China softens its hard line against free hugs?

I was surprised to see this 3-par filler story appear from the China Daily (officially-sanctioned English language paper):

"A company in Changchun, Jilin province, encouraged 70 young people to give pedestrians of the opposite gender a big hug on the streets as a way to rid them of shyness or timidity when meeting strangers."

Back in November 2006, free hugs got people arrested - in Shanghai of all places.

Now gorgeous babes have been doing it in Beijing, there's even an organisation dedicated to promoting street hugging between foreigners and Chinese in China.

This is all pretty lame as far as subjects go. But one last thing: The China Daily article above seems to say a private company - not an international hugging organisation - hired or co-opted these 70 random "young people". Why? And why was it specifically the opposite sex the young people had to hug? See if i can't work my ol' Jilin contact list and find out...

Found: One Shanghai slum

MAY 10, 2008: For a time, i remember arrogantly thinking that where we live is as bad as Shanghai gets.

There's a bridge about 3 minutes walk away, down where the canal over our back fence runs into the Dingpu ("Sediment Beach" according to my chosen interpretation of two multi-meaningful characters) River. I walked down there today to take some photos. On the opposite side of the bridge is a green, tree-lined boulvard with spanking new 25-storey apartment towers. The smooth, new concrete surface of the boulevard continues across the bridge, and stops abruptly at my side of the bridge. On this side, it's muddy, rock-strewn and bumpy.

That's not to say this is what the roads are like on "my side" of the canal - they're mostly quite good - it's just that the good roads on this side don't link up with the good bridge. This little corner has been wholly left to fester.


In the corner bordered by the canal and the river, there's a guy arranging his scrap wood into large stacks in the corner formed by the waterways. Past him there are more piles of scrap wood leading down to some kind of factory. And some of these piles of scrap wood, i discovered as i walked through, are actually people's houses. Houses made from plywood, chipboard, cardboard and tree branches, with curtains for doors. Oily carpet lies submerged in the mud. Not a window to be seen.

Two women in jeans and t-shirts chatted outside their shanties. Loud conversation in some dialect emanated from a pile next to the canal. I asked a couple of blokes if i could get through to the other side. Beaming, and insisting my Chinese was perfect, he gave me directions.

Despite this friendliness (no different to anywhere else) i just couldn't pull out the camera. Sure the scene was poignant to me, and perhaps to others of a similar persuasion, but the people already have so little privacy without me poking around, let along taking pictures. Am i projecting my own opinion of their houses onto them? Perhaps, but i have to think they'd be all too aware of their predicament, given the high-rise towers all around which close to the whole population of the city, not just the rich people, live in. It's not so much that i think they should feel ashamed of anything - hell i think poverty's virtue in many ways i won't go into - but that in China's vicious Darwinistic society, i have every reason to think they themselves would feel ashamed.

This is compounded by the fact most Chinese people can't see why anyone would take a picture of anything "not beautiful".


I'm sure there are plenty of worthy photographers and journalists out there - far more worthy than the waste of space that's me - who would just barge right in, grill people about the abominable state of things, and snap away with the camera in the name of the greater good. But for me, to do slum photos/stories right is to know the background of the area first, not to talk to people purely because they're the only ones who have to shit outside.

In the countryside, where everyone shits outside, it was different: the photos i took out there were of normal daily life, rather than an enclave of deprivation in a city of relative wealth. Even in the most backwards of places, peasants, i don't think, would feel as put down or scrutinised when a foreigner takes photos as they travel around seeing the land.

Now sure, compared to the next-worst kind of dwelling - our kind pretty much - the slum is horrific. But in truth, with 200 million or more migrant workers it's quite a miracle there aren't more of them in China. If i can find out the reasons for this one's existence i'll go back and talk to the residents about the place. It's most likely the lack of low-cost housing...hmmm i guess that would make me responsible, according to my instinctive pissweak liberal way of seeing things. Grrrrrrrgh get some China into ya son! Obviously i haven't been in here long enough.

Prizes for patriots!

When I loaded up a computer at the internet bar a couple of days ago i was greeted with a generous offer of "heavy" prizes! (note, translation corrections are more than welcome; i'm pretty shit)

Apparently all i had to do was love China and i could get QQ money, "experience" or props for QQ's online game.

Of course i clicked the link. But to my disappointment it was a wrong address.

Determined, as a lover of China, to get my free "experience", i entered some of the text into a search engine, and it turned out more interesting than i even imagined.

On 17173.com, China's busiest gaming website, the promotion, roughly translated, is introduced thus:

"The mood in QQ Huaxia [online game] is urgent and angry - this is intolerable! It's been learned that "Concealing Dangerous Drugses" are hiding in the northern region..."

So what the hell is a Concealing Dangerous Drugs?

Well, it's ugly, has bad breath and is easy to kill. Oh and it's name, "Zang-du" (藏毒) is uncannily similar to "T!betan 1ndependence". ("Conceal" shares the same character as "T!bet", while "dangerous drug" shares the same pronunciation as "independence".)

And did i mention you get a "certificate of patriotism" for killing one?


You'd think perhaps, having gone to the trouble of renaming the monster separatists "Concealing Dangerous Drugses", QQ itself wouldn't admit the connnection with real Tibetans, but they do. This from an announcement of the upcoming promotion, titled (roughly as always) "Take your liberties with 'Zang-du' - QQ Huaxia to provide new services for angry youth to vent their rage":

"This time, QQ Huaxia stands up!

[...]

We're supporting the Olympics with our unique anti-T!betan 1ndependence online game content"

Of course, the online community doesn't exactly see a distinction either. And why should they? Chinese internet discussions about
T!betan 1ndependence have often used "藏毒" in order to avoid the censors and/or the Golden Shield, like i'm doing (probably unnecessarily) with that "T!bet" shit.

Now, lest i commit too severely the sins i have recently been preaching against, let me say that QQ Huaxia claims to have 1 million players, which isn't very many by Chinese online game standards. Still, they're obviously hoping that number will pick up.

"The most entertaining way for players to oppose T!betan 1ndependence - QQ Huaxia, with its patriotic new services, calls patriotic players around the world to spread the true red heart of patriotism, support the sacred flame and oppose T!betan 1dependence!"

It's significant to see a privately-owned company running a marketing ploy so unashamedly aimed at the fenqing (angry youth) and their nationalist sentiment. (Ironic, too in that the same market-driven principles resulted in China's recent rough ride in the American media.)

How well this works will be interesting, if not telling. But even if it's a huge hit, we can't forget our most popular games in the west are downright horrific if we take them at face value like this. The biggest difference is the marketing rhetoric from the company.

There already may be signs it's too bloodthirsty for many users online: at the bottom of the 17173.com page is a poll asking "how do you feel after reading this?", to which 25 out of 30 responses have been negative.

After all that, i'm not really any wiser on what the "experience" i could win for loving China is. But perhaps killing "Zang-du" isn't the one everyone on the Chinese internet is after.


Update 4/5: Needing QQ to play (i think it also costs money), i've been denied the opportunity of downloading the game and experiencing killing 'Zang-du' myself. If anyone out there can get on it please tell me how it goes...number 1 question, how does it feel compared to, say, igniting the 10 Hare-krishnas with the flame thrower in the original GTA, or stomping hecklers in the new GTA, or running down dogs with tanks in "Red Alert" (yes the 1996 one)?

Australia demonstrates the worth of internet comments

We keep hearing about the "wave of nationalism" gripping China, and i keep not experiencing anything like it on the ground.

As has been pointed out so often - yet often ignored - it's a predominantly online thing. The only analogue, real-world manifestations of this "wave of nationalism" are the protests outside Carrefour stores, and they've not exactly been well supported, given the country has 250 million internet users.

That is, a sizeable majority of the Chinese population have not been involved in any outpouring at all. My friends in the countryside, when asked, have expressed disappointment and anger about that wretched, criminal Dalai Lama and the biased western media. But i've read only one story of rage against an actual foreigner, and it was promptly debunked by the alleged "victim".

This Time article is probably one of the worse examples, with outrageous references to "the fever pitch of nationalism" and China being "awash in antiforeigner sentiment".

But even quality commentators have continuously been referring back to angry and misinformed online comments. I used to work on the website of a penny-dreadful rag in Australia and can categorically say that Australian online comment there, too, tends to be misinformed or uninformed, bigoted and - most importantly - downright ridiculous as an indicator of sober public opinion. That's because it's generally uninformed hotheads who feel the inclination to comment straight after they read something.

Have a look at the first few comments reacting to the (Sydney) Daily Telegraph website's inflammatory report of the olympic torch relay in Canberra:

Wow!!Whats happened to our golden brown Nation?. We've descended into a black hole of racism.....Thanks alot Canberra all recent past leaders have destroyed THE AUSSIE WAY!! Terry.
Posted by: TERRY HILL 11:52am today
Comment 1 of 143

multiculturalism... gotta love it..
Posted by: kidk of sydney 11:53am today
Comment 2 of 143

These people who think it is acceptable to come to OUR country and spit on australians should be escoreted out of the country immediatly. Go to your own country and protest, disrupting our country is not going to help your cause. And while your at it, how about show some respect for the anzacs!
Posted by: melissa of sydney 11:57am today
Comment 3 of 143

If they are on student visas and they can be identified then they should be immediately deported. No need for foreign nationals to assault Australian citizens. Then again, were the instigators Chinese "security" staff or embassy staff? As they were waving Chinese flags I doubt that they are Australian citizens.
Posted by: Gavin of Maroubra 12:01pm today
Comment 4 of 143

Chinese students came here under the FALSE pretense of running away from the Tianamen Massacre and now they are showing their true colours spitting on our people and running riot. They came here only for ECONOMIC reasons as they are clear supporters of the murderous communist party in China and should be deported!! Deport Chinese trouble makers. They are making trouble in Australia when we welcomed them to help them. They show NO RESPECT for Australia yet are either permanent residents or even Australian Citizens. KICK CHINESE OUT OF AUSTRALIA!!!!
Posted by: Joe of null 12:02pm today
Comment 5 of 143

The pro chinese supporters need to realise that this is Australia and not their own poor communist excuse for a country and that in Australia, you have the right and the privledge to have a protest without the other side belting the hell out of you. Maybe we could add that to the citizenship test.
Posted by: David Sim 12:02pm today
Comment 6 of 143

It goes on - after comment #1, the next non-hysterical voice is comment #20.

So, on the basis of this evidence, should the Chinese print and online media be fretting about how Australia is awash in antiforeigner sentiment?

Of course not. It's completely normal for hotheaded idiots to let off steam in internet forums. Many wouldn't even say these things in a real-life public forum. Why? Because people don't think before they post. It's further proof that "netizens" shouldn't be treated as citizens, and comments from online forums don't constitute public opinion.

More moderate commentators tend to decry the gap in understanding between Chinese and westerners. I agree this is a problem; informed, interested people are struggling to appreciate where each other is coming from. But the chasm between uninformed online hotheads will always be this wide. What counts is their numbers, and in China at least, their numbers aren't that big.

Later on, a few Chinese noticed and joined the above "discussion". And whatever they wrote, it speaks volumes that they at least read opposing views far, far more than we Australians do.

The report the commenters were responding to, by Ben English and Gary Linnell, was provocative and inflammatory, and dripping with racial innuendo. I can only hope it didn't get circulated around the global Chinese community too widely, and i'm sorry that i didn't notice it earlier and fire a letter at the Telegraph. (Where the hell was Media Watch?)

A few highlights:
First par: "POLICE lost control of angry mobs of Chinese nationals who ran amok threatening or assaulting non-Chinese in the latter stages of the torch relay today."

So multiple mobs of Chinese ran amok, attacking not pro-Tibetan protesters, not Tibetans, not anti-Chinese protesters, but "non-Chinese"...yet only five of them were arrested for this obviously racist violence. Ah, but was it violence or not?

"Threatening or assaulting"? It's to be assumed, from the lack of attribution, that Ben English or Gary Linnell was on the scene - but you'd think they'd be able to tell whether it was threats, assaults or both that they observed occurring.

"In one incident, an Australian couple waving a Tibetan flag were mobbed by dozens of Chinese activists on Commonwealth Avenue Bridge.

The Chinese grabbed the flag, threw it off the bridge and began punching the man and woman, aged in their 20s. No police were around."

That Australian couple, surely they'd be happy to tell exactly what happened to the reporter on the scene, give 'em a quote, advance the Tibetan cause...? Not to either of these two reporters, it seems. Could it be that Ben or Gary, or both, watched a woman getting punched by "the Chinese" and did nothing about it?

Or perhaps they actually weren't on the scene after all...being non-Chinese, why would Ben English or Gary Linnell put themselves in danger of being attacked by mobs on the basis of their race, when they could just report the claims of anonymous fellow non-Chinese instead:

"Non-Chinese people in various parts of Canberra reported threatening behaviour from the pro-China crowds, with some claiming to have been spat on."

But it would have been hard to avoid "at least 15,000" Chinese. Oh that spitting, punching, flag-waving, and above all multitudinous Yellow Peril! ACT police estimated 7,500-10,000.

"Earlier up to a dozen Chinese students were arrested after clashes between Tibetan supporters and Chinese nationals."

Ahh, alright, i'll have to let them off on this one: I suppose "up to a dozen" does include 5. But i'd like to know how the intrepid pair manage to check so many people's nationality...especially given the flags were not always conclusive:



I saw this bloke Gary Linnell's TV report (web TV) from about 11 o'clock that morning and it was centred around the words "absolute chaos". Well, let's just say he scooped the rest of the media on that one. Can't blame him for a bit of sensationalism, looking for the new angle, though - he's just trying to make his way at News Corp being paid a million bucks to resign as Channel 9's director of news last year.

Incidentally, the rest of the media, while reporting no serious incidents, weren't exactly kind in their descriptions of the pro-Chinese demonstrations, e.g.:
Sydney Morning Herald: "Olympic torch relay 'thugs' blasted"
The Australian: Chinese accused of punching protesters

And one final aside: so the Chinese government orchestrated the Chinese mobs referred to above by helping organise buses and accommodation?

Big deal, according to ACT Chief Minister Jon Stanhope. From The Age: "if a similar event involving Australians took place overseas, he had no doubt the Australian embassy there would facilitate attendance by Australians."