a*****c
发帖数: 3525 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 WaterWorld 讨论区 】
发信人: agostic (π-packing), 信区: WaterWorld
标 题: 【必看】中国日报引用维基泄密“天安门大屠杀的未知数”（带中文注解）
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jul 14 15:58:09 2011, 美东)
这篇报道和维基解密的公布内容，让我一直坚持的看法舒心了一口气。
以下来自：
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/chinese-newsp
Posted at 12:57 PM ET, 07/14/2011
Chinese newspaper cites WikiLeaks: ‘Tiananmen massacre a myth’
By Elizabeth Flock
http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/blogpost/201107/Images/tianenmansquare.JPG?uuid=5bC9rK4yEeCagMRrnLElXw
A May 1989 file photo shows students from Beijing University during a huge
demonstration at Tiananmen Square as they start an unlimited hunger strike
as the part of mass pro-democracy protest against the Chinese government. (
Catherine Henriette - AFP/Getty Images)Since the Tiananmen Square protests
of 1989 — seven weeks of student-led demonstrations for political and
economic reform — there’s been an ongoing debate about how many people
died within the square.（到底多少人死在广场，一直存在争论）
At the time of the protests, Tim Russert on television’s “Meet the Press”
estimated thousands had been killed by machine guns in Tiananmen Square. The
New York Times ran a story in which a Qinghua University student described
machine guns mowing down students in front of a monument in the square.（是
机关枪突突地扫射，还是这个清华学生满嘴放炮？） A week later, no evidence was
found to confirm either account.（一星期之后，没有发现证据可以证实哪一种说
法）
In 2010, The Post’s former Beijing bureau chief, Jay Mathews, wrote a
report for the Columbia Journalism Review, entitled “The Myth of Tiananmen
and the Price of a Passive Press.” In the report, Mathews suggested that
hundreds, not thousands of people died, and almost all of them outside the
square.（是数百人，而不是数千人死了，而且几乎所有死的人是在广场外）
Last month, the release of WikiLeaks diplomatic cables gave credence to
Mathews’s report, showing that there was no bloodshed in the actual square,
and that most of the killings took place a few miles outside it. （上个月，
公布的维基泄密外交电文支持了Mathews的报告。电文指明真正广场内没有流血，大多
数被杀的人是发生在广场外数英里的地方。）
Yesterday, English language government-run newspaper China Daily picked up
on WikiLeaks and Mathews’s report, publishing a story headlined “Tiananmen
massacre a myth.” The story reprinted in large part a story that an
Australian diplomat wrote on July 1 in the Japan Times.
Both articles state:
Tiananmen remains the classic example of the shallowness and bias in most
Western media reporting, and of governmental black information operations
seeking to control those media. China is too important to be a victim of
this nonsense.
They also state that Mathews’s report is the best “expose” of what
happened.
But Mathews says his purpose for writing the report was different. “My
point is that yes, the Chinese did a terrible thing in Tiananmen, but in
American journalism, we have to be careful about the truth. If we as
Americans want to tell the Chinese to have a free press, our own free press
must be accurate.”（我的观点，是的，中国人在xx门上做了一件可怕的事情，但在
美国新闻界，我们必须对事实真相小心。如果我们美国人要告诉中国人得有言论自由，
我们的自由言论必须准确。）
On Twitter, many who read the China Daily article were upset by it:
rt @kinablog: ...China reality distortion field in overdrive today. CD:
Tiananmen massacre a myth http://t.co/WgHqPid via @GraniteStudioless than a minute ago via Twitter for iPhone Favorite Retweet ReplyColleen Lin 林可玲
stealingsand
Erasing history - sad :( RT @mranti: RT @bucketoftongues: China Daily says
Tiananmen massacre a total myth http://bit.ly/pTyeizless than a minute ago via UberSocial for BlackBerry Favorite Retweet ReplyRobert Guerra
netfreedom
Mathews says China Daily’s story is interesting because it shows the
government allowed a report to be published that didn’t completely follow
the party line.
“The party line in China is a complex thing. People in the party don’t
want anything mentioned about Tiananmen Square, even if it supports the
party,” Mathews says.
On the same day China Daily published its story, the BBC broadcast a story
about a Chinese dissident poet who was jailed for writing about the
Tiananmen Square protests but has now fled to Germany so that he could
publish material about life in China.
By Elizabeth Flock | 12:57 PM ET, 07/14/2011 |
|
