Spokesperson of Terrorists: The Wall Street Journal
Starting today, I am no longer a reader of The Wall Street Journal. I have already deleted the newspaper's website from my web browser's bookmarks and marked the daily Wall Street Journal Chinese Edition newsletter as junk mail.
I will use every opportunity I get to ask my friends and coworkers not to read The Wall Street Journal, not to browse The Wall Street Journal website, and most of all not to upload posts to the website. I will ask all my Chinese press colleagues to please not quote The Wall Street Journal's reports or editorials. I will further tell Chinese people who subscribe to The Wall Street Journal to stop wasting their dollars.
As a loyal reader of ten years, I made sure to read the internationally respected newspaper daily. While I worked abroad, I continued to subscribe and I have obtained much valuable information from the Journal. Up until I wrote this article, The Wall Street Journal Chinese Edition would arrive in my mailbox every day.
Frankly, over the past few years The Wall Street Journal has disappointed me more and more with its China-related reports and editorials, many of which carry prejudice and ignorance. Considering that its financial and economic news and commentary were still valuable, I had not given up reading the newspaper. However, The Wall Street Journal's reports of the violence in Urumqi have become more and more intolerable for me. In its coverage of these reports, the newspaper is not just approaching China with prejudice and ignorance, but is openly standing on the side of terrorists, becoming their spokesperson.
After daily reading of reports in The Wall Street Journal Asia Edition, I found some articles referring to those of the Uighur race as "protesters" while referring to those of the Han [Chinese] race as "thugs." Some reports call the riots "bloody incidents" and claim they were incited by Uighurs protesting "unfair treatment." At first, I considered this a result of western media prejudice. However, a July 8 update to their website was simply intolerable. A portrait of the leader of the "World Uighur Congress," Rebiya Kadeer, appeared in a prominent position with a link to her article "The Real Uighur Story" [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124698273174806523.html]. Further, an anonymous article's headline reads "Uprising in Urumqi" with the subtitle "Beijing Cracks Down on a Muslim Minority" [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124698224912106465.html]. There is no need to further quote these articles, because this balderdash, translated into Chinese, is extreme pollution of the mind. [TRANSLATOR’S NOTE: I could not find the specific phrases "thugs" and "bloody incidents" in the English sources I searched.]
Yes, in their defense, the editors of The Wall Street Journal can claim their treatment of this issue is fair and just. But, if after 9/11, some Chinese media outlet had used a headline like "Vengeance in New York -- Muslim National Minority Stands Up Against U.S. Hegemony" in an editorial, would they still consider this fair or just?!
Please remember, in whatever country, regardless of how the law interprets their actions, brutes merciless enough not even to spare small children are terrorists!
In reading these articles and editorials, I had a feeling of being humiliated. I can endure prejudice, but I cannot tolerate humiliation. I believe nowhere on earth is there a reader willing to read a newspaper that makes him feel humiliated. The Wall Street Journal can ignore losing my readership, but I certainly cannot disregard my own dignity and the honor of my people.
Of course, I can choose to rebut these reports and editorials by writing articles and posts, but I feel debating with the spokespeople of terrorists fundamentally does harm to one's honor and image. The best method, then, is to give up reading The Wall Street Journal—out of sight, out of mind—and let one's spirit feel a little more at peace.
Starting today, I will tell every Chinese person who stops reading The Wall Street Journal or who stops providing The Wall Street Journal with material, "Thank you!"
(The author is a senior member of a Beijing media organization)
I will use every opportunity I get to ask my friends and coworkers not to read The Wall Street Journal, not to browse The Wall Street Journal website, and most of all not to upload posts to the website. I will ask all my Chinese press colleagues to please not quote The Wall Street Journal's reports or editorials. I will further tell Chinese people who subscribe to The Wall Street Journal to stop wasting their dollars.
As a loyal reader of ten years, I made sure to read the internationally respected newspaper daily. While I worked abroad, I continued to subscribe and I have obtained much valuable information from the Journal. Up until I wrote this article, The Wall Street Journal Chinese Edition would arrive in my mailbox every day.
Frankly, over the past few years The Wall Street Journal has disappointed me more and more with its China-related reports and editorials, many of which carry prejudice and ignorance. Considering that its financial and economic news and commentary were still valuable, I had not given up reading the newspaper. However, The Wall Street Journal's reports of the violence in Urumqi have become more and more intolerable for me. In its coverage of these reports, the newspaper is not just approaching China with prejudice and ignorance, but is openly standing on the side of terrorists, becoming their spokesperson.
After daily reading of reports in The Wall Street Journal Asia Edition, I found some articles referring to those of the Uighur race as "protesters" while referring to those of the Han [Chinese] race as "thugs." Some reports call the riots "bloody incidents" and claim they were incited by Uighurs protesting "unfair treatment." At first, I considered this a result of western media prejudice. However, a July 8 update to their website was simply intolerable. A portrait of the leader of the "World Uighur Congress," Rebiya Kadeer, appeared in a prominent position with a link to her article "The Real Uighur Story" [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124698273174806523.html]. Further, an anonymous article's headline reads "Uprising in Urumqi" with the subtitle "Beijing Cracks Down on a Muslim Minority" [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124698224912106465.html]. There is no need to further quote these articles, because this balderdash, translated into Chinese, is extreme pollution of the mind. [TRANSLATOR’S NOTE: I could not find the specific phrases "thugs" and "bloody incidents" in the English sources I searched.]
Yes, in their defense, the editors of The Wall Street Journal can claim their treatment of this issue is fair and just. But, if after 9/11, some Chinese media outlet had used a headline like "Vengeance in New York -- Muslim National Minority Stands Up Against U.S. Hegemony" in an editorial, would they still consider this fair or just?!
Please remember, in whatever country, regardless of how the law interprets their actions, brutes merciless enough not even to spare small children are terrorists!
In reading these articles and editorials, I had a feeling of being humiliated. I can endure prejudice, but I cannot tolerate humiliation. I believe nowhere on earth is there a reader willing to read a newspaper that makes him feel humiliated. The Wall Street Journal can ignore losing my readership, but I certainly cannot disregard my own dignity and the honor of my people.
Of course, I can choose to rebut these reports and editorials by writing articles and posts, but I feel debating with the spokespeople of terrorists fundamentally does harm to one's honor and image. The best method, then, is to give up reading The Wall Street Journal—out of sight, out of mind—and let one's spirit feel a little more at peace.
Starting today, I will tell every Chinese person who stops reading The Wall Street Journal or who stops providing The Wall Street Journal with material, "Thank you!"
(The author is a senior member of a Beijing media organization)