It all started when Jackie Chan was speaking at the Boao Forum. He was discussing censorship and restrictions in filmmaking when he stated
"I'm not sure if it's good to have freedom or not," Chan said. "I'm really confused now. If you're too free, you're like the way Hong Kong is now. It's very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic. Chan added: "I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we're not being controlled, we'll just do what we want."
Now this statement was taken by the AP reporter (William Foreman) to be an affirmation of the communist Chinese Government, or at least that's the tone of his report. And the comments of Chan quoted in that article do tend to support that view, in part. They also go on to make a strong critique of recent debacles in China, like the tainted milk event.
The whole thing left me confused. Was Chan for less democracy? Were his comments about filmmaking just misinterpeted or misquoted? Was Chan upset with the modern Chinese culture?
Of course the international response didn't bother to wonder about these things. The international media focused in on the one line they cared about "I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled."
There was outrage as some took his words as to mean that he was calling Chinese people pets, like Hong Kong pro-democracy legislator Leung Kwok-hung
"He's insulted the Chinese people. Chinese people aren't pets. Chinese society needs a democratic system to protect human rights and rule of law."
This of course ignores the harsh denouncement Chan made of the Chinese Government after the Beijing Tiananmen Square event where hundreds of pro-democracy protesters were killed in June 1989.
So it has come to the final point where Jackie Chan had his spokesman clarify things. And like I wondered at the onset, he was taken out of context as his spokesperson stated
"Some people with ulterior motives deliberately misinterpreted what he was saying."
Chan was speaking about the entertainment industry. Just that industry. Which makes sense since that was why he was speaking in the first place, to talk about entertainment. And it makes his comment clearer what he was meaning. But the AP reporter stands by his account and the nature of how he made the quote.
But while Asia is in an uproar I still have to wonder. Chan has made millions because of the freedoms he has enjoyed. Why would someone who can directly tie his success with freedom be against it, especially for his own people? That just doesn't make sense.
Though it makes a lot of sense that a reporter might misquote or misinterpet a comment in a foreign language (I presume Chinese is not Foreman's fist language) that would create lots of coverage and promote a certain political view. It's a trend that we have seen in America since roughly October of 2007 with President Obama.
Even now the media reports on President Obama are short on details, missing the vigorous questioning given to other Administrations, and in some cases blatantly propagandist. Which says nothing of the trend in the mainstream media to become more entertainment oriented as opposed to true journalism.
Did Jackie Chan intend to insult the Chinese people, and support the Communist Government of mainland China? I think not. But that won't stop him from becoming the scapegoat those opposed to those ideals can use to whip up international outrage at China. If this were to destroy the career of Chan, thouse using his words for their own ends won't care. They just want headlines that get their message across.
Maybe I am wrong. Maybe I am too much of a Jackie Chan fan. Still I think that this is too odd and suspiciously politically adventageous for certain groups. Too bad there seems to be no transcript of the full speech to make this absolutely clear for everyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment