Coverage of the Tibet crisis by CNN.com

Allison Rupp writes the magnificent journey to Lhasa in his article The Sky Train on CNN.com only three days before the exiled Tibetans in India began their march to China to protest Beijing’s hosting of the Olympic Games. The March 10th protest coincided with the uprising against China that forced the Dalai Lama into exile in 1959. Protests in India and Nepal were marked with violence. News of unprecedented world-wide protests were reported all over the world. The Chinese government ignored the issue for couple days, but as the protests grew more violent, China reacted by saying that the whole episode was orchestrated by the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama has condemned China's statements and extreme actions.

Ever since the protests began, CNN.com has written more than 70 articles to date, and has posted nearly 140 videos on the Web site. This is a remarkable media coverage given the time span of just three weeks.

Let me briefly discuss how CNN.com reports present the Tibetan side of the story more positively or neutrally and the Chinese side of the story more neutrally and negatively. These reports cover violence in different parts of the world, mostly in India and Nepal. The write-up is based on my experience of reading and watching stories posted on the Web site over the period. I haven't employed any empirical methods to come to a conclusion, hence I must warn you the evaluation might seem subjective!

As violence continues across Lhasa and Nepal, the international community has appealed for peace. The European Union has appealed China to handle the Tibet crisis peacefully calling for respecting Tibet's cultural heritage and maintaining China’s integrity at the same time. The Dalai Lama has called this crisis a ‘cultural genocide’ and the Chinese government blames him for perpetuating violence deliberately.

In the CNN.com reports, what is most glaringly seen is the viewpoint of the Tibetans mostly and not that of the Chinese. The Tibetans have a human interest frame, whereas the Chinese have only the official version which is mostly the denunciation of the Dalai Lama. But as we go to alternative media like YouTube, there are several videos counteracting what the western media have been portraying about the protests. These response-videos and blogs have mostly targeted the western media for overweighing the Tibetan’s cause. In doing so, they have used this medium to put forth their own biased message. One of the YouTube videos shows why an independent Tibet is not acceptable to the Chinese.

The video attempts to expose the myth of the ‘crackdown’ in mainland China. It shows images that were actually taken in Nepal and printed by the western media, including the BBC, Bild Zeitung, CNN, Aljazeera, and others. Very clearly, this video itself presents a slant, but the international media haven’t been fair either in reporting the exact nature of violence that erupted in the streets of Lhasa or in Nepal, India or other parts of the world. This is an excellent example of how the gatekeepers control the message in the newsroom. The Tibet crisis also brings the question of whether international media have differing parameters in tackling issues of the Communist regimes like Russia, China, and some Latin American countries. The historical aspect of the country in the present crisis is completely ignored.

The history of how Tibet was a part of China during the Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties until the making of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 is what is often referred. China ‘regained’ Tibet in 1950 when it was under the influence of the British Colonial Empire. Historians contest whether Tibet is a suzerain of China or an autonomous region. But the Chinese consider it as part of the territory, much like Taiwan and Hong Kong. While the relationship with Taiwan isn’t what the Chinese want to discuss, Tibet’s case has brought infamy to the Chinese. A majority of the Chinese believe the Dalai Lama is funded by the CIA ever since his exile in 1959. In the news covered by the CNN.com, there is no indication of any covert funding, but the US has sponsored a radio station and a Web site. The Chinese see this as signs of anti-China policy, and actually an instance of supporting the Tibetans cause in breaking away from China.

The media have, however, not reported the history behind the present crisis. News reports have merely focused on the event itself, and long form report that occasionally report the historical facts use most of their space talking about how the upcoming Olympics will be hurt.
Once I had an opportunity to talk to a Chinese student regarding this crisis. He candidly remarked that it’s the so-called ‘fair, western media’ that actually propagates ‘Free Tibet’ slogan more vociferously than the Tibetans themselves.

The Chinese model of authoritarian press doesn’t permit independent reporting. In China, you ought to support the state, and it’s the state’s interests that matters most. The press is the product of the regime.

When the only journalist from the western media -The Economist - was invited to visit Tibet, Chinese official had hoped a more positive coverage based on the subsidy granted. However, the nature of violence was too brutal to be ignored. The magazine reports that Lhasa television “broadcast over and over again, alternately in Tibetan and Chinese, a government statement accusing the “Dalai Lama clique” of being behind the violence by a ‘small number’ of rioters.”

Where can you find a truly objective media?