點新聞
Through dots, we connect.
讓世界看到彩色的香港 讓香港看到彩色的世界
標籤

Opinion | Two countries, two standards, two narratives

By Tom Fowdy

Ohio is currently experiencing an environmental disaster. On February 3rd, a 150-car train carrying hazardous chemicals derailed in the town of East Palestine and exploded, sending massive plumes of smoke into the area. The incident is killing wildlife in considerable numbers, with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources saying "the chemical spill resulting from the derailment had killed an estimated 3,500 small fish across 7½ miles of streams as of Wednesday." Locals also report their own animals such as chickens are dying. Despite this, authorities, including America's "Environmental Protection Agency" (EPA) insist that there is no risk to safety and says it is okay for residents to return.

Although US media have in fact covered the incident, the tone and scale of coverage have nonetheless been "quiet" in respect to how some things are presented, such as for example the absolute tidal wave of hysteria and frenzy surrounding the so-called "Spy Balloons" and "UFOs" over the United States. In other words, the coverage is mute and is without the extreme alarm and panic that has often narrated Anti-China stories. A major environmental disaster is occurring and seemingly, the response from journalists is indifference at best, and silence from outlets such as the BBC.

We have to ask ourselves; would this manner of coverage be the same if it happened in China? If the past few years have taught us anything, the answer is absolutely not. If such a chemical explosion occurred in China it would be met with wall-to-wall coverage across the mainstream media which would in turn weaponize rumors from locals, while explicitly pinpointing the blame on the country's ruling Communist Party.

With it, would come scores of op-eds that would blame the incident directly on the governance of Xi Jinping, accusing them of negligence and a coverup that conceals the true extent of the disaster, this would be mirrored by commentaries on pollution, corruption and other environmental problems in China. In addition, we would have also had statements from US government departments, such as the Department of State, criticizing a "lack of transparency" from China and demanding "answers", as well as accusing the impact of the chemical spill of impacting "neighboring countries". Every effort would be made to politicize the incident.

To summarize it, China in such circumstances would be subject to a completely different reporting standard. The three-year saga of covid is the most explicit example of this happening. Throughout every stage of the pandemic, the western mainstream media relentlessly attacked China's response wherever it could, spreading unsubstantiated rumors, insinuating coverups and accusing the government of abuse toward its own population. When China pursued lockdown policies, it was bad, when China moved away from zero-covid, it was also bad, and when China released figures, they were fake. Under no circumstances could China do anything "right" pertaining to covid.

Yet at the same time, like what is happening in Ohio now, such coverage also explicitly ignored the large-scale incompetence and negligence of western governments in inflicting mass casualties on their own populations, despite nit-picking at China. The United States government never received any scrutiny for a death toll that exceeded 1 million, so steep that it reduced the average life expectancy throughout the country. Instead, it was depicted as a success story as America's economy apparently "roared back", yet China's prudent and cautious decision to end zero-covid was depicted as "chaos" and economically disastrous.

Hence, the world would only be "alarmed" if the chemical spill in Ohio was a "Chinese disaster", so to put it, and only then would its consequences be deemed to have political implications. That's because the narrative and agenda of the mainstream media are aggressively focused on depicting China in a deceitfully negative, hysterical and also ideological light, even against the flow of the facts. The BBC World Service for one, happily makes every single incident in China a leading story and often fills them with loaded language and cherry-picked rumors. It would likely in the midst of such a hypothetical disaster, be running "human interest" stories about how people's lives have been ruined by the government's criminality, but for this? Silence. What is it running with right now at the time of writing? "White House defends decision to shoot down flying objects" showing how the pursuit of drama, hysteria and panic is selective and deliberate.

In conclusion, the chemical disaster in Ohio is a very telling example of how the media chooses to react to different incidents in different ways. If it happens in America, it's "bad" but they report on it conservatively and emphasize playing it down. But if it happens in China, it's a catastrophe, one which ought to have the worst possible consequences and political ramifications.

 

The author is a well-seasoned writer and analyst with a large portfolio related to China topics, especially in the field of politics, international relations and more. He graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University in 2018.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.

Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:

Opinion | The new UFO scare

Opinion | The geopoliticization of tragedy

Opinion | America, State of Paranoia

Opinion | New Huawei move shows Biden is ultimately worse than Trump

Comment

Related Topics

New to old 
New to old
Old to new
relativity
Search Content 
Content
Title
Keyword