Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Tiananmen Square “Massacre”? The Power of Words vs. Silent Evidence (The Art of Media Disinformation is Hurting the World and Humanity) (Volume 2) Paperback – March 12, 2014
|New from||Used from|
The Amazon Book Review
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
The confessions made by Western journalists are documented in this new book titled 'Tiananmen Square "Massacre"? The Power of Words vs. Silent
In 1998, Washington Post journalist Jay Mathews confessed in the Columbia Journalism Review that "no one died at Tiananmen Square" and that "it is hard to find a journalist who has not contributed to the misimpression" (including himself). In 2004 the Christian Science Monitor revealed that the Human Rights Watch decided not to publish their own 52-page report that confirmed the Chinese side of the story.
In 2009, BBC journalist James Miles admitted that he had "conveyed the wrong impression." CBS journalist Richard Roth also confessed in 2009 that after a "debriefed on-air by Dan Rather (London office)", he made "an effort to avoid using the word "massacre", and acknowledges that he did not "make a point trying to contradict a colleague on the air".
Are you aware of the circumstances under which these journalists suddenly decided to admit their years of contribution to the "misimpression"? Are you aware that they then tried to change the story to a "Beijing Massacre" with the exception of Graham Earnshaw - a Reuters journalist?
About the Author
Wei Ling Chua is a freelance journalist accredited by the Australia News and Feature Services (ANFS) and the International News Syndicate (INS). However, since 2009 he has been banned from accessing any of the benefits derived from his accredited membership due to an assignment he submitted to the Morris Journalism Academy questioning the honesty and ethics of the Western media. Wei Ling specialises in media disinformation.
If you buy a new print edition of this book (or purchased one in the past), you can buy the Kindle edition for only $2.99 (Save 70%). Print edition purchase must be sold by Amazon. Learn more.
For thousands of qualifying books, your past, present, and future print-edition purchases now lets you buy the Kindle edition for $2.99 or less. (Textbooks available for $9.99 or less.)
Top customer reviews
I can quibble over the details, but an overarching sense is that the author despite his claims to having received Western journalist training and accreditation, clearly never quite got the "Western outlook" and thus lacked the ability to understand why Tiananmen Square went viral, while the cases he mentioned (which admittedly are worthy of concern, and while hardly a "professional" research effort he should receive some recognition for gathering so many into one location).
The first distinction he misses is the significance of the Army. In a rule of law state, police handling public order is part of their regular duties which is to be executed under programmatic law, and requiring no will on the part of the state (in fact, any message from the government other than a mild request for "leniency" is at risk of being considered interference with that rule of law). Thus the State is not held responsible. Even in the case of excess, the blame will be on the individual or department.
Further, thanks to indoctrination from youth, we are trained to think of cops as good guys. With the exception of those who have already been victimized or someone with extraordinary interest in the subject, we tend to believe in their good faith - in fact, our mental health depends on this assumption. Thus they are allowed large margins of appreciation, and even a wrongful action will receive at least some sympathy.
The Army does not receive the latter advantage. Further, even when authorized by law, it clearly involves an active decision by the top levels of government and marks the point when rule of law disintegrates to at best rule by law - the government is clearly no longer a neutral player, nor are the rights of the citizenry its top priority. Thus, all negative consequences from the decision (in particular, all deaths from *both* sides) are its responsibility. Any leniency shown by the soldiers are to their individual credit. Futher, the heavy equipment changes the metrics employed - what's "armed" when facing the police is "unarmed" when facing the army (as the author notes but fails to understand the reason).
The second distinction is the importance of avoiding deaths. In the articles he actually quotes, the last one that actually involved deaths (in the single digits, too) are in the 1970s. Yes, deaths cross a line, deaths by the Army cross two, and the author doesn't realize this. If he did, at least he'll try harder to find cases in the US that actually involve deaths.
The third lesson he doesn't figure out is how freedom of speech (which he objects to in the Chinese context and provides a stereotypical justification of protection against Western meddling) and rule of law is a win-win deal, not just a win for the people or a win for the government. Through constant work with the public and media, Western governments have learnt from experience what lines they absolutely may not cross, what narratives combine at least marginal plausibility and acceptability, and when it's time to stop denying and put up at least a show of remorse. This avoids the masses congealing into a solid block of antagonism, and is knowledge that dictatorships find hard to acquire, which actually reduces rather than increases the stability of their state.
Meanwhile, rule of law and due process means that citizens are often willing to put off judgment until said "due process" is complete, and the system is considered to have worked as long as excess is stopped before the last stage (despite the considerable damage caused by then). The author recognizes the negatives and limitations, but doesn't note how it does keep the government from going too far, while increasing the overall stability of the state.
On less thematic points, the author engages the "in the Square" narrative, but no matter how he plays it up, is forced to acknowledge it is no longer part of the serious studying of the event so he's engaging a past target. He doesn't really handle the claim of deaths occuring elsewhere except a stereotypical note that soldiers died to (a fact that is actually known).
And he can really do translations properly. Referring to location 1086, like it or not, 期待 is not "wish", but expectation or anticipation. 無賴至極 does not translate to "frustrate ... to the extreme" - a better translation of the phrase is "that is, to let the government when it reaches the extremes (至極) of despicability (無賴) to butcher its own citizens". The mistranslation shifts the active element from the government to the protesters, which is clearly not what was said or meant.
Moving to 1094, 這話 should be translated as "this (in context)" or "this narrative (translating with maximal literalness)" not our intention, and 要 is "need", not "intention". The sum effect of these "errors" is to distort a narrative of resigned acceptance into a narrative of active desire for bloodshed, and by itself would lead to reasonable doubts about the author's objectivity and fair-mindedness. Is he gambling his audience doesn't know a shred of Chinese?
In short, the author tries hard, but he fails because he hasn't even succeeded in understanding his target audience or presenting himself as objective and fair-minded on the issue.
Dear editor, kindly publish and distribute following important China dream discussion topics:
Harmony Renaissance: Revival of harmony philosophy ancient or modern for multipolar national cultural identity and world peace and harmony. For more details please refer to World Harmony Organization and Francis C W Fung publications. UPDATED 20 CHINA
China Dream: Revival of Chinese nation for national dignity and multipolar world peace and harmony. For more details on China dream please refer to summary of President Xi's statements.
1) China dream, harmony renaissance essential for China and global peace and China revival.
2) China dream and harmony renaissance together means Chinese soft power.
3) China must continue harmony renaissance for survival against U S criticism
4) China must be proactive on harmony renaissance not to be contained by U.S. liberal democracy
5) China dream, resolve south China sea dispute by harmony diplomacy
6) ancient Chinese thought, modern Chinese softpower through harmony renaissance
7) Harmony renaissance is the spirit of China dream, dream with in a dream
8) Harmony renaissance vs liberal democracy thought in 21st century.
9) Rally around harmony renaissance to rebuild a Chinese civilization state
10) Can China survive without harmony renaissance under U.S. democracy assault?
11) Survival of the fittest demands China dream to include harmony renaissance.
12) Without harmony renaissance China dream is empty
13) "China is unlikely to become a superpower because it lacked an independent ideology with global clout" according to Margret Thatcher.
14) China will remain a "small country" without harmony renaissance despite economic growth.
15) China dream means 21st century multipolar world, peace and world harmony.
16) Harmony renaissance is the missing ancient Chinese ideology with global clout Margret Thatcher is referring to.
17) Harmony renaissance is the revival of Chinese cultural value ,ancient and modern.
18) The Chinese dream with harmony renaissance can enrich world civilization.
19) Harmony renaissance adds spiritual life and perspective to China dream.
20) Harmony Renaissance will be a preferred balance to U.S. relentless and powerful push of liberal democracy ideology on other countries in a multipolar world.
21) China dreams mean democratic world order and multipolar world peace and harmony.
22) Sun Yet Sen and Nationalist party empowered the elite, Mao Zedong empowered women and the masses, Deng Xiaoping’s reform and open up empowered the economy and rule and order, the final movement in the symphony of Chinese modernization is to empower China’s soul and spirit with China dream and harmony renaissance.
Best of Harmony
Francis C W Fung, Ph.D.
World Harmony Organization
Chua has sourced his book well. Be open-minded and judge for yourself what really happened.
Most recent customer reviews
Keep working with the truth, the peolpe are already waking up to controlled corporation media.