Freedom of speech and restrictions on the foreign press have long been issues within China. The White House renewed its concern on Thursday after a New York Times reporter was forced to leave China while waiting for credentials to be approved.
The process of waiting for visa approval and press credentials to be issued can be a long one in China and often purposely delayed. The New York Times has a history of irking the Communist leaders of China.
In 2012, Chinese authorities blocked the Times’ Chinese- and English-language websites after it published an article reporting that family members of then-Premier Wen Jiabao had amassed a fortune worth billions of dollars. But other news organizations have not been immune to the government’s wrath over stories for which it doesn’t approve.
The same year as the Times incident, Chinese authorities expelled an American journalist working for Al Jazeera English and forced the news outlet to close its Beijing bureau altogether over the government’s anger at a documentary the channel aired last November on the alleged use of slave labor by prisoners in Chinese jails.
“We are very disappointed that New York Times reporter Austin Ramzy was forced to leave China today because of processing delays for his press credentials,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said in a statement on Thursday. “We remain concerned that Mr. Ramzy and several other U.S. journalists have waited months, and in some cases years, for a decision on their press credentials and visa applications.”
The statement also said the U.S. government had repeatedly spoken to Chinese officials at the highest levels of their government on issues facing foreign media in China.
“These restrictions and treatment are not consistent with freedom of the press—and stand in stark contrast with U.S. treatment of Chinese and other foreign journalists,” Carney said.
China ranks as one of the worst offenders for press freedoms in the world, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. China ranks third in the world for the most imprisoned journalists for a single country, behind Turkey and Iran, respectively. The foreign press is often restricted from traveling freely around the country or, in some cases, not allowed to travel at all to certain parts, like Tibet, which are deemed to “sensitive” for reportage.
But another comment from the White House on Thursday conflicts with its position on advocating for a free press in China.
Carney said, “Around the world, the United States strongly supports universal rights and fundamental freedoms — central among them freedom of speech and freedom of the press.”
However, the administration found itself caught up in a publicized scandal in 2013, where it were caught spying on The Associated Press.
The AP reported, “In all, the government seized the records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP and its journalists in April and May of 2012. The exact number of journalists who used the phone lines during that period is unknown, but more than 100 journalists work in the offices where phone records were targeted, on a wide array of stories about government and other matters.”
Not to mention the fact that it was publicly disclosed in 2010 that the government had spied on The Washington Post and The New York Times on matters involving a leaks investigation going back to 2004.
Some might mention Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency whistleblower currently in hiding in Russia after he fled with copious amounts of state secrets, many of which are correcting the way the U.S. handles itself both domestically and abroad. While it may not be on the same parallel as freedom of press issues, it does involve freedom of speech issues that many argue the American public deserved to know about.
While it is commendable for the American government to champion freedom of speech issues, it should look in the mirror before doing so, as it comes off as hypocritical. Many journalists working both inside and outside of the U.S. have long memories.
Why else would the White House have issued a printed statement on the China matter, rather than having Carney call a press conference where journalists could actually ask follow up questions that might wind up embarrassing the administration? The answer is obvious.