Thread by @tanvi_madan

THREAD Ok, ppl, a few have asked what's wrong w/ Chinese officials publishing op-eds in Indian newspapers. Here's a thread re some concerns that I hope will provide some food for thought.

ps I'd hv the same concerns re other countries' officials if they operated the same way 1/

There are 2 issues here that are related but distinct:
1. Chinese govt advertorials in Indian (& other) newspapers
2. Chinese officials' numerous op-eds in Indian newspapers

I'll address the op-ed issue first... 2/

The caveats first:
- this isn't abt publishing a foreign official's op-ed per se -- no. of countries do this, GoI officials publish op-eds in newspapers in other countries too.
- the logic behind it is fair enough: gives a glimpse of another country's perspective/party line. 3/

But there are specific issues w/r/t Chinese officials' op-ed writing in Indian newspapers that make them (i) different (ii) cause for concern. Here are a few:
a. frequency
b. content style
c. taking them at their word
d. lack of reciprocity
e. mislabeling
More on each below. 4/

Frequency: in the last couple of months, there have been at least 6 op-eds by Chinese officials in Indian newspapers. This is unusual and almost like the Chinese missions in India have a regular column. 5/

Style/Protocol: while Chinese officials hv refrained from the vitriolic "wolf warrior" approach we've seen from PRC diplos in other countries, their op-eds don't hesitate to attack Indian partners by name or touch on issues sensitive in/to India. (+ no reciprocity here) 6/

An Open Field: Chinese officials' op-eds are one-sided. That is to be expected. But esp since they're so prolific/keen, newspapers should consider:
- publishing a different view on the same op-ed page that day
- insisting on interviews instead/also w/o pre-approved questions 7/

Lack of reciprocity: (i) style (ii) substance
i) Indian officials do not get this kind of space in Chinese media
ii) when they get space, it has limits. An Indian ambo cldn't write op-ed
- re Kashmir or Arunachal as PRC amb did abt Tibet
- attacking Pak as PRC amb attacks US. 8/

Mislabeling: there hv now been at least 2 instances of labeling op-eds by the PRC ambo as "analysis" and as representing his "personal views."

A Chinese ambo's views - unless maybe he's writing abt his love for Bahrisons - are not personal. They are definitely not analysis. 9/

Then there's the matter - not just in India but in a no. of democracies - of PRC advertorials. I know the commercial motivations for newspapers but a few probs:
- undermines work of newspapers' journos
- lack of proper labeling
- passed off by PRC as coverage rather than ads 10/

On PRC ads undermining newspapers' journos:
- tough to take WP's "democracy dies in darkness" seriously when they regularly include propaganda insert from an authoritarian state
- i kno biz/reporting sides separate but many will ask if PRC $$ shape reporting/analysis/op-eds 11/

The labeling/clarity problem w/ PRC ads: we've seen this repeatedly. Either labeling noting that the ads aren't articles is tiny (& only on 1 page) and/or it's ambiguous ("space mktg initiative). Sometimes it's non-existent. 12/

Whether newspapers like it or not, the PRC emb can & has passed off these advertorials as media publishing views (rather than "we placed an ad"). e.g. from last month re a full-page ad the Chinese emb placed and which it highlighted as "Indian media publishes special page" 13/