the Western media criticize China about her human rights record, the Chinese government answers that human rights are an internal affair. The Western countries, so the argumentation, are not perfect in respect to human rights (which is certainly true), therefore they should first clean up their own mess before they sermon other countries.
每次西方媒体批评中国的人权问题，中国政府都会反驳说人权是本国内政，并且表示，西方国家本身在人权问题上也没有做到完美（这肯定是真的），所以他们应该先把本国问题解决好再来其他国家布道。
This line of defense has got no chance of succeeding, mainly for two reasons. First of all, one of the basic principles of human rights is that even countries which are not perfect can and should criticize other countries about their human rights record. Second, the Western countries have been deeply traumatized by the fascist regimes which have triggered World War II (see our article Europe and China – two opposed traumas). Intervening quickly when a regime is responsible for systematic human rights abuses is considered to be the only way of preventing a repetition of what happened in the 1930ies. Since the fundamental human rights tools were elaborated in the years after World War II, this principle is now enshrined in texts valid for the whole world.
这个辩词在西方不可能成立，主要有两个原因。第一点，人权有一条基本原则是，即使不完美的国家也应该批判其他国家的人权问题。第二点，西方国家在二战中由于法西斯而受到了巨大灾难（参见本站文章Europe and China – two opposed traumas），因此如果一个政权有侵犯人权的情况，快速干预被认为是避免三十年代的悲剧重演的唯一方法。二战之后制定的基本的人权准则，现在已经世界通用并被视为神圣的准则。
However, this does not mean that the criticism of the Western media is justified. The first problem is that they consider only the civil and political rights (see our article Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation). I heard many Chinese government officials trying to convince the journalist interviewing them that the economic, social and cultural rights are also part of the human rights, but with no success.
然而，这些并不能证明西方媒体的批评有理。他们第一个问题就在于，他们只考虑公民和政治权利（参见本站文章Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation)。我听过很多中国政府官员尝试说服采访他们的西方记者，经济、社会和文化权利也是人权的一部分。但是这种尝试并未成功。
Many journalists defuse this argument by explaining to their readers that "the Chinese government considers that the social rights like the right to a decent standard of living are also part of the human rights". Our media have succeeded in a whole century of a constant ideological fight against communism to convince almost all Westerners that whatever the Chinese government says is wrong. Therefore, whenever a Westerner hears a Chinese government official using this argument, he sees his conviction confirmed that this is the "Chinese concept of human rights", which should not be taken seriously.
很多记者化解这种论点的方法是，向他们的读者解释说："中国政府认为社会权利和过上基本体面的生活的权利一样都是人权的一部分"。我们的媒体在近一整个世纪的不间断的与共产主义的意识形态斗争中，成功地说服了几乎所有西方人，无论中国政府说什么都是错的。因此，无论什么时候，一个西方人听到中国政府官员表达这样的观点，他就会确信这是"中国的人权概念"，而且不会把这个概念当回事。
Moreover, the evolution of the human rights situation in China should be taken into account. In the last decades, a positive development took place in all the fields, not only in the economic, social and cultural rights. China has made important progress in building the rule of law, even if much remains to be done. Even voices extremely critical towards the regime confirm that freedom of expression is not an empty word anymore, even if it does not reach the level in Western states yet.
此外，中国的人权情况改善也应该被考虑进来。在近几十年中，不仅在经济、社会和文化权利上有所改善，在所有领域里，中国的人权情况都有了积极的发展。中国在法制建设上，尽管还有很多有待改进的地方，但是已经有了很重大的进步。即使是对于中国极端批判的声音，也承认在中国言论自由不再是一句空话，即使其程度并没有达到西方国家的水平。
It is perfectly understandable that the international community is worried if a regime will more and more disregard the human rights. However, if a country shows regular progress in the last decades, it is difficult to see why this positive evolution should be ignored and why the constant China-bashing should go on.
如果一个政权越来越忽视人权，国际社会的担心是完全可以被理解的。但是，既然中国在近几十年中表现出了稳定的进步，那么对于它积极发展的忽略，以及一贯的抨击态度就很难被理解了。
Cultural differences in conflict solving
解决冲突过程中的文化差异
In general, the problem is that the Chinese argumentation is too much on the defensive. Based on solid research about the human rights concept used by the Western media, the Chinese government officials could argue that the Western media systematically betray the human rights they pretend to defend. They should say loud and clear that whoever reads the UN human rights text will immediately realize that there is a problem. This would put the media on the defensive; they would have to justify themselves, which they can not do.
总的说来，中国的辩驳过于着重防御。基于对西方媒体所用的人权概念的充分研究，中国政府官员可以反驳说，西方媒体经常违背他们假装要捍卫的人权准则。他们应该大声而清晰地说出，任何读过联合国人权文件的人都会马上意识到这里面是有问题的。这样就会把西方媒体置于防守的位置，他们就需要为自己辩解，而且他们根本无法证明自己正确。
The relative inefficiency of the Chinese argumentation is probably due to the Chinese culture of conciliatory problem solving. I admire and respect this habit. It is not an exclusively Chinese characteristic: it is also one of the fundaments of the Swiss political culture, and this has made Switzerland an extremely stable country. I don't doubt that it has also contributed to a large extent to the fast and smooth development in China and that it is an absolutely necessary feature for managing such a large and diverse country.
中国相对无效的辩驳方式很有可能与中国文化中中庸的思维方式有关。我欣赏并尊重这种习惯。这也并不是中国独有的特点，这也是瑞士政治文化的基本特点之一，并使瑞士成为了一个极为稳定的国家。我并不怀疑这种特点对于中国快速稳定的发展所作出的重要贡献，而且要管理这样一个巨大而多元的国家，这种特点也是绝对必要的。
However, when talking with foreign journalists, a more aggressive discussion style would be more adapted to the situation and the audience. The Western media use extremely problematic methods to criticize China with regards to all the imaginable aspects, including in fields where China is among the best performing countries in the world. This helps them to sell their newspapers and to attract a larger audience to TV news programs; they will not give up this income source without a fight.
然而，和西方记者交流的时候，更加针锋相对的对话方式应该更加适合情境和打动观众。西方媒体运用一种极端质疑的方式，来批判关于中国他们所能想到的所有方面，包括中国领先于世界大部分国家的一些领域。这样他们能售出更多的报纸或者吸引更多的电视新闻观众。不经过斗争，他们是不会放弃这个收入来源的。
When trying to solve a conflict, the Chinese will do everything in order not to "lose their face" and will also try to avoid that their opponent loses his face. By contrast, the only way of putting pressure on the Western media is precisely to make them lose their face in front of their own audience. Since this would be done with solid data considered trustworthy even in the eyes of Westerners, the Western journalists would have to recognize that much of what they said and wrote before was actually wrong. This would lead them to change their reporting by their own will, not through pressure from outside.
当面对一个需要解决的冲突的时候，中国人会为了"面子"做任何事，并且也会尽量避免让对手"丢脸"。但是相反的，能给西方媒体施压的唯一方法，恰恰就是让他们在观众面前丢脸。这可以通过实实在在的数据来实现，西方人也会认为这些数据是可信的。这样西方记者就要承认大部分以前他们所写的和说的都是错的。这样他们就会从主观意愿上改变报道方式，而并非只是由于外部压力。
Since 2008, the Chinese government and people have been more and more successful in their attempts to put outside pressure on the Western media so that they soften their tone and report about more positive aspects of the Chinese development. A perfect example is the boycott of the French products after the torch relay in Paris, which ended in a disaster while the French security forces did not much to avoid it. As soon as the French economic interests in China were hurt, pressure grew on the media to repair the damage and to take the Chinese public opinion into consideration.
2008年以来，中国政府和人民对西方媒体施压的尝试获得了越来越多的成功。这些媒体的论调变柔和了，也报道了更多关于中国发展的积极新闻。有一个最好的例子：由于法国警察的失职，在巴黎进行的火炬传递以混乱收场。这之后，中国掀起了抵制法国货的浪潮。法国在中国的经济利益一受损，媒体马上就感受到压力并且要去修复这个损失，这样在报道的时候他们就必须把中国公众的看法考虑进来。
However, this external pressure on the media is a two-edged sword. In response, the Western media portray China more and more as a threatening new power, which we must fight with all possible means if we don't want to be dominated by it. This is a new turn in the Western discourse about China which is certainly not good for a peaceful development of the world.
然而，这种对于媒体的外部压力是把双刃剑。西方媒体的反应就是，越来越多地把中国描绘成一个新的威胁力量，我们必须要用尽办法与其斗争，否则就会被掌控。这是关于中国的西方言论的一种新转变，而这种转变必然不利于世界的和平发展。
Many Chinese might consider the Western media as the voice of the West. However, more and more Westerners are critical towards their own media. In particular, almost all the people I know who visited remote countries lost their faith in our media because what they saw there did not correspond to what they had learned through the media before. Forcing our media to report in a more professional way about remote countries might actually be a way to help them regain credit in the eyes of the public opinion not only in China, but even in the West (see our article The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries).
很多中国人可能认为，西方媒体就是西方人的传声筒。然而，越来越多的西方人批判他们的媒体。特别是，几乎所有我认识的去过偏远国家的人，都不再相信我们的媒体。因为他们在那些国家看到的和他们以前从媒体了解到的是很不同的。敦促我们的媒体用更加专业的方式报道偏远国家的新闻，也许是让他们重获信任的办法。不仅仅是中国公众的信任，也是西方公众的信任。（参见本站文章The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries)。
At the same time, it could open the way to a real application of the economic, social and cultural rights, which the Western media have decided to boycott. This would certainly lead to a significant improvement of the living conditions of billions of people worldwide. It would also lead to a better understanding between the people of the world, especially between the rich and the poor.
同时，这也能为经济、社会和文化权利的真正实行开启一条道路，否则，西方媒体是抵制这些准则的实施的。而这些权利的实行必定能显著改善世界上无数人民的生活条件，也能让人与人之间更好地互相理解，尤其是富人与穷人之间。
China is in the best position to help our media to understand what went wrong and how to improve it, since this country was among the poorest countries on earth some 60 years ago. Now, it has got the research capacity to do the necessary data collecting and also the prestige deriving from a fast and successful development.
中国的情况，最能帮助我们的媒体了解症结所在并且自我改进。因为这个国家曾经在六十多年前是世界最穷的国家之一。而现在，它有能力收集到必要的资料进行研究，也通过快速而成功的发展获得了威望。What can China do to improve the Western media coverage?
中国怎么做会改变西方媒体的报道？
【链接】
原文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
译文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
【作者】
Otto Kölbl 奥多考波
Otto Kölbl graduated from the Lausanne University (Switzerland) in German language and literature and worked for four years as an assistant there. During that time, for research purposes, he travelled several times to China, where he worked in various schools from kindergarten to university. In 2005, he taught German and linguistics at the Northwestern Polytechnical University in Xi'an (PR China) during one academic term. He is currently a researcher at the Lausanne University and a German teacher. He is the founder and webmaster of this website and is legally responsible for all what the content, except of course for the contributions in the comments and the forum.
【正文】
The huge majority of the Chinese are outraged by the way in which the Western media report about their country. Some tried to get their voice heard, but generally without much success. This lack of success is probably due to a large extent to cultural differences, which make communication about sensitive topics difficult.
大部分中国人都会被西方媒体对中国的报道所激怒。其中有一些人尝试让别人了解自己对此的意见，但是基本上都失败了。这种失败很大程度上归因于文化差异，正是这种差异使得中西双方在关于敏感话题上的沟通很困难。
The Chinese use mainly three different arguments:
中国人主要表达了三个不同观点：
●The Western media report only about the negative aspects in China, they don't live up to their standard of balanced reporting.
●西方媒体只报道中国的负面新闻，他们并没有达到他们自己制定的应该客观公正的报道准则。
●The Western media have made obvious errors, especially in their coverage of the unrest in Tibet in March 2008.
●西方媒体的报道有明显的错误，尤其是关于08年XZ暴乱的报道。
●When talking about "human rights abuses", the West is not in a position to criticize China, because the Western countries have got various problems with their human rights standards too. Furthermore, human rights are an internal affair, and "meddling in the internal affairs" of another country is explicitly prohibited by international law.
●在谈到人权问题的时候，西方媒体并没有资格批评中国，因为西方国家的人权标准也有很多问题。再者，人权是一个国家的内部事务，而"干预其他国家的内政"是被国际法明令禁止的。
However, Western journalists will not accept these arguments, for reasons related to basic Western values and to the Western concept of the role of the media. On the other hand, there are other arguments which are much more likely to inflect the Western journalistic methods in a durable way. They are based on a fact-based critical comparison of the actual reporting with the Western ideal of good journalistic practice.
然而，基于西方的价值观和西方人对媒体作用的定义，西方记者不会接受这些观点。另一方面，有些其他的论点更有可能长期性地改变西方媒体的报道方式。在对媒体实际报道和西方新闻工作的理想标准进行比较之后，可以得出这些基于事实的批判性的论点。
"Only bad news is good news"
"只有坏消息是好新闻。"
The Western media consider themselves to be a countervailing power (see our article The Western media – Power without countervailing power?). This role consists in closely watching each move of the authorities and other powerful actors, in order to report all possible abuses. This role is considered to be fundamental to the good functioning of democratic as well as authoritarian societies. Therefore, reporting about problems and abuses is fundamental to the self-understanding of our media, whereas reporting about things which work well is not considered to be vital.
西方媒体认为自身是一种对抗的力量（参见本站文章"西方媒体-没有对抗力量的力量？"）。这种力量体现在：近距离观察权力机构和其他有权利的角色的每个举动，以便于报道出所有可能的权力滥用。这种作用的体现，无论是在民主社会还是专制社会都被认为是社会良好运转的表现。因此，在我们的媒体看来，对于揭露问题和批判的报道是自己最基本的任务，而对于发展良好的事物的正面报道却并不重要。
Another factor is the commercialization of the Western media. Western consumers tend to be more interested in reports about abuses than in reports about nice progress and positive development. This has not always been the case. In the 1950ies and 1960ies, Western newspapers and magazines had a much more optimistic tone, and this was generally appreciated. Things started to change with the 1968 movement, the 1973 oil shock and with the various economic crises which followed. More recently, the 2001 World Trade Center attacks and the recent loss of Western influence in the world have amplified this tendency.
另外一个因素是西方媒体的商业化。相对于描述进步与发展的新闻报道，西方媒体的消费者对批评的报道更感兴趣。在五十和六十年代，情况并不像现在这样，那时西方的报纸杂志都表现出一个更加积极的论调，而且那时的读者也都喜欢这样的论调。1968年，在欧美大国都掀起了革命浪潮，比如美国的反越战浪潮，德国的反纳粹浪潮等等。这之后，1973年又爆发了石油危机，并随之引起了大范围的经济危机。这一系列事情的发生之后，媒体的报道方式与受众的关注点就开始转变了。而距离现在更近的911恐怖袭击以及西方国家对世界影响的减弱也扩大了这种变化。
Therefore, Western media reports are generally more "negative" in their tone and in the selected subjects than Chinese media. This does not justify the abuses of recent Western media reporting about China, because even criticism must be fair. However, only a systematic comparison between solid data and a large quantity of newspaper articles can allow us to point out problems.
因此，西方媒体的报道在论调和选题上一般都比中国媒体要消极和负面。但是这些并不能证明西方媒体近期对于中国的批评是完全有理的，因为即使是批判也需要公正。然而，只有系统地比较了真实可靠的数据和大量的报刊文章之后我们才能指出问题所在。
Amnesty International, a well-known human rights defense organization, publishes every year a report denouncing human rights abuses in almost every country on earth. This report is not exactly part of what we call the "media", but it has a great influence on newspapers and TV news, and its structure makes it especially suitable for such an example. There is one article per country; they have got all the same structure. This makes a systematic comparison much easier.
著名的人权保护组织大赦国际每年会针对几乎每个国家做出一份报告，抨击当地的人权侵犯问题。这份报告并不是我们所说的"媒体"，但是它对报刊和电视新闻都有很大的影响力。而且它的形式很适合被媒体引用，因为针对每个国家的报告都是相同的形式结构，这样如果要系统比较的话就容易得多。
The 2010 report mentions among others the "lack of access to adequate health care" in the article about China (p. 104). The only other country where access to health care is described as a general problem for the whole population is Afghanistan. This is in obvious contradiction to the data provided by the World Health Organization and the Child Mortality Estimate organization.
在2010年关于中国的报告中提到了"不能获得足够的医疗保障"这一条（第104页）。而在他们的报告中，除中国以外，只有阿富汗的医疗保障被视为全国性的普遍的人权问题。这明显和世界卫生组织以及儿童死亡率评估组织（Child Mortality Estimate organization）提供的数据相矛盾。
According to their figures, China ranks 60th out of 156 in terms of infant mortality relative to the standard of living (in all the rankings, rank 1 stands for the positive end of the scale, i.e. here for a low infant mortality rate). It does even better in the recent decrease in infant mortality, where it ranks 17th out of 156 (see our article The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?). Infant mortality is generally considered to be a good indicator of general access to health care.
根据这两个组织的数据，在由婴幼儿死亡率所得出的生活水平上，中国在156个国家中排名第60（所有排名中，第一名为情况最好的，在这个排名中，意为婴幼儿死亡率最低）。而在近期婴幼儿死亡率降低的排名中，中国排名则更加靠前，在156个国家中排名第17名。（参见本站文章The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?)。婴幼儿死亡率被普遍认为是判断医疗保障优劣的基本指标。
These good results in recent years are confirmed by a series of articles in the prestigious medical periodical The Lancet. The volume 372 (November 2008) was dedicated to the recent health reforms in China. Therefore, Amnesty's accusation that China shows a "lack of access to adequate health care" is totally unfounded, the contrary is true: China provides a far better access to health care to its population than the international average.
英国著名医学杂志《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）刊登了一系列文章肯定了以上数据所表现出的积极结论。2008年11月发行的第372期杂志全刊介绍了中国近期的医疗改革。因此，大赦国际所说的在中国"不能获得足够的医疗保障"是没有根据的。相反的，中国的医疗保障比全世界的平均水平要好的多。
Newspapers are of course much more difficult to analyze; this is the more true for TV and radio. Each year, many articles are published in each newspaper about every major country in the world. Only a quantitative analysis of all the articles or of a random sample using adequate statistical tools allows a meaningful comparison.
对报刊进行分析已经比较难，而电视和广播就更难了。每年，每种报刊都会刊登关于每个世界大国的无数文章。只有运用适当的数据工具，对所有文章或者科学选取的随机样本进行数量分析，才能做出有意义的比较研究。
From my personal experience, such an analysis would certainly reveal a heavily biased reporting about corruption. According to Transparency International, China ranks 78th out of 178 countries listed in the Corruption Perception Index 2010, therefore doing better than average. Despite this relatively good score, corruption is mentioned almost systematically when talking about the Chinese political system or China in general, much more so than in other countries where corruption is much more widespread.
根据我的个人体验，这种分析一般会体现出对于贪污腐败的大量报道。根据国际透明（Transparency International）2010年的全球贪污指数报告，中国在178个国家中排名第78名，比平均水平要好。尽管有相对好的排名，中国政治系统或者说整个中国在被提到的时候，总是与贪污联系在一起。比起那些实际上贪污情况严重的多的国家，中国被提到的更多。
Only such systematic research in this and other similar questions could provide the necessary data to confront the media and show them that their reporting about China does not correspond to their own quality standards. It could prove that the feeling, widespread among Chinese, that our media are "biased against China" is caused not by cultural differences, but by objectively measurable problems in their coverage. Unfortunately, Western media researchers will never engage in this kind of research methodology (see our article What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?).
只有这样针对问题的系统研究才能提供指正媒体的必要的数据，并且让媒体知道他们关于中国的报道与他们自己制定的标准相悖。这也能证明，很多中国人认为西方媒体"对中国有偏见"，并不是因为文化差异，而是由于媒体报道中客观显著的问题。不幸的是，研究西方媒体的学者都不研究这个问题（参见本站文章What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?）。
Obvious errors in the reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008
关于2008年XZ动乱的错误报道
In 2008, many websites were filled with reports about the errors made by the Western media when reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008. However, there are two fundamental problems with this way of criticizing our media. First of all, the fact that the media make errors from time to time is well know and well documented; this procedure will not lead to a fundamental questioning of their working methods. Second, criticizing a few details shows that all the rest is correct.
2008年，很多人在各种网站上登出文章，列举西方媒体对XZ动乱报道中的错误。然而，这些批评西方媒体的文章有两大基本问题。第一，媒体时而出错的事实是被广泛接受和记录的，这样挑错的批评并不能引导出对媒体工作方式的广泛质疑。第二，挑一小部分错，就证明了其他大部分都是正确的。
The Western media report not only about the world, they report about their own errors too. They do not always do so properly, but quite often they will use reports about their own errors in order to increase their credibility: "You see, we make errors, this is unavoidable, but we recognize them and inform about them." In the case of Tibet, they had a good excuse for these errors: If the Chinese government had not barred them from reporting from the region, they could have offered better information about these events.
西方媒体并不仅仅报道世界新闻，他们还报道自己犯的错误。他们并不总是正确，但是经常用承认自己所犯错误的方法来提升自己的信誉："你看，我们犯错，犯错不可避免，但是我们认识到错误并且公开承认。"关于XZ，他们有一个很好的犯错借口：如果中国政府让他们进入XZ报道，他们就能提供更准确的新闻。
However, there is a much more general problem with pointing out precise details which are incorrect: it confirms that all the rest is correct. It shows that even those who don't like what the media say can only criticize minor details and don't have any arguments against most of the information given by the media.
但是，列举出细节上的错误带来一个更大的问题，那就是：这样就肯定了余下的大部分内容都是正确的。这显示出，即使是不喜欢这些媒体所报道的内容的人，也只能批评一些小细节，而不是针对这些媒体所描述的大部分内容。
Recently, I talked with a Swiss media specialist about the problem of incorrect media reporting. He confirmed the impression that I got from reading several books about the topic: most researchers believe that false information appears in the media from time to time, and can be transmitted from one journal or TV channel to another with incredible speed. However, these cases are believed to be discovered quite quickly and corrected, even if the media do not always recognize their errors publicly.
最近，我和一位瑞士媒体专家探讨了媒体报道错误的问题。他肯定了我从一些关于媒体的著作中得到的印象：大部分学者认为，错误的信息不时出现在媒体上，并且以不可思议的速度在报刊电视中迅速传播。但是，大家也认为，即使媒体不一定每次都公开承认错误，这些错误都会很快被发现并且纠正。
Proving them wrong is not an easy task, and it takes much more than pointing out a few details. Here again, we arrive at the conclusion that systematic research is necessary, in which media reports are compared with independent sources. In particular, most of the background information about Tibet, as it is presented in the Western media, is in stark contradiction to historical events as presented in Western history books. However, since not that many people read them, this fact will generally go unnoticed.
证明他们错了并不是一件简单的事，远比指出几处细节错误要难的多。再一次，我们可以得出结论，将媒体报道和独立可靠的数据进行比较的系统的研究是很有必要的。特别是西方媒体描述的关于XZ的背景资料，都和西方历史书中的史实有明显的矛盾之处。然而由于并没有很多人读历史书，这个事实也就被忽略了。
Human rights: internal affairs or global scrutiny?
人权：是一国内务还是全球审议？
Each time the Western media criticize China about her human rights record, the Chinese government answers that human rights are an internal affair. The Western countries, so the argumentation, are not perfect in respect to human rights (which is certainly true), therefore they should first clean up their own mess before they sermon other countries.
每次西方媒体批评中国的人权问题，中国政府都会反驳说人权是本国内政，并且表示，西方国家本身在人权问题上也没有做到完美（这肯定是真的），所以他们应该先把本国问题解决好再来其他国家布道。
This line of defense has got no chance of succeeding, mainly for two reasons. First of all, one of the basic principles of human rights is that even countries which are not perfect can and should criticize other countries about their human rights record. Second, the Western countries have been deeply traumatized by the fascist regimes which have triggered World War II (see our article Europe and China – two opposed traumas). Intervening quickly when a regime is responsible for systematic human rights abuses is considered to be the only way of preventing a repetition of what happened in the 1930ies. Since the fundamental human rights tools were elaborated in the years after World War II, this principle is now enshrined in texts valid for the whole world.
这个辩词在西方不可能成立，主要有两个原因。第一点，人权有一条基本原则是，即使不完美的国家也应该批判其他国家的人权问题。第二点，西方国家在二战中由于法西斯而受到了巨大灾难（参见本站文章Europe and China – two opposed traumas），因此如果一个政权有侵犯人权的情况，快速干预被认为是避免三十年代的悲剧重演的唯一方法。二战之后制定的基本的人权准则，现在已经世界通用并被视为神圣的准则。
However, this does not mean that the criticism of the Western media is justified. The first problem is that they consider only the civil and political rights (see our article Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation). I heard many Chinese government officials trying to convince the journalist interviewing them that the economic, social and cultural rights are also part of the human rights, but with no success.
然而，这些并不能证明西方媒体的批评有理。他们第一个问题就在于，他们只考虑公民和政治权利（参见本站文章Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation)。我听过很多中国政府官员尝试说服采访他们的西方记者，经济、社会和文化权利也是人权的一部分。但是这种尝试并未成功。
Many journalists defuse this argument by explaining to their readers that "the Chinese government considers that the social rights like the right to a decent standard of living are also part of the human rights". Our media have succeeded in a whole century of a constant ideological fight against communism to convince almost all Westerners that whatever the Chinese government says is wrong. Therefore, whenever a Westerner hears a Chinese government official using this argument, he sees his conviction confirmed that this is the "Chinese concept of human rights", which should not be taken seriously.
很多记者化解这种论点的方法是，向他们的读者解释说："中国政府认为社会权利和过上基本体面的生活的权利一样都是人权的一部分"。我们的媒体在近一整个世纪的不间断的与共产主义的意识形态斗争中，成功地说服了几乎所有西方人，无论中国政府说什么都是错的。因此，无论什么时候，一个西方人听到中国政府官员表达这样的观点，他就会确信这是"中国的人权概念"，而且不会把这个概念当回事。
Moreover, the evolution of the human rights situation in China should be taken into account. In the last decades, a positive development took place in all the fields, not only in the economic, social and cultural rights. China has made important progress in building the rule of law, even if much remains to be done. Even voices extremely critical towards the regime confirm that freedom of expression is not an empty word anymore, even if it does not reach the level in Western states yet.
此外，中国的人权情况改善也应该被考虑进来。在近几十年中，不仅在经济、社会和文化权利上有所改善，在所有领域里，中国的人权情况都有了积极的发展。中国在法制建设上，尽管还有很多有待改进的地方，但是已经有了很重大的进步。即使是对于中国极端批判的声音，也承认在中国言论自由不再是一句空话，即使其程度并没有达到西方国家的水平。
It is perfectly understandable that the international community is worried if a regime will more and more disregard the human rights. However, if a country shows regular progress in the last decades, it is difficult to see why this positive evolution should be ignored and why the constant China-bashing should go on.
如果一个政权越来越忽视人权，国际社会的担心是完全可以被理解的。但是，既然中国在近几十年中表现出了稳定的进步，那么对于它积极发展的忽略，以及一贯的抨击态度就很难被理解了。
Cultural differences in conflict solving
解决冲突过程中的文化差异
In general, the problem is that the Chinese argumentation is too much on the defensive. Based on solid research about the human rights concept used by the Western media, the Chinese government officials could argue that the Western media systematically betray the human rights they pretend to defend. They should say loud and clear that whoever reads the UN human rights text will immediately realize that there is a problem. This would put the media on the defensive; they would have to justify themselves, which they can not do.
总的说来，中国的辩驳过于着重防御。基于对西方媒体所用的人权概念的充分研究，中国政府官员可以反驳说，西方媒体经常违背他们假装要捍卫的人权准则。他们应该大声而清晰地说出，任何读过联合国人权文件的人都会马上意识到这里面是有问题的。这样就会把西方媒体置于防守的位置，他们就需要为自己辩解，而且他们根本无法证明自己正确。
The relative inefficiency of the Chinese argumentation is probably due to the Chinese culture of conciliatory problem solving. I admire and respect this habit. It is not an exclusively Chinese characteristic: it is also one of the fundaments of the Swiss political culture, and this has made Switzerland an extremely stable country. I don't doubt that it has also contributed to a large extent to the fast and smooth development in China and that it is an absolutely necessary feature for managing such a large and diverse country.
中国相对无效的辩驳方式很有可能与中国文化中中庸的思维方式有关。我欣赏并尊重这种习惯。这也并不是中国独有的特点，这也是瑞士政治文化的基本特点之一，并使瑞士成为了一个极为稳定的国家。我并不怀疑这种特点对于中国快速稳定的发展所作出的重要贡献，而且要管理这样一个巨大而多元的国家，这种特点也是绝对必要的。
However, when talking with foreign journalists, a more aggressive discussion style would be more adapted to the situation and the audience. The Western media use extremely problematic methods to criticize China with regards to all the imaginable aspects, including in fields where China is among the best performing countries in the world. This helps them to sell their newspapers and to attract a larger audience to TV news programs; they will not give up this income source without a fight.
然而，和西方记者交流的时候，更加针锋相对的对话方式应该更加适合情境和打动观众。西方媒体运用一种极端质疑的方式，来批判关于中国他们所能想到的所有方面，包括中国领先于世界大部分国家的一些领域。这样他们能售出更多的报纸或者吸引更多的电视新闻观众。不经过斗争，他们是不会放弃这个收入来源的。
When trying to solve a conflict, the Chinese will do everything in order not to "lose their face" and will also try to avoid that their opponent loses his face. By contrast, the only way of putting pressure on the Western media is precisely to make them lose their face in front of their own audience. Since this would be done with solid data considered trustworthy even in the eyes of Westerners, the Western journalists would have to recognize that much of what they said and wrote before was actually wrong. This would lead them to change their reporting by their own will, not through pressure from outside.
当面对一个需要解决的冲突的时候，中国人会为了"面子"做任何事，并且也会尽量避免让对手"丢脸"。但是相反的，能给西方媒体施压的唯一方法，恰恰就是让他们在观众面前丢脸。这可以通过实实在在的数据来实现，西方人也会认为这些数据是可信的。这样西方记者就要承认大部分以前他们所写的和说的都是错的。这样他们就会从主观意愿上改变报道方式，而并非只是由于外部压力。
Since 2008, the Chinese government and people have been more and more successful in their attempts to put outside pressure on the Western media so that they soften their tone and report about more positive aspects of the Chinese development. A perfect example is the boycott of the French products after the torch relay in Paris, which ended in a disaster while the French security forces did not much to avoid it. As soon as the French economic interests in China were hurt, pressure grew on the media to repair the damage and to take the Chinese public opinion into consideration.
2008年以来，中国政府和人民对西方媒体施压的尝试获得了越来越多的成功。这些媒体的论调变柔和了，也报道了更多关于中国发展的积极新闻。有一个最好的例子：由于法国警察的失职，在巴黎进行的火炬传递以混乱收场。这之后，中国掀起了抵制法国货的浪潮。法国在中国的经济利益一受损，媒体马上就感受到压力并且要去修复这个损失，这样在报道的时候他们就必须把中国公众的看法考虑进来。
However, this external pressure on the media is a two-edged sword. In response, the Western media portray China more and more as a threatening new power, which we must fight with all possible means if we don't want to be dominated by it. This is a new turn in the Western discourse about China which is certainly not good for a peaceful development of the world.
然而，这种对于媒体的外部压力是把双刃剑。西方媒体的反应就是，越来越多地把中国描绘成一个新的威胁力量，我们必须要用尽办法与其斗争，否则就会被掌控。这是关于中国的西方言论的一种新转变，而这种转变必然不利于世界的和平发展。
Many Chinese might consider the Western media as the voice of the West. However, more and more Westerners are critical towards their own media. In particular, almost all the people I know who visited remote countries lost their faith in our media because what they saw there did not correspond to what they had learned through the media before. Forcing our media to report in a more professional way about remote countries might actually be a way to help them regain credit in the eyes of the public opinion not only in China, but even in the West (see our article The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries).
很多中国人可能认为，西方媒体就是西方人的传声筒。然而，越来越多的西方人批判他们的媒体。特别是，几乎所有我认识的去过偏远国家的人，都不再相信我们的媒体。因为他们在那些国家看到的和他们以前从媒体了解到的是很不同的。敦促我们的媒体用更加专业的方式报道偏远国家的新闻，也许是让他们重获信任的办法。不仅仅是中国公众的信任，也是西方公众的信任。（参见本站文章The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries)。
At the same time, it could open the way to a real application of the economic, social and cultural rights, which the Western media have decided to boycott. This would certainly lead to a significant improvement of the living conditions of billions of people worldwide. It would also lead to a better understanding between the people of the world, especially between the rich and the poor.
同时，这也能为经济、社会和文化权利的真正实行开启一条道路，否则，西方媒体是抵制这些准则的实施的。而这些权利的实行必定能显著改善世界上无数人民的生活条件，也能让人与人之间更好地互相理解，尤其是富人与穷人之间。
China is in the best position to help our media to understand what went wrong and how to improve it, since this country was among the poorest countries on earth some 60 years ago. Now, it has got the research capacity to do the necessary data collecting and also the prestige deriving from a fast and successful development.
中国的情况，最能帮助我们的媒体了解症结所在并且自我改进。因为这个国家曾经在六十多年前是世界最穷的国家之一。而现在，它有能力收集到必要的资料进行研究，也通过快速而成功的发展获得了威望。
中国怎么做会改变西方媒体的报道？
【链接】
原文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
译文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
【作者】
Otto Kölbl 奥多考波
Otto Kölbl graduated from the Lausanne University (Switzerland) in German language and literature and worked for four years as an assistant there. During that time, for research purposes, he travelled several times to China, where he worked in various schools from kindergarten to university. In 2005, he taught German and linguistics at the Northwestern Polytechnical University in Xi'an (PR China) during one academic term. He is currently a researcher at the Lausanne University and a German teacher. He is the founder and webmaster of this website and is legally responsible for all what the content, except of course for the contributions in the comments and the forum.
【正文】
The huge majority of the Chinese are outraged by the way in which the Western media report about their country. Some tried to get their voice heard, but generally without much success. This lack of success is probably due to a large extent to cultural differences, which make communication about sensitive topics difficult.
大部分中国人都会被西方媒体对中国的报道所激怒。其中有一些人尝试让别人了解自己对此的意见，但是基本上都失败了。这种失败很大程度上归因于文化差异，正是这种差异使得中西双方在关于敏感话题上的沟通很困难。
The Chinese use mainly three different arguments:
中国人主要表达了三个不同观点：
●The Western media report only about the negative aspects in China, they don't live up to their standard of balanced reporting.
●西方媒体只报道中国的负面新闻，他们并没有达到他们自己制定的应该客观公正的报道准则。
●The Western media have made obvious errors, especially in their coverage of the unrest in Tibet in March 2008.
●西方媒体的报道有明显的错误，尤其是关于08年XZ暴乱的报道。
●When talking about "human rights abuses", the West is not in a position to criticize China, because the Western countries have got various problems with their human rights standards too. Furthermore, human rights are an internal affair, and "meddling in the internal affairs" of another country is explicitly prohibited by international law.
●在谈到人权问题的时候，西方媒体并没有资格批评中国，因为西方国家的人权标准也有很多问题。再者，人权是一个国家的内部事务，而"干预其他国家的内政"是被国际法明令禁止的。
However, Western journalists will not accept these arguments, for reasons related to basic Western values and to the Western concept of the role of the media. On the other hand, there are other arguments which are much more likely to inflect the Western journalistic methods in a durable way. They are based on a fact-based critical comparison of the actual reporting with the Western ideal of good journalistic practice.
然而，基于西方的价值观和西方人对媒体作用的定义，西方记者不会接受这些观点。另一方面，有些其他的论点更有可能长期性地改变西方媒体的报道方式。在对媒体实际报道和西方新闻工作的理想标准进行比较之后，可以得出这些基于事实的批判性的论点。
"Only bad news is good news"
"只有坏消息是好新闻。"
The Western media consider themselves to be a countervailing power (see our article The Western media – Power without countervailing power?). This role consists in closely watching each move of the authorities and other powerful actors, in order to report all possible abuses. This role is considered to be fundamental to the good functioning of democratic as well as authoritarian societies. Therefore, reporting about problems and abuses is fundamental to the self-understanding of our media, whereas reporting about things which work well is not considered to be vital.
西方媒体认为自身是一种对抗的力量（参见本站文章"西方媒体-没有对抗力量的力量？"）。这种力量体现在：近距离观察权力机构和其他有权利的角色的每个举动，以便于报道出所有可能的权力滥用。这种作用的体现，无论是在民主社会还是专制社会都被认为是社会良好运转的表现。因此，在我们的媒体看来，对于揭露问题和批判的报道是自己最基本的任务，而对于发展良好的事物的正面报道却并不重要。
Another factor is the commercialization of the Western media. Western consumers tend to be more interested in reports about abuses than in reports about nice progress and positive development. This has not always been the case. In the 1950ies and 1960ies, Western newspapers and magazines had a much more optimistic tone, and this was generally appreciated. Things started to change with the 1968 movement, the 1973 oil shock and with the various economic crises which followed. More recently, the 2001 World Trade Center attacks and the recent loss of Western influence in the world have amplified this tendency.
另外一个因素是西方媒体的商业化。相对于描述进步与发展的新闻报道，西方媒体的消费者对批评的报道更感兴趣。在五十和六十年代，情况并不像现在这样，那时西方的报纸杂志都表现出一个更加积极的论调，而且那时的读者也都喜欢这样的论调。1968年，在欧美大国都掀起了革命浪潮，比如美国的反越战浪潮，德国的反纳粹浪潮等等。这之后，1973年又爆发了石油危机，并随之引起了大范围的经济危机。这一系列事情的发生之后，媒体的报道方式与受众的关注点就开始转变了。而距离现在更近的911恐怖袭击以及西方国家对世界影响的减弱也扩大了这种变化。
Therefore, Western media reports are generally more "negative" in their tone and in the selected subjects than Chinese media. This does not justify the abuses of recent Western media reporting about China, because even criticism must be fair. However, only a systematic comparison between solid data and a large quantity of newspaper articles can allow us to point out problems.
因此，西方媒体的报道在论调和选题上一般都比中国媒体要消极和负面。但是这些并不能证明西方媒体近期对于中国的批评是完全有理的，因为即使是批判也需要公正。然而，只有系统地比较了真实可靠的数据和大量的报刊文章之后我们才能指出问题所在。
Amnesty International, a well-known human rights defense organization, publishes every year a report denouncing human rights abuses in almost every country on earth. This report is not exactly part of what we call the "media", but it has a great influence on newspapers and TV news, and its structure makes it especially suitable for such an example. There is one article per country; they have got all the same structure. This makes a systematic comparison much easier.
著名的人权保护组织大赦国际每年会针对几乎每个国家做出一份报告，抨击当地的人权侵犯问题。这份报告并不是我们所说的"媒体"，但是它对报刊和电视新闻都有很大的影响力。而且它的形式很适合被媒体引用，因为针对每个国家的报告都是相同的形式结构，这样如果要系统比较的话就容易得多。
The 2010 report mentions among others the "lack of access to adequate health care" in the article about China (p. 104). The only other country where access to health care is described as a general problem for the whole population is Afghanistan. This is in obvious contradiction to the data provided by the World Health Organization and the Child Mortality Estimate organization.
在2010年关于中国的报告中提到了"不能获得足够的医疗保障"这一条（第104页）。而在他们的报告中，除中国以外，只有阿富汗的医疗保障被视为全国性的普遍的人权问题。这明显和世界卫生组织以及儿童死亡率评估组织（Child Mortality Estimate organization）提供的数据相矛盾。
According to their figures, China ranks 60th out of 156 in terms of infant mortality relative to the standard of living (in all the rankings, rank 1 stands for the positive end of the scale, i.e. here for a low infant mortality rate). It does even better in the recent decrease in infant mortality, where it ranks 17th out of 156 (see our article The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?). Infant mortality is generally considered to be a good indicator of general access to health care.
根据这两个组织的数据，在由婴幼儿死亡率所得出的生活水平上，中国在156个国家中排名第60（所有排名中，第一名为情况最好的，在这个排名中，意为婴幼儿死亡率最低）。而在近期婴幼儿死亡率降低的排名中，中国排名则更加靠前，在156个国家中排名第17名。（参见本站文章The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?)。婴幼儿死亡率被普遍认为是判断医疗保障优劣的基本指标。
These good results in recent years are confirmed by a series of articles in the prestigious medical periodical The Lancet. The volume 372 (November 2008) was dedicated to the recent health reforms in China. Therefore, Amnesty's accusation that China shows a "lack of access to adequate health care" is totally unfounded, the contrary is true: China provides a far better access to health care to its population than the international average.
英国著名医学杂志《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）刊登了一系列文章肯定了以上数据所表现出的积极结论。2008年11月发行的第372期杂志全刊介绍了中国近期的医疗改革。因此，大赦国际所说的在中国"不能获得足够的医疗保障"是没有根据的。相反的，中国的医疗保障比全世界的平均水平要好的多。
Newspapers are of course much more difficult to analyze; this is the more true for TV and radio. Each year, many articles are published in each newspaper about every major country in the world. Only a quantitative analysis of all the articles or of a random sample using adequate statistical tools allows a meaningful comparison.
对报刊进行分析已经比较难，而电视和广播就更难了。每年，每种报刊都会刊登关于每个世界大国的无数文章。只有运用适当的数据工具，对所有文章或者科学选取的随机样本进行数量分析，才能做出有意义的比较研究。
From my personal experience, such an analysis would certainly reveal a heavily biased reporting about corruption. According to Transparency International, China ranks 78th out of 178 countries listed in the Corruption Perception Index 2010, therefore doing better than average. Despite this relatively good score, corruption is mentioned almost systematically when talking about the Chinese political system or China in general, much more so than in other countries where corruption is much more widespread.
根据我的个人体验，这种分析一般会体现出对于贪污腐败的大量报道。根据国际透明（Transparency International）2010年的全球贪污指数报告，中国在178个国家中排名第78名，比平均水平要好。尽管有相对好的排名，中国政治系统或者说整个中国在被提到的时候，总是与贪污联系在一起。比起那些实际上贪污情况严重的多的国家，中国被提到的更多。
Only such systematic research in this and other similar questions could provide the necessary data to confront the media and show them that their reporting about China does not correspond to their own quality standards. It could prove that the feeling, widespread among Chinese, that our media are "biased against China" is caused not by cultural differences, but by objectively measurable problems in their coverage. Unfortunately, Western media researchers will never engage in this kind of research methodology (see our article What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?).
只有这样针对问题的系统研究才能提供指正媒体的必要的数据，并且让媒体知道他们关于中国的报道与他们自己制定的标准相悖。这也能证明，很多中国人认为西方媒体"对中国有偏见"，并不是因为文化差异，而是由于媒体报道中客观显著的问题。不幸的是，研究西方媒体的学者都不研究这个问题（参见本站文章What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?）。
Obvious errors in the reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008
关于2008年XZ动乱的错误报道
In 2008, many websites were filled with reports about the errors made by the Western media when reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008. However, there are two fundamental problems with this way of criticizing our media. First of all, the fact that the media make errors from time to time is well know and well documented; this procedure will not lead to a fundamental questioning of their working methods. Second, criticizing a few details shows that all the rest is correct.
2008年，很多人在各种网站上登出文章，列举西方媒体对XZ动乱报道中的错误。然而，这些批评西方媒体的文章有两大基本问题。第一，媒体时而出错的事实是被广泛接受和记录的，这样挑错的批评并不能引导出对媒体工作方式的广泛质疑。第二，挑一小部分错，就证明了其他大部分都是正确的。
The Western media report not only about the world, they report about their own errors too. They do not always do so properly, but quite often they will use reports about their own errors in order to increase their credibility: "You see, we make errors, this is unavoidable, but we recognize them and inform about them." In the case of Tibet, they had a good excuse for these errors: If the Chinese government had not barred them from reporting from the region, they could have offered better information about these events.
西方媒体并不仅仅报道世界新闻，他们还报道自己犯的错误。他们并不总是正确，但是经常用承认自己所犯错误的方法来提升自己的信誉："你看，我们犯错，犯错不可避免，但是我们认识到错误并且公开承认。"关于XZ，他们有一个很好的犯错借口：如果中国政府让他们进入XZ报道，他们就能提供更准确的新闻。
However, there is a much more general problem with pointing out precise details which are incorrect: it confirms that all the rest is correct. It shows that even those who don't like what the media say can only criticize minor details and don't have any arguments against most of the information given by the media.
但是，列举出细节上的错误带来一个更大的问题，那就是：这样就肯定了余下的大部分内容都是正确的。这显示出，即使是不喜欢这些媒体所报道的内容的人，也只能批评一些小细节，而不是针对这些媒体所描述的大部分内容。
Recently, I talked with a Swiss media specialist about the problem of incorrect media reporting. He confirmed the impression that I got from reading several books about the topic: most researchers believe that false information appears in the media from time to time, and can be transmitted from one journal or TV channel to another with incredible speed. However, these cases are believed to be discovered quite quickly and corrected, even if the media do not always recognize their errors publicly.
最近，我和一位瑞士媒体专家探讨了媒体报道错误的问题。他肯定了我从一些关于媒体的著作中得到的印象：大部分学者认为，错误的信息不时出现在媒体上，并且以不可思议的速度在报刊电视中迅速传播。但是，大家也认为，即使媒体不一定每次都公开承认错误，这些错误都会很快被发现并且纠正。
Proving them wrong is not an easy task, and it takes much more than pointing out a few details. Here again, we arrive at the conclusion that systematic research is necessary, in which media reports are compared with independent sources. In particular, most of the background information about Tibet, as it is presented in the Western media, is in stark contradiction to historical events as presented in Western history books. However, since not that many people read them, this fact will generally go unnoticed.
证明他们错了并不是一件简单的事，远比指出几处细节错误要难的多。再一次，我们可以得出结论，将媒体报道和独立可靠的数据进行比较的系统的研究是很有必要的。特别是西方媒体描述的关于XZ的背景资料，都和西方历史书中的史实有明显的矛盾之处。然而由于并没有很多人读历史书，这个事实也就被忽略了。
Human rights: internal affairs or global scrutiny?
人权：是一国内务还是全球审议？
Each time the Western media criticize China about her human rights record, the Chinese government answers that human rights are an internal affair. The Western countries, so the argumentation, are not perfect in respect to human rights (which is certainly true), therefore they should first clean up their own mess before they sermon other countries.
每次西方媒体批评中国的人权问题，中国政府都会反驳说人权是本国内政，并且表示，西方国家本身在人权问题上也没有做到完美（这肯定是真的），所以他们应该先把本国问题解决好再来其他国家布道。
This line of defense has got no chance of succeeding, mainly for two reasons. First of all, one of the basic principles of human rights is that even countries which are not perfect can and should criticize other countries about their human rights record. Second, the Western countries have been deeply traumatized by the fascist regimes which have triggered World War II (see our article Europe and China – two opposed traumas). Intervening quickly when a regime is responsible for systematic human rights abuses is considered to be the only way of preventing a repetition of what happened in the 1930ies. Since the fundamental human rights tools were elaborated in the years after World War II, this principle is now enshrined in texts valid for the whole world.
这个辩词在西方不可能成立，主要有两个原因。第一点，人权有一条基本原则是，即使不完美的国家也应该批判其他国家的人权问题。第二点，西方国家在二战中由于法西斯而受到了巨大灾难（参见本站文章Europe and China – two opposed traumas），因此如果一个政权有侵犯人权的情况，快速干预被认为是避免三十年代的悲剧重演的唯一方法。二战之后制定的基本的人权准则，现在已经世界通用并被视为神圣的准则。
However, this does not mean that the criticism of the Western media is justified. The first problem is that they consider only the civil and political rights (see our article Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation). I heard many Chinese government officials trying to convince the journalist interviewing them that the economic, social and cultural rights are also part of the human rights, but with no success.
然而，这些并不能证明西方媒体的批评有理。他们第一个问题就在于，他们只考虑公民和政治权利（参见本站文章Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation)。我听过很多中国政府官员尝试说服采访他们的西方记者，经济、社会和文化权利也是人权的一部分。但是这种尝试并未成功。
Many journalists defuse this argument by explaining to their readers that "the Chinese government considers that the social rights like the right to a decent standard of living are also part of the human rights". Our media have succeeded in a whole century of a constant ideological fight against communism to convince almost all Westerners that whatever the Chinese government says is wrong. Therefore, whenever a Westerner hears a Chinese government official using this argument, he sees his conviction confirmed that this is the "Chinese concept of human rights", which should not be taken seriously.
很多记者化解这种论点的方法是，向他们的读者解释说："中国政府认为社会权利和过上基本体面的生活的权利一样都是人权的一部分"。我们的媒体在近一整个世纪的不间断的与共产主义的意识形态斗争中，成功地说服了几乎所有西方人，无论中国政府说什么都是错的。因此，无论什么时候，一个西方人听到中国政府官员表达这样的观点，他就会确信这是"中国的人权概念"，而且不会把这个概念当回事。
Moreover, the evolution of the human rights situation in China should be taken into account. In the last decades, a positive development took place in all the fields, not only in the economic, social and cultural rights. China has made important progress in building the rule of law, even if much remains to be done. Even voices extremely critical towards the regime confirm that freedom of expression is not an empty word anymore, even if it does not reach the level in Western states yet.
此外，中国的人权情况改善也应该被考虑进来。在近几十年中，不仅在经济、社会和文化权利上有所改善，在所有领域里，中国的人权情况都有了积极的发展。中国在法制建设上，尽管还有很多有待改进的地方，但是已经有了很重大的进步。即使是对于中国极端批判的声音，也承认在中国言论自由不再是一句空话，即使其程度并没有达到西方国家的水平。
It is perfectly understandable that the international community is worried if a regime will more and more disregard the human rights. However, if a country shows regular progress in the last decades, it is difficult to see why this positive evolution should be ignored and why the constant China-bashing should go on.
如果一个政权越来越忽视人权，国际社会的担心是完全可以被理解的。但是，既然中国在近几十年中表现出了稳定的进步，那么对于它积极发展的忽略，以及一贯的抨击态度就很难被理解了。
Cultural differences in conflict solving
解决冲突过程中的文化差异
In general, the problem is that the Chinese argumentation is too much on the defensive. Based on solid research about the human rights concept used by the Western media, the Chinese government officials could argue that the Western media systematically betray the human rights they pretend to defend. They should say loud and clear that whoever reads the UN human rights text will immediately realize that there is a problem. This would put the media on the defensive; they would have to justify themselves, which they can not do.
总的说来，中国的辩驳过于着重防御。基于对西方媒体所用的人权概念的充分研究，中国政府官员可以反驳说，西方媒体经常违背他们假装要捍卫的人权准则。他们应该大声而清晰地说出，任何读过联合国人权文件的人都会马上意识到这里面是有问题的。这样就会把西方媒体置于防守的位置，他们就需要为自己辩解，而且他们根本无法证明自己正确。
The relative inefficiency of the Chinese argumentation is probably due to the Chinese culture of conciliatory problem solving. I admire and respect this habit. It is not an exclusively Chinese characteristic: it is also one of the fundaments of the Swiss political culture, and this has made Switzerland an extremely stable country. I don't doubt that it has also contributed to a large extent to the fast and smooth development in China and that it is an absolutely necessary feature for managing such a large and diverse country.
中国相对无效的辩驳方式很有可能与中国文化中中庸的思维方式有关。我欣赏并尊重这种习惯。这也并不是中国独有的特点，这也是瑞士政治文化的基本特点之一，并使瑞士成为了一个极为稳定的国家。我并不怀疑这种特点对于中国快速稳定的发展所作出的重要贡献，而且要管理这样一个巨大而多元的国家，这种特点也是绝对必要的。
However, when talking with foreign journalists, a more aggressive discussion style would be more adapted to the situation and the audience. The Western media use extremely problematic methods to criticize China with regards to all the imaginable aspects, including in fields where China is among the best performing countries in the world. This helps them to sell their newspapers and to attract a larger audience to TV news programs; they will not give up this income source without a fight.
然而，和西方记者交流的时候，更加针锋相对的对话方式应该更加适合情境和打动观众。西方媒体运用一种极端质疑的方式，来批判关于中国他们所能想到的所有方面，包括中国领先于世界大部分国家的一些领域。这样他们能售出更多的报纸或者吸引更多的电视新闻观众。不经过斗争，他们是不会放弃这个收入来源的。
When trying to solve a conflict, the Chinese will do everything in order not to "lose their face" and will also try to avoid that their opponent loses his face. By contrast, the only way of putting pressure on the Western media is precisely to make them lose their face in front of their own audience. Since this would be done with solid data considered trustworthy even in the eyes of Westerners, the Western journalists would have to recognize that much of what they said and wrote before was actually wrong. This would lead them to change their reporting by their own will, not through pressure from outside.
当面对一个需要解决的冲突的时候，中国人会为了"面子"做任何事，并且也会尽量避免让对手"丢脸"。但是相反的，能给西方媒体施压的唯一方法，恰恰就是让他们在观众面前丢脸。这可以通过实实在在的数据来实现，西方人也会认为这些数据是可信的。这样西方记者就要承认大部分以前他们所写的和说的都是错的。这样他们就会从主观意愿上改变报道方式，而并非只是由于外部压力。
Since 2008, the Chinese government and people have been more and more successful in their attempts to put outside pressure on the Western media so that they soften their tone and report about more positive aspects of the Chinese development. A perfect example is the boycott of the French products after the torch relay in Paris, which ended in a disaster while the French security forces did not much to avoid it. As soon as the French economic interests in China were hurt, pressure grew on the media to repair the damage and to take the Chinese public opinion into consideration.
2008年以来，中国政府和人民对西方媒体施压的尝试获得了越来越多的成功。这些媒体的论调变柔和了，也报道了更多关于中国发展的积极新闻。有一个最好的例子：由于法国警察的失职，在巴黎进行的火炬传递以混乱收场。这之后，中国掀起了抵制法国货的浪潮。法国在中国的经济利益一受损，媒体马上就感受到压力并且要去修复这个损失，这样在报道的时候他们就必须把中国公众的看法考虑进来。
However, this external pressure on the media is a two-edged sword. In response, the Western media portray China more and more as a threatening new power, which we must fight with all possible means if we don't want to be dominated by it. This is a new turn in the Western discourse about China which is certainly not good for a peaceful development of the world.
然而，这种对于媒体的外部压力是把双刃剑。西方媒体的反应就是，越来越多地把中国描绘成一个新的威胁力量，我们必须要用尽办法与其斗争，否则就会被掌控。这是关于中国的西方言论的一种新转变，而这种转变必然不利于世界的和平发展。
Many Chinese might consider the Western media as the voice of the West. However, more and more Westerners are critical towards their own media. In particular, almost all the people I know who visited remote countries lost their faith in our media because what they saw there did not correspond to what they had learned through the media before. Forcing our media to report in a more professional way about remote countries might actually be a way to help them regain credit in the eyes of the public opinion not only in China, but even in the West (see our article The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries).
很多中国人可能认为，西方媒体就是西方人的传声筒。然而，越来越多的西方人批判他们的媒体。特别是，几乎所有我认识的去过偏远国家的人，都不再相信我们的媒体。因为他们在那些国家看到的和他们以前从媒体了解到的是很不同的。敦促我们的媒体用更加专业的方式报道偏远国家的新闻，也许是让他们重获信任的办法。不仅仅是中国公众的信任，也是西方公众的信任。（参见本站文章The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries)。
At the same time, it could open the way to a real application of the economic, social and cultural rights, which the Western media have decided to boycott. This would certainly lead to a significant improvement of the living conditions of billions of people worldwide. It would also lead to a better understanding between the people of the world, especially between the rich and the poor.
同时，这也能为经济、社会和文化权利的真正实行开启一条道路，否则，西方媒体是抵制这些准则的实施的。而这些权利的实行必定能显著改善世界上无数人民的生活条件，也能让人与人之间更好地互相理解，尤其是富人与穷人之间。
China is in the best position to help our media to understand what went wrong and how to improve it, since this country was among the poorest countries on earth some 60 years ago. Now, it has got the research capacity to do the necessary data collecting and also the prestige deriving from a fast and successful development.
中国的情况，最能帮助我们的媒体了解症结所在并且自我改进。因为这个国家曾经在六十多年前是世界最穷的国家之一。而现在，它有能力收集到必要的资料进行研究，也通过快速而成功的发展获得了威望。What can China do to improve the Western media coverage?
中国怎么做会改变西方媒体的报道？
【链接】
原文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
译文：http://www.rainbowbuilders.org/c ... erage-china-improve
teamotto200.jpg (10.84 KB, 下载次数: 0)
下载附件 保存到相册
【作者】
Otto Kölbl 奥多考波
Otto Kölbl graduated from the Lausanne University (Switzerland) in German language and literature and worked for four years as an assistant there. During that time, for research purposes, he travelled several times to China, where he worked in various schools from kindergarten to university. In 2005, he taught German and linguistics at the Northwestern Polytechnical University in Xi'an (PR China) during one academic term. He is currently a researcher at the Lausanne University and a German teacher. He is the founder and webmaster of this website and is legally responsible for all what the content, except of course for the contributions in the comments and the forum.
【正文】
The huge majority of the Chinese are outraged by the way in which the Western media report about their country. Some tried to get their voice heard, but generally without much success. This lack of success is probably due to a large extent to cultural differences, which make communication about sensitive topics difficult.
大部分中国人都会被西方媒体对中国的报道所激怒。其中有一些人尝试让别人了解自己对此的意见，但是基本上都失败了。这种失败很大程度上归因于文化差异，正是这种差异使得中西双方在关于敏感话题上的沟通很困难。
The Chinese use mainly three different arguments:
中国人主要表达了三个不同观点：
●The Western media report only about the negative aspects in China, they don't live up to their standard of balanced reporting.
●西方媒体只报道中国的负面新闻，他们并没有达到他们自己制定的应该客观公正的报道准则。
●The Western media have made obvious errors, especially in their coverage of the unrest in Tibet in March 2008.
●西方媒体的报道有明显的错误，尤其是关于08年XZ暴乱的报道。
●When talking about "human rights abuses", the West is not in a position to criticize China, because the Western countries have got various problems with their human rights standards too. Furthermore, human rights are an internal affair, and "meddling in the internal affairs" of another country is explicitly prohibited by international law.
●在谈到人权问题的时候，西方媒体并没有资格批评中国，因为西方国家的人权标准也有很多问题。再者，人权是一个国家的内部事务，而"干预其他国家的内政"是被国际法明令禁止的。
However, Western journalists will not accept these arguments, for reasons related to basic Western values and to the Western concept of the role of the media. On the other hand, there are other arguments which are much more likely to inflect the Western journalistic methods in a durable way. They are based on a fact-based critical comparison of the actual reporting with the Western ideal of good journalistic practice.
然而，基于西方的价值观和西方人对媒体作用的定义，西方记者不会接受这些观点。另一方面，有些其他的论点更有可能长期性地改变西方媒体的报道方式。在对媒体实际报道和西方新闻工作的理想标准进行比较之后，可以得出这些基于事实的批判性的论点。
"Only bad news is good news"
"只有坏消息是好新闻。"
The Western media consider themselves to be a countervailing power (see our article The Western media – Power without countervailing power?). This role consists in closely watching each move of the authorities and other powerful actors, in order to report all possible abuses. This role is considered to be fundamental to the good functioning of democratic as well as authoritarian societies. Therefore, reporting about problems and abuses is fundamental to the self-understanding of our media, whereas reporting about things which work well is not considered to be vital.
西方媒体认为自身是一种对抗的力量（参见本站文章"西方媒体-没有对抗力量的力量？"）。这种力量体现在：近距离观察权力机构和其他有权利的角色的每个举动，以便于报道出所有可能的权力滥用。这种作用的体现，无论是在民主社会还是专制社会都被认为是社会良好运转的表现。因此，在我们的媒体看来，对于揭露问题和批判的报道是自己最基本的任务，而对于发展良好的事物的正面报道却并不重要。
Another factor is the commercialization of the Western media. Western consumers tend to be more interested in reports about abuses than in reports about nice progress and positive development. This has not always been the case. In the 1950ies and 1960ies, Western newspapers and magazines had a much more optimistic tone, and this was generally appreciated. Things started to change with the 1968 movement, the 1973 oil shock and with the various economic crises which followed. More recently, the 2001 World Trade Center attacks and the recent loss of Western influence in the world have amplified this tendency.
另外一个因素是西方媒体的商业化。相对于描述进步与发展的新闻报道，西方媒体的消费者对批评的报道更感兴趣。在五十和六十年代，情况并不像现在这样，那时西方的报纸杂志都表现出一个更加积极的论调，而且那时的读者也都喜欢这样的论调。1968年，在欧美大国都掀起了革命浪潮，比如美国的反越战浪潮，德国的反纳粹浪潮等等。这之后，1973年又爆发了石油危机，并随之引起了大范围的经济危机。这一系列事情的发生之后，媒体的报道方式与受众的关注点就开始转变了。而距离现在更近的911恐怖袭击以及西方国家对世界影响的减弱也扩大了这种变化。
Therefore, Western media reports are generally more "negative" in their tone and in the selected subjects than Chinese media. This does not justify the abuses of recent Western media reporting about China, because even criticism must be fair. However, only a systematic comparison between solid data and a large quantity of newspaper articles can allow us to point out problems.
因此，西方媒体的报道在论调和选题上一般都比中国媒体要消极和负面。但是这些并不能证明西方媒体近期对于中国的批评是完全有理的，因为即使是批判也需要公正。然而，只有系统地比较了真实可靠的数据和大量的报刊文章之后我们才能指出问题所在。
Amnesty International, a well-known human rights defense organization, publishes every year a report denouncing human rights abuses in almost every country on earth. This report is not exactly part of what we call the "media", but it has a great influence on newspapers and TV news, and its structure makes it especially suitable for such an example. There is one article per country; they have got all the same structure. This makes a systematic comparison much easier.
著名的人权保护组织大赦国际每年会针对几乎每个国家做出一份报告，抨击当地的人权侵犯问题。这份报告并不是我们所说的"媒体"，但是它对报刊和电视新闻都有很大的影响力。而且它的形式很适合被媒体引用，因为针对每个国家的报告都是相同的形式结构，这样如果要系统比较的话就容易得多。
The 2010 report mentions among others the "lack of access to adequate health care" in the article about China (p. 104). The only other country where access to health care is described as a general problem for the whole population is Afghanistan. This is in obvious contradiction to the data provided by the World Health Organization and the Child Mortality Estimate organization.
在2010年关于中国的报告中提到了"不能获得足够的医疗保障"这一条（第104页）。而在他们的报告中，除中国以外，只有阿富汗的医疗保障被视为全国性的普遍的人权问题。这明显和世界卫生组织以及儿童死亡率评估组织（Child Mortality Estimate organization）提供的数据相矛盾。
According to their figures, China ranks 60th out of 156 in terms of infant mortality relative to the standard of living (in all the rankings, rank 1 stands for the positive end of the scale, i.e. here for a low infant mortality rate). It does even better in the recent decrease in infant mortality, where it ranks 17th out of 156 (see our article The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?). Infant mortality is generally considered to be a good indicator of general access to health care.
根据这两个组织的数据，在由婴幼儿死亡率所得出的生活水平上，中国在156个国家中排名第60（所有排名中，第一名为情况最好的，在这个排名中，意为婴幼儿死亡率最低）。而在近期婴幼儿死亡率降低的排名中，中国排名则更加靠前，在156个国家中排名第17名。（参见本站文章The right to health – how can we hold the governments accountable?)。婴幼儿死亡率被普遍认为是判断医疗保障优劣的基本指标。
These good results in recent years are confirmed by a series of articles in the prestigious medical periodical The Lancet. The volume 372 (November 2008) was dedicated to the recent health reforms in China. Therefore, Amnesty's accusation that China shows a "lack of access to adequate health care" is totally unfounded, the contrary is true: China provides a far better access to health care to its population than the international average.
英国著名医学杂志《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）刊登了一系列文章肯定了以上数据所表现出的积极结论。2008年11月发行的第372期杂志全刊介绍了中国近期的医疗改革。因此，大赦国际所说的在中国"不能获得足够的医疗保障"是没有根据的。相反的，中国的医疗保障比全世界的平均水平要好的多。
Newspapers are of course much more difficult to analyze; this is the more true for TV and radio. Each year, many articles are published in each newspaper about every major country in the world. Only a quantitative analysis of all the articles or of a random sample using adequate statistical tools allows a meaningful comparison.
对报刊进行分析已经比较难，而电视和广播就更难了。每年，每种报刊都会刊登关于每个世界大国的无数文章。只有运用适当的数据工具，对所有文章或者科学选取的随机样本进行数量分析，才能做出有意义的比较研究。
From my personal experience, such an analysis would certainly reveal a heavily biased reporting about corruption. According to Transparency International, China ranks 78th out of 178 countries listed in the Corruption Perception Index 2010, therefore doing better than average. Despite this relatively good score, corruption is mentioned almost systematically when talking about the Chinese political system or China in general, much more so than in other countries where corruption is much more widespread.
根据我的个人体验，这种分析一般会体现出对于贪污腐败的大量报道。根据国际透明（Transparency International）2010年的全球贪污指数报告，中国在178个国家中排名第78名，比平均水平要好。尽管有相对好的排名，中国政治系统或者说整个中国在被提到的时候，总是与贪污联系在一起。比起那些实际上贪污情况严重的多的国家，中国被提到的更多。
Only such systematic research in this and other similar questions could provide the necessary data to confront the media and show them that their reporting about China does not correspond to their own quality standards. It could prove that the feeling, widespread among Chinese, that our media are "biased against China" is caused not by cultural differences, but by objectively measurable problems in their coverage. Unfortunately, Western media researchers will never engage in this kind of research methodology (see our article What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?).
只有这样针对问题的系统研究才能提供指正媒体的必要的数据，并且让媒体知道他们关于中国的报道与他们自己制定的标准相悖。这也能证明，很多中国人认为西方媒体"对中国有偏见"，并不是因为文化差异，而是由于媒体报道中客观显著的问题。不幸的是，研究西方媒体的学者都不研究这个问题（参见本站文章What do media scientists do against abusive reporting by our media?）。
Obvious errors in the reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008
关于2008年XZ动乱的错误报道
In 2008, many websites were filled with reports about the errors made by the Western media when reporting about the Tibet unrest in 2008. However, there are two fundamental problems with this way of criticizing our media. First of all, the fact that the media make errors from time to time is well know and well documented; this procedure will not lead to a fundamental questioning of their working methods. Second, criticizing a few details shows that all the rest is correct.
2008年，很多人在各种网站上登出文章，列举西方媒体对XZ动乱报道中的错误。然而，这些批评西方媒体的文章有两大基本问题。第一，媒体时而出错的事实是被广泛接受和记录的，这样挑错的批评并不能引导出对媒体工作方式的广泛质疑。第二，挑一小部分错，就证明了其他大部分都是正确的。
The Western media report not only about the world, they report about their own errors too. They do not always do so properly, but quite often they will use reports about their own errors in order to increase their credibility: "You see, we make errors, this is unavoidable, but we recognize them and inform about them." In the case of Tibet, they had a good excuse for these errors: If the Chinese government had not barred them from reporting from the region, they could have offered better information about these events.
西方媒体并不仅仅报道世界新闻，他们还报道自己犯的错误。他们并不总是正确，但是经常用承认自己所犯错误的方法来提升自己的信誉："你看，我们犯错，犯错不可避免，但是我们认识到错误并且公开承认。"关于XZ，他们有一个很好的犯错借口：如果中国政府让他们进入XZ报道，他们就能提供更准确的新闻。
However, there is a much more general problem with pointing out precise details which are incorrect: it confirms that all the rest is correct. It shows that even those who don't like what the media say can only criticize minor details and don't have any arguments against most of the information given by the media.
但是，列举出细节上的错误带来一个更大的问题，那就是：这样就肯定了余下的大部分内容都是正确的。这显示出，即使是不喜欢这些媒体所报道的内容的人，也只能批评一些小细节，而不是针对这些媒体所描述的大部分内容。
Recently, I talked with a Swiss media specialist about the problem of incorrect media reporting. He confirmed the impression that I got from reading several books about the topic: most researchers believe that false information appears in the media from time to time, and can be transmitted from one journal or TV channel to another with incredible speed. However, these cases are believed to be discovered quite quickly and corrected, even if the media do not always recognize their errors publicly.
最近，我和一位瑞士媒体专家探讨了媒体报道错误的问题。他肯定了我从一些关于媒体的著作中得到的印象：大部分学者认为，错误的信息不时出现在媒体上，并且以不可思议的速度在报刊电视中迅速传播。但是，大家也认为，即使媒体不一定每次都公开承认错误，这些错误都会很快被发现并且纠正。
Proving them wrong is not an easy task, and it takes much more than pointing out a few details. Here again, we arrive at the conclusion that systematic research is necessary, in which media reports are compared with independent sources. In particular, most of the background information about Tibet, as it is presented in the Western media, is in stark contradiction to historical events as presented in Western history books. However, since not that many people read them, this fact will generally go unnoticed.
证明他们错了并不是一件简单的事，远比指出几处细节错误要难的多。再一次，我们可以得出结论，将媒体报道和独立可靠的数据进行比较的系统的研究是很有必要的。特别是西方媒体描述的关于XZ的背景资料，都和西方历史书中的史实有明显的矛盾之处。然而由于并没有很多人读历史书，这个事实也就被忽略了。
Human rights: internal affairs or global scrutiny?
人权：是一国内务还是全球审议？
Each time the Western media criticize China about her human rights record, the Chinese government answers that human rights are an internal affair. The Western countries, so the argumentation, are not perfect in respect to human rights (which is certainly true), therefore they should first clean up their own mess before they sermon other countries.
每次西方媒体批评中国的人权问题，中国政府都会反驳说人权是本国内政，并且表示，西方国家本身在人权问题上也没有做到完美（这肯定是真的），所以他们应该先把本国问题解决好再来其他国家布道。
This line of defense has got no chance of succeeding, mainly for two reasons. First of all, one of the basic principles of human rights is that even countries which are not perfect can and should criticize other countries about their human rights record. Second, the Western countries have been deeply traumatized by the fascist regimes which have triggered World War II (see our article Europe and China – two opposed traumas). Intervening quickly when a regime is responsible for systematic human rights abuses is considered to be the only way of preventing a repetition of what happened in the 1930ies. Since the fundamental human rights tools were elaborated in the years after World War II, this principle is now enshrined in texts valid for the whole world.
这个辩词在西方不可能成立，主要有两个原因。第一点，人权有一条基本原则是，即使不完美的国家也应该批判其他国家的人权问题。第二点，西方国家在二战中由于法西斯而受到了巨大灾难（参见本站文章Europe and China – two opposed traumas），因此如果一个政权有侵犯人权的情况，快速干预被认为是避免三十年代的悲剧重演的唯一方法。二战之后制定的基本的人权准则，现在已经世界通用并被视为神圣的准则。
However, this does not mean that the criticism of the Western media is justified. The first problem is that they consider only the civil and political rights (see our article Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation). I heard many Chinese government officials trying to convince the journalist interviewing them that the economic, social and cultural rights are also part of the human rights, but with no success.
然而，这些并不能证明西方媒体的批评有理。他们第一个问题就在于，他们只考虑公民和政治权利（参见本站文章Europe and human rights – the history of a silent amputation)。我听过很多中国政府官员尝试说服采访他们的西方记者，经济、社会和文化权利也是人权的一部分。但是这种尝试并未成功。
Many journalists defuse this argument by explaining to their readers that "the Chinese government considers that the social rights like the right to a decent standard of living are also part of the human rights". Our media have succeeded in a whole century of a constant ideological fight against communism to convince almost all Westerners that whatever the Chinese government says is wrong. Therefore, whenever a Westerner hears a Chinese government official using this argument, he sees his conviction confirmed that this is the "Chinese concept of human rights", which should not be taken seriously.
很多记者化解这种论点的方法是，向他们的读者解释说："中国政府认为社会权利和过上基本体面的生活的权利一样都是人权的一部分"。我们的媒体在近一整个世纪的不间断的与共产主义的意识形态斗争中，成功地说服了几乎所有西方人，无论中国政府说什么都是错的。因此，无论什么时候，一个西方人听到中国政府官员表达这样的观点，他就会确信这是"中国的人权概念"，而且不会把这个概念当回事。
Moreover, the evolution of the human rights situation in China should be taken into account. In the last decades, a positive development took place in all the fields, not only in the economic, social and cultural rights. China has made important progress in building the rule of law, even if much remains to be done. Even voices extremely critical towards the regime confirm that freedom of expression is not an empty word anymore, even if it does not reach the level in Western states yet.
此外，中国的人权情况改善也应该被考虑进来。在近几十年中，不仅在经济、社会和文化权利上有所改善，在所有领域里，中国的人权情况都有了积极的发展。中国在法制建设上，尽管还有很多有待改进的地方，但是已经有了很重大的进步。即使是对于中国极端批判的声音，也承认在中国言论自由不再是一句空话，即使其程度并没有达到西方国家的水平。
It is perfectly understandable that the international community is worried if a regime will more and more disregard the human rights. However, if a country shows regular progress in the last decades, it is difficult to see why this positive evolution should be ignored and why the constant China-bashing should go on.
如果一个政权越来越忽视人权，国际社会的担心是完全可以被理解的。但是，既然中国在近几十年中表现出了稳定的进步，那么对于它积极发展的忽略，以及一贯的抨击态度就很难被理解了。
Cultural differences in conflict solving
解决冲突过程中的文化差异
In general, the problem is that the Chinese argumentation is too much on the defensive. Based on solid research about the human rights concept used by the Western media, the Chinese government officials could argue that the Western media systematically betray the human rights they pretend to defend. They should say loud and clear that whoever reads the UN human rights text will immediately realize that there is a problem. This would put the media on the defensive; they would have to justify themselves, which they can not do.
总的说来，中国的辩驳过于着重防御。基于对西方媒体所用的人权概念的充分研究，中国政府官员可以反驳说，西方媒体经常违背他们假装要捍卫的人权准则。他们应该大声而清晰地说出，任何读过联合国人权文件的人都会马上意识到这里面是有问题的。这样就会把西方媒体置于防守的位置，他们就需要为自己辩解，而且他们根本无法证明自己正确。
The relative inefficiency of the Chinese argumentation is probably due to the Chinese culture of conciliatory problem solving. I admire and respect this habit. It is not an exclusively Chinese characteristic: it is also one of the fundaments of the Swiss political culture, and this has made Switzerland an extremely stable country. I don't doubt that it has also contributed to a large extent to the fast and smooth development in China and that it is an absolutely necessary feature for managing such a large and diverse country.
中国相对无效的辩驳方式很有可能与中国文化中中庸的思维方式有关。我欣赏并尊重这种习惯。这也并不是中国独有的特点，这也是瑞士政治文化的基本特点之一，并使瑞士成为了一个极为稳定的国家。我并不怀疑这种特点对于中国快速稳定的发展所作出的重要贡献，而且要管理这样一个巨大而多元的国家，这种特点也是绝对必要的。
However, when talking with foreign journalists, a more aggressive discussion style would be more adapted to the situation and the audience. The Western media use extremely problematic methods to criticize China with regards to all the imaginable aspects, including in fields where China is among the best performing countries in the world. This helps them to sell their newspapers and to attract a larger audience to TV news programs; they will not give up this income source without a fight.
然而，和西方记者交流的时候，更加针锋相对的对话方式应该更加适合情境和打动观众。西方媒体运用一种极端质疑的方式，来批判关于中国他们所能想到的所有方面，包括中国领先于世界大部分国家的一些领域。这样他们能售出更多的报纸或者吸引更多的电视新闻观众。不经过斗争，他们是不会放弃这个收入来源的。
When trying to solve a conflict, the Chinese will do everything in order not to "lose their face" and will also try to avoid that their opponent loses his face. By contrast, the only way of putting pressure on the Western media is precisely to make them lose their face in front of their own audience. Since this would be done with solid data considered trustworthy even in the eyes of Westerners, the Western journalists would have to recognize that much of what they said and wrote before was actually wrong. This would lead them to change their reporting by their own will, not through pressure from outside.
当面对一个需要解决的冲突的时候，中国人会为了"面子"做任何事，并且也会尽量避免让对手"丢脸"。但是相反的，能给西方媒体施压的唯一方法，恰恰就是让他们在观众面前丢脸。这可以通过实实在在的数据来实现，西方人也会认为这些数据是可信的。这样西方记者就要承认大部分以前他们所写的和说的都是错的。这样他们就会从主观意愿上改变报道方式，而并非只是由于外部压力。
Since 2008, the Chinese government and people have been more and more successful in their attempts to put outside pressure on the Western media so that they soften their tone and report about more positive aspects of the Chinese development. A perfect example is the boycott of the French products after the torch relay in Paris, which ended in a disaster while the French security forces did not much to avoid it. As soon as the French economic interests in China were hurt, pressure grew on the media to repair the damage and to take the Chinese public opinion into consideration.
2008年以来，中国政府和人民对西方媒体施压的尝试获得了越来越多的成功。这些媒体的论调变柔和了，也报道了更多关于中国发展的积极新闻。有一个最好的例子：由于法国警察的失职，在巴黎进行的火炬传递以混乱收场。这之后，中国掀起了抵制法国货的浪潮。法国在中国的经济利益一受损，媒体马上就感受到压力并且要去修复这个损失，这样在报道的时候他们就必须把中国公众的看法考虑进来。
However, this external pressure on the media is a two-edged sword. In response, the Western media portray China more and more as a threatening new power, which we must fight with all possible means if we don't want to be dominated by it. This is a new turn in the Western discourse about China which is certainly not good for a peaceful development of the world.
然而，这种对于媒体的外部压力是把双刃剑。西方媒体的反应就是，越来越多地把中国描绘成一个新的威胁力量，我们必须要用尽办法与其斗争，否则就会被掌控。这是关于中国的西方言论的一种新转变，而这种转变必然不利于世界的和平发展。
Many Chinese might consider the Western media as the voice of the West. However, more and more Westerners are critical towards their own media. In particular, almost all the people I know who visited remote countries lost their faith in our media because what they saw there did not correspond to what they had learned through the media before. Forcing our media to report in a more professional way about remote countries might actually be a way to help them regain credit in the eyes of the public opinion not only in China, but even in the West (see our article The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries).
很多中国人可能认为，西方媒体就是西方人的传声筒。然而，越来越多的西方人批判他们的媒体。特别是，几乎所有我认识的去过偏远国家的人，都不再相信我们的媒体。因为他们在那些国家看到的和他们以前从媒体了解到的是很不同的。敦促我们的媒体用更加专业的方式报道偏远国家的新闻，也许是让他们重获信任的办法。不仅仅是中国公众的信任，也是西方公众的信任。（参见本站文章The ethic charter for journalists and researchers working on remote countries)。
At the same time, it could open the way to a real application of the economic, social and cultural rights, which the Western media have decided to boycott. This would certainly lead to a significant improvement of the living conditions of billions of people worldwide. It would also lead to a better understanding between the people of the world, especially between the rich and the poor.
同时，这也能为经济、社会和文化权利的真正实行开启一条道路，否则，西方媒体是抵制这些准则的实施的。而这些权利的实行必定能显著改善世界上无数人民的生活条件，也能让人与人之间更好地互相理解，尤其是富人与穷人之间。
China is in the best position to help our media to understand what went wrong and how to improve it, since this country was among the poorest countries on earth some 60 years ago. Now, it has got the research capacity to do the necessary data collecting and also the prestige deriving from a fast and successful development.
中国的情况，最能帮助我们的媒体了解症结所在并且自我改进。因为这个国家曾经在六十多年前是世界最穷的国家之一。而现在，它有能力收集到必要的资料进行研究，也通过快速而成功的发展获得了威望。