Economic Systems and the Organization of the Media Industries in China
Organization of the Media Industries in China
The Chinese media industry has for the recent years experienced several changes that have brought it to a contradictory mix of social authoritarian and capitalist neoliberalism. For several years, Schramm’s “Soviet Communist Theory of the Press” has been widely used as a guideline for investigating the press systems within the communists, and in particular China. In China media is treated as the ultimate propaganda machine that is regarded as an apparatus of political manipulation and ideological control. It is important to note that censorship, the most serious danger to press freedom, is bound to exist in China, being among the worst in the world in terms of having the most restrictive media environments. The government of China uses several means to force the Chinese media and journalists to censor themselves. For instance, it uses libel lawsuits, and arrests with a good example being in 2017 when thirty-eight journalists were imprisoned. It is also commonly known that China blocks a majority of foreign websites including Facebook, Instagram, and some Google services. However, the Chinese public has always found ways of circumventing this “Great Firewall”.
Under capitalist neoliberalism, the state serves as a committee to oversee the business concerns of the entire bourgeoisie. In the end, it depends on its military forces of men and women to safeguard the rights of something like the capitalist class, including the police, army, courts, and prisons. However, the capitalist class does not want to seem to be openly using violence to maintain its power. Military-police systems of governance, particularly now in a nation like China, would incite a working class that’s also statistically stronger than it’s ever been into a rebellion that might topple the whole system. Therefore, the bourgeois state defends capitalist power via other, gentler means, such as a strong dependence on the media to sway public opinion.
Democratization of Media in China
There lacks a specific media company that is responsible with fights for China’s media freedom. However, several movements and groups all over the world have taken the initiative to ensure that the media industry can operate without too much restriction from within the government. The Institute of the Bar of Arbitrators (IBA) is serving as the Panel’s secretariat, and its director, Baroness Helena Kennedy QC, is its chair. She thinks world leaders should take action because of the rising number of journalists killed while doing their jobs. She warns that the increasing number of assaults on journalists should be a cause of anxiety to the free world and cites examples from Mexico, the Middle East, and the Philippines.
The Panel is co-chaired by Amal Clooney, a prominent human rights attorney at Doughty Street Chambers. More people should be held responsible for assaults on the media, she says on Global Insight. If global leaders are getting more unified, more determined, and more imaginative in discovering methods to silence the press, shouldn’t the defenders of the press do the same. ‘She’s saying,’ we interrogate. As the year progresses, the Panel will advise countries on how to better safeguard journalists by bringing their laws in line with international norms and taking action against those that are cracking down on the press. There is no reason to believe this behavior won’t persist if we don’t make it more expensive for those engaging in it.