“The Chinese Watching the Iraqi War
with Shock and Awe” by Zhou He was a good article about the Iraqi war and how
it gave reason to China’s growth in international affairs and development in
media. Zhou He starts off the article with an unusual statement, “[Chinese]
watched the high-tech war through high-tech communication means with shock and
awe – as if it were a spectacular game.” To most Americans, at least to myself,
war isn’t a video game, but to the Chinese’ virgin eyes, the experience and
visual is unbelievable. This statement also shows that the article wasn’t about
the U.S. or Iraq it was about China and the other countries were just part of
the story.
He
provides a sufficient history, although it’s always more comprehensive with
outside material and knowledge, he provides a run down on China’s political
history, the nature of the war and the relationship between all the countries.
“The Chinese Watching the Iraqi War with Shock and Awe,” has an international
demographic because of its neutral stance in the war and “lack of ties” between
Iraq and the United States. He does bring up the bitter past between China and
the United States under Clinton’s presidency, but it was surpassed because of
their billion-dollar relationship of exports and imports, a relationship that
China does not want to jeopardize. As for China’s history, their lack of
experience in the media world was because of their political prohibitions
against media.
“The
Iraqi war was also an ideal conflict for the Chinese media. It involved two
sides with whom China had no close alliance.” Their prime reasons for media
partake; “Universally accepted practice of professional journalism, the
newsworthiness of the event and the competition on a free market.”
Zhou
He’s article doesn’t talk about their relationship with the war and how it’s
affected their daily lives but it talks about how the war was an opportunity to
develop their countries media tradition. How it was a challenge and
accomplishment for the Chinese media, “a rare move for the Hong Kong media that
catered to an audience who was usually indifferent to international news.”
That’s
where the biggest difference between China and Brazil’s article “The Self
Absorbed Bully: A Brazilian view on the United States at War” by Antonio Pastina
on the Iraqi war. For China, they took a neutral stance between the countries
and the war aided their international media developments, whereas Brazil took a
stance, not necessarily for Saddam
Hussein, but certainly against the United States. Antonio Pastina talks about
how the war is directly affecting them although they are as stated “a periphery
country” that they may be affected in the future since the United States is so
“imperializing”.
Pastina, writes this article in a
personal way rather than a political view and writes very prejudicially against
the U.S. I may be bias myself as an American but Pastina’s view reads clearly
in one of the opening sentences. “When a domineering country, the United
States, refused to play by the rules of the community…” and again, “In Brazil,
similar to most of Latin America, there is a strong anti-United States bias in
the media.”. Yet, they continue further into the article and claim, “The
Brazilian media did not position itself in favor of Saddam Hussein but questioned
the United States’ right to invade and dispose another leader of another nation
based on unsubstantiated claims and without United Nation’s support.”
This article has a very targeted demographic, Brazilians and
maybe other Latin countries as well. If
the oil issue was brought further to the beginning of the article, which oil is
a valid proposition as a driver into this war, the issue may not be so directed
one way. They also fail to mention anything on terrorism, the article is less
about media, form and international affairs but simply about how the US in
“domineering.” They may not be for Saddam Hussein, but they’re certainly not
for the U.S. either. A strong article in the eyes of those against the United
States, but if it were presented as an international article, it would not
stand.
No comments:
Post a Comment