For all think tanks, the media plays an important role in disseminating ideas to the public and political leaders alike. And thus, It is vitally important to have independent media sources in any given country to assure that there is an outlet for dissenting voices. This is a particular problem in China, where, for obvious reasons, muckraking journalism is slightly harder than in other parts of Asia.
It is thus disheartening to hear of the troubles that are stirring in Caijing Magazine (财经), a Beijing-based bi-monthly with a strong focus on economics and finance. More than that, however, it has, since its inception in 1998 by Hu Shuli, become one of the most focal proponents for a truly free market in China. Towards that end, it has published many free market voices from outside and inside China (including articles from scholars at the Cato Institute and free market economists such as Nobel Prize-winner Gary Becker).
As it gained an audience of loyal readers, it also began to rub up against the unstated rules of play in China: don’t challenge the ruling regime. In a quest to stay editorially independent, the magazine’s editors and staff constantly took on the big issues, many of them concerning China’s economy and the role of government.
During the past few weeks, however, there has been a mass shake-up. According to Gady Epstein of Forbes:
Caijing is in turmoil. China’s leading financial magazine has been hit with mass resignations of its business-side staff, and with more shoes yet to drop, readers of the groundbreaking publication are speculating about just what has brought this mess on. Has the propaganda ministry applied pressure to the magazine’s owners? Have long-running internal financial squabbles come to a head? Is the magazine’s indomitable editor, Hu Shuli, maneuvering to ensure she can continue pushing the boundaries of press freedom, either at Caijing or at a new publication?
Any one of these three scenarios is plausible, and they are not mutually exclusive. As a July New Yorker profile of Hu points out, Caijing has accomplished a rare feat in China by becoming both influential and highly profitable while also reporting aggressively on stories that extend beyond business to politics and social issues, from SARS to the shoddy construction of schools that collapsed in the Sichuan earthquake. Though they have been slapped on the wrist many times, Hu and Caijing‘s investors have managed to avoid the harshest of reprisals through a combination of keen political instincts and by having the right friends in high places.
But Caijing may now be testing the Chinese media’s equivalent of Ohm’s law: The more readers, money and fame a publication accrues through muckraking, the greater official resistance becomes. In the last decade Caijing has grown from a small upstart weekly into a huge mainstream brand with a high-profile Internet presence, and it is launching an international Bloomberg-like wire service in a joint venture with Hong Kong billionaire Richard Li.
Copyright © 2010 The Atlas Network.
Developed by The Liberty Lab