Why?

China’s media leaders may want to consider the French approach with France24 if they want to grow audience share with their own media properties:

1. Editorial autonomy + Higher Content Legitimacy = Audience Loyalty

It is hard to tell if online users and TV viewers of France24 clearly understand that they are consuming a media property owned and operated by the French government.  Just as viewers of Al Jazeera may not be fully aware of the Qatari government’s backing of that network.  What’s important here is that both France24 and Al Jazeera afford their editorial staff considerable editorial autonomy in determining the news.  I can speak from personal experience (full disclosure: I am currently a freelance journalist at France24′s english language online service) to attest that there is never any concern among the editorial staff about government censorship or oversight of any kind.  Conversely, the pressure from management is to produce the highest quality news comparable to the standards of any of the international newsrooms I have worked in, including CNN, CNBC Asia and the Associated Press among others.  Consider this example from July 14, 2010, France’s national holiday.  In an effort to rebuild relations with its former African colonies, the French government invited those states celebrating 50 years of independence to have a delegation of military representatives march in the grand Bastille Day parade up the Champs Elysees. In China, such national day festivities would be greeted with patriotic enthusiasm by official media organs, but not so in France.

The Chinese are making it much harder than it needs to be for international viewers to access their content online.

Both the TV and online editors at France24 led with stories of accusations from a federation of  international human rights groups that war criminals may be among those marching in the parade. The headline (left) led the coverage for most of the day and never was there a concern that France24 was embarrassing France’s leaders or the state itself.  Instead, the story generated above-average traffic online.

The lesson here for China’s own media entities is that by giving experienced media producers greater autonomy to report a story, even if it may be critical of China, will ultimately improve the content’s legitimacy among its target audiences and thus lead to increased user loyalty.  I fully understand how difficult it would be for some within the Propaganda Ministry, and even in the State Council, to loosen the reigns of media control.  However, it should be considered essential if the ultimate objective is to persuade sophisticated international media consumers to divert themselves from rival websites and TV channels to CNC World, BON Live or CCTV International.

2.  Make it Easy to Watch and Access the Content

When CNC World debuted in July 2010, I rushed to find the live stream online the very first day it went on the air.  It went without saying that CNC would have a live-stream, or even on-demand video available, considering the importance the government had placed on reaching out to international viewers like myself.  Yet after four attempts using three computers on two platforms, I have still not been able to access the CNC World live stream.   CNC World is making it much more difficult than it needs to be for viewers to access their content online.  Here are a few suggestions on how the network can improve its usability to make it significantly easier for viewers, such as myself, to watch CNC World over the internet:

A. Domain Name: select an easy to remember URL.  http://www.xhstv.com is NOT a good domain name for an international audience.   Now, as a Chinese speaker, I understand that XHS stands for 新华社, the average American viewer will not.

B. Make it Mac Compatible:  No, in fact, make it platform agnostic.  Currently, CNC World can only be viewed on PCs which eliminates tens of millions of prospective viewers who use Apple’s products.  This is critical in both the United States and Europe.

C. No Plug-ins!:  This is a massive mistake on the part of Xinhua.  First of all, web users in the U.S. and Europe are accustomed to watching online video using any of the established methods ranging from Flash to HTML5.  The era of downloading additional software applications to run video ended about five years.  Secondly, Western internet users will NEVER download a plug-in prompted by text written in Chinese!   This is a screen grab of the prompt to download the program “UUSEE” to watch CNC World.  To the vast majority of non-Chinese speaking Westerners, this looks extremely ominous.

D. Do not use Chinese characters: Even if a user in the U.S. or Europe wanted to download the UUSEE plug-in, there is a very good chance that s/he would not be able to because many of the anti-virus programs block Chinese language applications.  This is even more so on corporate networks that often have much stricter security measures than most home users.  To avoid this restrictions, the English-language streaming site should be entirely in English with no Chinese language prompts for plug in requirements or any Chinese-character metadata that will trigger the security programs to block the site.

3. Quality Counts

Just as China is not a native-English speaking country, France faces a similar challenge in how it staffs its English language media channels.  Unlike most of China’s multilingual media outlets, France24′s english and Arabic services are staffed by native speakers.  In China, by contrast, CCTV9, China Radio International and other channels are often staffed with Chinese employees whose english skills are quite strong relative to other mainland Chinese however nowhere near international broadcast standards.  Subsequently, there are significantly higher levels of on air and online mistakes that are often directly associated with language abilities.  In an extremely competitive news markets, these kinds of mistakes are unacceptable as it undermines the credibility of the product and encourages consumers to seek elsewhere for similar information.  There is ample evidence of poor language and copy editing skills of China’s international media editors.  On three separate occasions over the course of a single week, the home page of CNTV (left) featured prominent spelling errors and template layout mistakes that, once again, indicate China’s media products are just not competing at the same level as French and other international media outlets.

]]> http://www.chinatalkingpoints.com/3-lessons-france-can-offer-china-about-government-run-media/feed/ 1 http://www.chinatalkingpoints.com/ctp-podcast-inevitable-confrontations/ http://www.chinatalkingpoints.com/ctp-podcast-inevitable-confrontations/#comments Fri, 18 Jun 2010 18:58:18 +0000 Michael McCune http://www.chinatalkingpoints.com/?p=868 Download audio file (CTP-Podcast-Inevitable-Confrontations.mp3)
]]> In this podcast, we tackle the question of how to assess the balance of power in our relationship with China.  Does leverage come from existing assets and clout or from pace of progress and growth?  Do you undercut a challenger’s point of weakness, or do you assert dominance where you can?

CTP Podcast – Inevitable Confrontations

Should calls for confrontation now be heeded?  Is conciliation a sign of weakness?  Can one country succeed if the other is mired in internal problems and economic turmoil?  We promise no answers, but good food for thought…

CTP Podcasts – Foxconn Suicide Coverage

In this podcast, Eric and I reflect on his previous rant about US media coverage and discuss the various factors at play on youth as they migrate from the countryside to take up positions at factories in the coastal provinces.

- Consider that the Red Shirts represent Thailand’s rural peasant population who have grown increasingly frustrated with political corruption and the government’s emphasis on urban development over agrarian reform.

- Notice how the various factions in this turmoil are largely divided between elite urbanites (the so-called “Yellow Shirts”) and poorer peasants (“Red Shirts”).

- The gap between the rich and poor in China is far more pronounced than it is in Thailand.   The measurement of such inequality is known as the “Gini Coefficient” and in China the figure is 46.9 whereas in Thailand it’s just 42.    The higher the Gini Coefficient, according to many experts, the greater the likelihood of social unrest.

The Hu-Wen administration speaks frequently on the need to rebalance the society and narrow the coastal-interior wealth gap.   Yet, even as China’s leaders pour more money into the countryside, their efforts may pale in comparison to the levels of frustration born from the real estate crisis that could become a critical flash point.  With land and housing prices now out of reach for a disturbingly large percentage of the population, the frustration of the masses can quickly morph into widespread anger against the urban elite who have benefitted from the property boom.

China’s wealth gap is now larger than at any time since the Communist Party came to power in 1949.  If the government wants to avoid the same kind of calamity that is currently taking place in Bangkok, it must do more to address official corruption, continue to reduce the peasant tax burden, and eliminate the perception that there are “Two Chinas: — one for the rich and one for everyone else.   The crisis in Thailand should be an unmistakable warning to China’s leaders that time is running out and the consequences of inaction could be severe.

UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal blog “China Real Time Report” posted a similar article today on Chinese perceptions of the unrest in Thailand.

We have been exploring the question of “China Going Global” for several weeks on CTP, in our blog, podcast and for a series of articles commissioned by Fortune magazine’s Chinese website.  In our first installment, we discussed the trend of how more and more Chinese companies are engaging Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs) in the Southern Hemisphere where the obstacles to market entry are significantly lower than in the United States, Europe and Japan.  In these various LDCs across South America, Africa and the Middle East, the Chinese can compete on price and their ability to build informal distribution networks among the Chinese diaspora.  Overall, Chinese companies operating in LDCs around the world are displaying their characteristic dexterity going into markets that most companies from the developed world either ignore or abandoned.  In places like Bolivia, Zambia and Bangladesh, product liability laws are weak, competition in many sectors is thin and the non-contract-based business cultures there all play to Chinese companies’ strengths.  In contrast, the United States offers the Chinese none of those advantages.  It is a huge, diverse market, with establish competitors in a system that is built on a legal system dedicated to contract enforcement.  If Chinese conglomerates want to play in this sandbox, they will have to adopt an entirely different approach to how they run their businesses.  In short, they will have to learn to be less “Chinese” and more “American.”

In this episode of the CTP Video Podcast, we explore the challenges confronting China’s emerging global conglomerates as they venture across the Pacific into the United States market.  Some of the questions we explore include:

• A “brand’s” value has very different meanings in the United States than it does in China.  Chinese companies will have to follow the lead of Korean and Japanese conglomerates who spent considerable time and money to learn the subtleties of American culture so as to effectively market to this diverse population.   Whereas price and value are among the driving forces of a brand’s value in China, that is less so in the United States where a pair of Diesel jeans, for example, can sell for over $300.  If the consumer is drawn to the Diesel brand, than the $300 spent on those jeans is within an acceptable value range.  Understand that concept of “value” will be critical for Chinese companies as their adapt their marketing strategies to accommodate the US market.

• The “Made in China” (MIC) brand poses distinct problems for Chinese companies coming to the United States.  MIC is now a widely used catch-phrase for low-quality, crappy products.  Following 10 years of scandals, product recalls and sub-standard quality associated with many Chinese products, the Mainland’s MNCs will no doubt face a significant challenge shedding this burdensome baggage.

• What sector will Chinese companies likely have the most success?  Cars.  Both Michael and I agree that the auto sector is wide open for an innovative product, particularly in the mixed-fuel or hybrid sectors.  The selection of Los Angeles as BYD’s North America headquarters is yet another indication that the Chinese are going to use their innovations in hybrid and solar power auto technology to serve as the proverbial “tip of the spear.”   However, autos present tremendous risk to the brand as well.  Imagine if Geely or BYD encounter quality problems similar to what Toyota just went through.  The Japanese auto maker was able to draw on a generation of brand investment in the United States to recover its standing in the market.  Chinese companies will not be afforded the same amount of trust.  If the gas pedals on a BYD or Geely car stick as Toyota vehicles reportedly did, then the Chinese will have a public relations disaster on their hands.  Remember, all Chinese products, regardless of their quality, will have to overcome the public’s skepticism of MIC.  On top of that, there is the whole… ahem… “Communist thing.”  Yes, the American people remain oddly afraid of anything “Communist” and China is still widely referred in Washington as “Red China.”  Finally, China has built up a sizable audience of detractors who would love nothing more than to see their brands fail miserably in the United States.   In the end, the Chinese must perform exceptionally well as there is very little room for error for them to establish their brands in this environment.

• Finally, the Chinese will have to grow a thicker skin.  When things go wrong, and they will, Chinese corporate leaders and senior government officials must resist the temptation to call on their nationalistic instincts that have been used to great effect until now.  If a product is recalled, it is not a conspiracy “to contain China.”  If American consumers protest against a Chinese company, it is not because “they want hurt the feelings of the Chinese people.”  Instead, the Chinese should address the problems as local issues, work hard to influence public opinion back home (especially in the blogosphere) and show a commitment to the American consumer that Chinese MNCs are investing in the United States for the long term and will work hard to resolve problems quickly, directly and honestly as they arise.  American consumers welcome Japanese companies with a similar level of skepticism when they first started to arrive en masse in the 1980s and now, a generation later, those companies are a trusted part of millions of US consumers’ lives.  The Chinese can do the same if they learn not to over react and to communicate with their American consumer in a tone and language they are accustomed to.

So many of the requirements of how to enter the American market are similar to the necessities of what it takes to break into the Chinese market.  The Chinese always tell Western investors that in order to succeed there it requires time, patience and a lot of money.  More importantly, it also requires leaders who are culturally sensitive, speak the language and understand the consumer’s needs.  Imposing your will on the consumer will not work, either in China or the United States.  So before Chinese corporate leaders pack their bags for Los Angeles, New York and Washington, they might want to first stop by an American company operating in China to listen to their experience about what it takes to make that long journey across the Pacific.

Regardless of whether the six-party talks continue, China will always be the one with the main influence on and self-interest in North Korea’s future stability.  China doesn’t want to see a unified Korea anytime soon, and it doesn’t want to deal with turmoil on its border that could lead to a massive refugee crisis.

With leadership change on the horizon, it seems likely that Kim Jong-Il will seek to set a foreign policy course and domestic development trajectory for his youngest son, Kim Jong-un, to implement.    By providing economic security (and opportunity), China can also seek to dissemble any nuclear infrastructure that North Korea has established – but it should be noted that border security, not nuclear threats, are China’s main concern.  China is also motivated to remove the nuclear threat, but its methods and timeline are inherently different from ours.

The other variable to contend with will be the American public’s perception/opinion of this evolution and what the reaction of our politicians will be.  For example, it seems highly unlikely that the US will ever want to see the six-party talks end (despite a lack of progress over 7 years).  Such an ending would result in too many headlines.  Fortunately, China doesn’t usually seek to be the sole actor responsible for extra-territorial security.  So while reality will be China as the main actor, perception will focus on a face-saving multi-lateral management.

A Bit of Background

First, it was CCTV9.  The ugly, English speaking cousin of CCTV that got a nice facelift a few years ago courtesy of Rupert Murdoch.  News Corp. advisors convinced CCTV9′s management to invest in new sets, a snazzy graphics package and replace the dour looking Chinese anchors with attractive Australians, Africans and other non-Chinese.   CCTV then leveraged its considerable political muscle to expand the network’s global distribution.  In the United States alone, CCTV9′s expanded distribution footprint is nothing short of amazing.   The channel is available on pretty much every major cable and satellite platform from DirecTV to Time Warner Cable.  You can also get your fill of watching Da Shan over the air as CCTV9 is making inroads in regional markets through digital terrestrial television stations as well.  Simply put, CCTV9′s distribution is phenomenal.  Nonetheless, CCTV9 is a tragic case study in how distribution alone is not enough.  I have yet to meet an American television viewer not affiliated with China who has ever heard of CCTV9, much less watched it, even though the channel is right there on their on screen TV guide.

Last year, the Chinese doubled-down on their English language TV investments with the launch of Blue Oceans Network, or BON Live.  Sensitive to the reaction of many international viewers that CCTV9 was simply an extension of the parent channel’s heavily censored content, the new BON brands itself as an “independent network” that produces “objective English language content for the Western world.”   While much of the content has that same “cable access” semi-professional feel to it that is so common on CCTV9, the difference with BON is that it is positioning itself as a Western channel designed exclusively for Western audiences.  That means there are few, if any, Chinese hosts and there is a pretense of independence from the government’s various media censors.

And now… CNC

That China feels the need to launch yet another network is indicative that its prior attempts have not fulfilled the government’s media objectives.  Beijing clearly perceives an injustice is being done by the international media in how it is perceived globally and the best solution is to follow the lead of the French (France24), the Russians (Russia Today) and Qatar (Al Jazeera) by deploying its own television platform to tell its story.   There is little, if any, evidence that suggests CNC will be any more successful than CCTV9 and BON Live in persuading the outside world of China’s positions on critical issues where it comes under such intense scrutiny by the international community.  On the key issues of human rights, Tibet, Taiwan and certain aspects of China’s relationship with the United States, China’s official government media simply lacks the necessary editorial credibility to be taken seriously as an impartial source of news.

Why Al Jazeera is Different

Beijing’s media leaders no doubt look to Al Jazeera as an example of how a state-funded media enterprise can have great effect in swaying public opinion.  Unfortunately for China, Al Jazeera is unique in many ways that do not benefit Beijing.   The key difference between China’s media ventures and Al Jazeera is the level of editorial independence the Qatari government affords the network’s management.  Doha provides Al Jazeera with seemingly endless resources to do pursue stories as it pleases, even if that complicates Qatar’s foreign relations.  Qatar is a staunch ally of the United States, even housing one of the largest American military bases in the Persian Gulf, yet permits Al Jazeera to feature guests and carry and editorial narrative that is constantly critical of American policies in the Gulf and towards the Arab/Muslim world at large.  It is hard to envision China permitting such editorial latitude with CNC’s editors.  Furthermore, Al Jazeera’s editorial management, both in Washington at Al Jazeera English and in Doha with its Arabic language service, is comprised of a journalists from around the world.   When Al Jazeera English launched several years ago, it cherry picked top editorial staff from the world’s leading news organizations with the offer of editorial independence.  While the full potential of that promise has predictably fallen short on some levels, overall that editorial freedom is also difficult to envision in Beijing where no such tradition exists.

What China Should Do…

There is a tremendous opportunity out there for a globally focused China-based television network that is essentially an english-language version of Phoenix TV News.  Instead of relying on its old ways of producing media, here’s what China should do:

• Engage the international media in a meaningful debate on the issues by making its government leaders more accessible to the English language media. It took years for the U.S. government to learn this lesson.  Initially, Washington avoided Al Jazeera, prohibiting its officials to appear on the network.  It then realized that by leaving a vacuum in the airspace, it allowed more time for critics to attack the administration for its Mid East policies.  Now, Arabic speaking American diplomats are regular guests on Al Jazeera.  China should follow suit by making media training in English mandatory for certain high level officials and follow the example of Beijing’s top diplomat on Africa Affairs, Liu Guijin, who appears regularly on international television to articulate China’s position and rebuff the government’s critics.

• Ease restrictions on China-based foreign correspondents to travel and access senior officials. I speak with firsthand experience here in how difficult it is to get officials in Beijing to talk on the record, or better yet on camera.  It takes days, even weeks, to get officials to agree to an interview and when they do it’s often accompanied by a long list of restrictions.  By making their officials more accessible to the foreign press corps and allowing journalists to form meaningful relationships with bureaucrats, they will find that the coverage will soften considerably.  The best example of this is in the United States where an extremely close relationship exists between the government and the media and more often than not, that close relationship often benefits the government significantly more than the media.

• Attract the best international journalists from around the world as Al Jazeera did.  To date, the quality of journalist at China’s english language networks is extremely green.  Largely, CCTV9 and BON Live, along with the China Daily and other similar outlets, are populated by journalists who are either too green to get jobs elsewhere or can’t find jobs elsewhere in the global media.  Instead, the Chinese should recruit from CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera and other established networks who have the experience to take China’s television programs to a much more sophisticated level.  Here’s the hard the part though: these experienced journalists will only come if they have assurances that they can truly tell the story as it is.  CNC’s management will have to include some international personnel and they will have to allow a greater degree of editorial freedom than they are accustomed.

In 2009 I was approached by a Hong Kong-based executive recruiter to join BON Live.  At the time, I was the Vice President of editorial affairs at the largest Chinese TV station in North America and I would have no doubt been a good fit for an endeavor like BON Live.  However, when I inquired about the degree of editorial control I would have over the programs I would manage, it was made very clear to me that I would be required to follow the guidance handed down from management on sensitive issues (those “sensitive issues” were not articulated however I knew exactly what they were: Taiwan/Tibet/June 4/etc…).  If China wants to really be taken seriously in the international TV marketplace, it will eventually have to soften those restrictions to allow for journalists with my level of experience to help them tell their very compelling story.

If this is such a big problem, why don’t we hear more complaints from the likes of Zambia and the developing world?

Across Africa and the developing world, China is rapidly displacing the traditional industrial powers as the largest investor and trading partner.  In less than a decade, China has displaced Britain and France to become Africa’s second-largest investor behind the United States.  Take U.S. oil investments out of the equation and China already is the largest investor across most of the continent.  Increasingly, African and other Southern countries must weigh the risks of continuing to open their doors to Chinese imports or criticizing Beijing and risk losing tens of billions of dollars in desperately needed investment, particularly in infrastructure.

So while U.S. Ambassador John Huntsman and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner plainly lay out the case that China’s undervalued currency is not only detrimental to Americans but also to billions of other consumers across the developing world, it may be worth for Chinese observers to take pause.  After all, China has long positioned itself as a leader among developing nations and it soon may be forced to confront the contradiction that its economic success stunts the economic growth of the very partner countries it purports to represent. Until now, the most vocal critics are in politicians in Washington and editorial writers such as Paul Krugman.  If Beijing isn’t careful and the effects of its under valued currency continue to damage developing world economies, China may itself confronting much more than just an angry American government.

China is not just bringing piles of cash and construction trucks to Africa, hundreds of thousands of immigrants are also making the long journey to resettle in cities like right here in Kinshasa.  These immigrants, like Mister Chen who we profiled earlier, are coming here in search of opportunity and to build a better life for their families.  They are opening businesses large and small in out of the way neighborhoods that largely go unseen by the casual observer.  In so many ways, the Chinese entrepreneurial enthusiasm is a welcome addition to poor and dysfunctional communities that essentially operate outside of the formal economy.  In short, the Chinese are bringing desperately needed jobs, goods and services.  Human culture being what it is though, there is also tremendous risk with how the Chinese ultimately assimilate with Congolese and other African cultures.  Initially, the arrival of those Chinese business were greeted either with indifference or welcomed as a positive addition to the community.  Now, however, the first rumblings of unease are beginning to emerge as some communities find the Chinese presence to be more problematic than they had initially thought.  This issue was most recently brought to light in Namibia where the growing competition from Chinese hair salon owners prompted the government to place an outright ban on Chinese ownership of these types of beauty parlors.  Separately, I am hearing more and more firsthand reports from Congolese who have friends and relatives working on Chinese construction projects who complain that Chinese foremen are becoming increasingly aggressive with their local employees.  It has been well documented that in countries such as Congo-Brazzaville, Angola and Algeria (source: China Safari, 2009) that many Chinese employers lack cultural sensitivity skills that would endear them to local populations.

To many Chinese, these so-called “soft skills” are meaningless.  The common retort from many Chinese business owners and project managers is that local workers complain because the Chinese work harder and demand more from their employees than do African companies.  The fact that local workers are complaining about working for low wages or not being paid at all just further reinforces that Chinese mindset.   In fact, the emotional standoff between Chinese merchants and their African critics is very similar to the same arguments made about cultural insensitivity by the Chinese in certain minority -populated provinces in China.  Now, let me be very clear here.  I do not have an opinion as to whether or not the popular sentiment held by the majority Han culture in China is correct or the views of minorities who feel their cultures are being paved over.  I will leave those questions to far more learned observers.  My point is that the debate is so similar.  The Han perspective emphasizes economic development as evidence by infrastructure construction.  Sentimentality for culture or religion is rarely a priority when measured against infrastructure development in economically deprived regions.

Considering the tremendous speed the Chinese are moving in Africa, particularly here in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, there may good reason to allocate a small percentage of that investment to building cultural ties between the Chinese and their African hosts.  The Congolese, for example, seem overwhelmingly positive about the Chinese arrival.  They regard the Chinese initiatives with optimism and see their enthusiasm for Africa as welcome relief from the failed policies of the West.  That said, the DRC is an extremely volatile country where a spark can light a blaze in seconds.  If the Chinese are not carefully with their cultural investment, it could handicap their broader regional agenda.

Does China Help or Hurt? Over at “The China Beat” blog writer, Angilee Shah posts another in a wave of reviews of Deborah Brautigam’s new book on the Chinese in Africa,  ”The Dragon’s Gift: The Real Story of China in Africa.” Shah raises a few good points in her post about the important fact that is overlooked by most Western diplomats here in the Congo and elsewhere that China itself is a developing country with specialized expertise in working in under-developed conditions similar to what is available across Africa.  That specialization in low-cost, effective development offers tremendous potential especially when compared to American and European aid efforts that are seemingly obsessed with process and paperwork over results.

Do the Chinese hire locals? Speaking of Professor Brautigam, her excellent blog “China in Africa: The Real Story” links to a You Tube video from one DR Congo’s TV stations that confirms my own observations here in Kinshasa that the Chinese use a blend of Chinese and local labor for their massive construction projects.  From what I have seen here, each construction crew has dozens of Kinois who work under the supervision of a handful of Chinese foremen.  This is among the most sensitive issues both here in the DRC and elsewhere in the region where political leaders are expressing their frustration with the Chinese over the use of too many imported Chinese laborers at the expense of local hires.  Furthermore, several sources have told me that in other Congolese provinces, Chinese employers are regarded to be “overbearing” and are often embroiled in disputes over pay with local employees.  This is definitely an issue to watch as Chinese investment here continues to grow.