|
|
Browse by Tags
All Tags » Foreign media on China
Sorry, but there are no more tags available to filter with.
-
 Can't touch this Journalism.sg has published the transcript of an interview with Lee Kuan Yew, the former Prime Minister and still serving 'Minister Mentor' of Singapore. Titled 'What China can learn from our handling of Western media', it is a thoughtful piece, introduced thusly:
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew says Beijing can learn from Singapore’s approach: 1. Give access to the Western reporters; 2. Don’t over-react to their negative coverage, just deal with them on their own terms, as businesses with bottom lines to protect; 3. Focus on building your reputation among the world’s decision makers, who will see things differently from the Western media. Over time, Singapore's experience shows, media coverage will get more nuanced and respectful.
Lee does also mention his tendency to sue Western media organizations for libel or apply other commercial pressures when they publish articles he does not like:
So when you write an article with a little sting at the end, which is not true. I claim the right of reply. You have written 5,000 words, I claim 500 words. They refused, and in that case, I will restrict you. I will not block you because you will say I'm afraid of what you said. But I will restrict you and allow the other people, the other subscribers to photostat, fax, and now scan. So now you allow me the right of reply, I get the right of reply, the writer who puts in all these poison barbs no longer appears so smart. You can twist my arm, I'll wring your neck. So what are the facts? So, now we have reached a certain respect for each other.
Neck wringing — that's a metaphor that will appeal to China's media regulators. But let's hope the Chinese government does not learn their sense of style from Singapore's elder statesman, who has this to say:
News gets out: “We are dull.”
Now, we are not dull, we are quite cool. We're going to have reverse bungee, all-night dining by the river and by the marina, two integrated resorts, Formula One. How do you explain that?
Reverse bungee! How cool is that.
Links and Sources
This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
Monday morning reading from the evil Western media.
From Canadian website Macleans:
Interview with Susanna Ng
An influential Chinese-Canadian blogger on Olympic protests, media bias and how Tibet has become a fantasyland for Westerners
The Chinese-Canadian community is remarkably unified in condemning the protests that have dogged the Olympic torch run and politicized the Beijing Summer Games, says Vancouver blogger Susanna Ng.
From The Guardian:
From Olympia to impasse
by Dominique Moisi
China and the west are almost matching each for sheer incompetence and hypocrisy over the Beijing Olympics
From Peking Duck:
Radio Free Asia's Tibet "coverage," and more
Alice Poon of Asia Sentinel pointed me to this most interesting post about Radio Free Asia and the neocons behind the RFA's curtain. The post is a real shocker, and causes one to wonder if the entire Tibet issue hasn't been manipulated to further the agenda of PNAC and the AEI.
From The Mercury News:
How dare the West use the Olympics to China-bash
From The New York Times:
Protests of the West Spread in China
Nationwide demonstrations against a French supermarket chain spread on Sunday as thousands of people protested what they said was France’s sympathy for pro-Tibetan agitators. The protesters have also been singling out Western news outlets, especially CNN, for what they said was biased coverage of unrest in Tibet.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/non-fiction/article3773056.ece This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
On Point, the live news talk show on NPR, broadcast its show live from Shanghai last week.
This episode is well worth a listen.
Hosted by Tom Ashbrook, it features an impassioned Yang Rui (the CCTV host), Hong Kong journalist Willy Lo-Lap Lam, and Shanghai correspondent for The Wall Street Journal James Areddy.
They talk about the anti-CNN movement, Jim Cafferty, Tibet, Chinese nationalism etc. The show includes a funny soundbite from the Dalai Lama, a scary-sounding caller from Iowa. There's also a soundbite from U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley saying that it would be a "cop-out" for countries to skip the opening ceremonies at the Beijing Olympics. This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
Spiked defines itself as "an independent online phenomenon dedicated to raising the horizons of humanity by waging a culture war of words against misanthropy, priggishness, prejudice, luddism, illiberalism and irrationalism in all their ancient and modern forms."
Dedicated to contrarian and unconventional views of subjects like immigration, smoking bans and health scares, Spiked is edited by Brendan O'Neill. The website is currently running a series of articles as a campaign called Beijing 2008: Challenging China bashing. This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
Your correspondent is getting a little tired of the toxic debate about Tibet going on in the comments section of this this website, and many other websites.
It's a little like discussing Israel and Palestine: everybody seems to have made up their mind in advance.
So I heartily recommend that all readers wishing to have arguments about Tibet head over to The New York Times, where Nicholas D. Kristof is Calling China:
I think I’m going to write my next column about China, in the wake of the Tibetan protests, and I’d love to hear from some Chinese readers...
... In any case, my sense is that many Chinese — whether in China or outside the country — are deeply indignant at U.S. media coverage of Tibet in particular and China-U.S. relations in general. I get waves of angry emails whenever I write about China and Darfur. So here’s your chance: What do we get wrong, and why? ...
... Americans are welcome to weigh in as well, but In particular I’d love to get some thoughtful Chinese voices.
Go for it boys and girls: your chance to influence New York Times coverage, and help a hack who has discovered journalism 2.0. This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
 The Session begins Danwei's Second Plenary Session took place last week at Song in The Place in Beijing.
Two Chinese journalists who blog and make podcasts sat down with senior journalists from The Guardian and Channel 4 News to discuss the state of Western media reporting on China, and the Chinese media.
We set the topic long before the riots in Tîbet started, before the rise of tension in China about Western media reporting on Tîbet and the Olympics.
This is what we had set out to discuss when we planned the event in January:
In the run up to the Olympics, Western news coverage of China has become a topic of controversy both within China and abroad. Is Western news coverage fair? How biased is Chinese news coverage? What effects are new media such as blogs having on TV news, newspapers and other traditional media?
The speakers:
Flypig is an editor at Sohu.com, but best known as half of the duo that produce Antiwave (反波), China’s most intelligent series of podcasts that focus on foreign and Chinese media.
Jaime A. FlorCruz is CNN’s Beijing Bureau Chief and correspondent. FlorCruz has studied, worked and traveled in China for thirty years and reported extensively on the country as a journalist since 1980.
Raymond Zhou is a movie critic, blogger, columnist for various newspapers and the author of essays and several books about film, media and society.
Lindsey Hilsum is International News Editor for Britain’s Channel 4 News and the current China correspondent. She famously covered the Fallujah assault in Iraq in November 2004 and has extensive experience as a print and broadcast journalist in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East.
The speakers will be introduced by Danwei’s Robert Ness and the discussion will be moderated by Jeremy Goldkorn.
 Raymond Zhou, Lindsey Hilsum, Goldkorn, Jon Watts, Flypig Jaime FlorCruz had to pull out of the event. The workload of the Tîbet story and a trip out of China had destroyed his schedule as he diplomatically explained, but the death threats CNN's Beijing staff have been receiving can't have helped.
Jonathan Watts of The Guardian kindly agreed to take Mr FlorCruz' place, which was natural since he was one of the speakers Danwei wanted at future events, and he had just returned from a reporting trip, trying to get into Tîbet.
As the moderator and one of the organizers of the event, your correspondent was rather worried the day before. Mr FlorCruz's cancellation, the poisonous atmosphere on the Chinese Internet and the English language blogs about China (including Danwei), the new tension between Chinese people and foreigners — even long time China residents who love living here; none of this boded well.
But about 150 nice people showed up to the event, and it went smoothly. The audience, like Danwei's readership, was about 30% Chinese with the rest being foreigners — Americans, Brits, Australians, Poles, Italians, Israelis etc. After a discussion amongst the four panelists, we opened to questions from the floor. I am happy to say that we had a thoroughly civilized evening: the discussion was, I believe, balanced, and the panelists and audience expressed both wariness of the Western media's tendency to stereotype China misleadingly, and the very real problems that journalists of Western media organizations are experiencing right now: in particular, that they can't get access to Tîbet to find out for themselves what is going on.
Two bloggers have written thoughtful posts related to some of the issues raised at the Session:
Cam of Zhongnanhai: The journalism divide: discussing the roles of east and west
Jeremiah Jenne of The China Beat: The Chinese Response to foreign media coverage of the 3.14 unrest (and also this related interview with James Miles of The Economist who was in Lhasa at the start of the riots:
From Zhongnanhai:
... an audience member asked a question regarding the use of the word "crackdown", and more specifically why western journalists use this word in relation to Tibet, but not in relation to the semi-recent riots in France...
... I generally feel "crackdown" doesn't necessarily come with negative connotations. For example, a Chinese "crackdown" on DVD piracy is generally believed to be a good thing (well, unless you like stocking up at the Lido). The problem, we felt, is that "crackdown" reminds people of the non-event in a big square in Beijing in 1989. To western minds, I would submit, a "crackdown in Tibet" conjures up images of peaceful monks praying for a modicum of freedom and peace while big, burly Chinese military officers come in to crack some skulls. If this is the perceived notion, then journalists should be careful when using the word "crackdown".
Jonathan Watts, the correspondent for the Guardian newspaper (who was filling in for an absent Jaime FlorCruz from CNN), said that he has struggled to use the correct terminology in his stories. Are the Tibetans rioters or protesters? Are the Chinese "cracking down" or "restoring order"? He said that he's used nearly all the terms, and makes a judgement call based on that individual situation. I believe that's as best as can be asked.
What vocabulary do we use to discuss China today? This is not only a fundamental problem for journalists, it's also a problem for the Chinese government. This is from a blog post by Lyndsey Hilsum written after the Danwei event:
It's hard to write about language when you're lost in translation, but even those of us who don't speak Chinese have noticed the extraordinary vocabulary used by the Chinese government since unrest broke out in Tibet.
The terminology has its origins in the Cultural Revolution, the era in the late 1960s and early 1970s when China tore itself apart with ideological fervour. Zhang Qingli, the Communist Party Secretary in Tibet, and widely regarded as a "hardliner" is the master of it.
"We are in the midst of a fierce struggle involving blood and fire, a life and death struggle with the Dalai clique," he said in an editorial in the Tibet Daily last week, going on to describe the Dalai Lama as "a jackal dressed a monk's robes, an evil spirit with a human face and the heart of a beast."
Below are photos, and a Youtube video of part of the panel discussion. The photos are by Marie Wennberg, the video is by Shaan Khan. We'll have more video of the event on Danwei soon.
Photos by Marie Wennberg
 Dror Poleg, and...?  Li Shan, Dan O'Brien
 Li Shan, Schokora, Ness  In vino veritas  Bill Zhang; the east is red
Video of Q&A by Shaan Khan
This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
The Beijing offices of CNN and The Times of London are at the receiving end of Chinese style Internet manhunts: angry netizens are posting hateful comments on various websites, with some going so far as to make death threats by phone.
CNN has been targeted primarily, it seems, because of the Chinese blogger postings currently collected at Anti-CNN.com and their own well-known brand name. The Times has been targeted after the newspaper published an editorial by Simon Barnes that starts thusly:
Is this the Genocide Olympics? There are already people claiming that this year’s Games, to be held in Beijing, are a rerun of the 1936 Olympics in Berlin – the Games that were a glorification of Hitler and Nazism; by extension a glorification of a genocidal regime.
The anger is misdirected. The Beijing-based journalists of CNN have no control over what the station does with their reporting, and the Beijing bureau's reporting is not what has been criticized. The Beijing correspondent of The Times has no control over what the newspaper runs in its editorial columns. The Simon Barnes piece was in fact published in The Sunday Times which has a different editorial structure from the weekday version of the paper.
While the anger on the part of young Chinese netizens is not being orchestrated by the Chinese government, the foreign ministry and XInhua are rather enjoying the whole affair. Yesterday there was a press briefing by Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang.
A Danwei source commented on Qin's response when asked why CNN was not invited on the journalist junket to Tibet.
Qin said “CNN has paid special attention to the events in Lhasa and given the events special treatment.” I could tell he was smirking when he said it, and apparently the Xinhua transcriber could too because he put 'special' in quotation marks."
The Xinhua transcript of Qin's briefing is here.
Links and Sources
This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
There is currently some discord amongst the foreign correspondents of Beijing:
The Chinese government has invited between seven and nine foreign journalists to Lhåsa to check out the situation themselves. The problem has been caused by the invitation list: AP is on, but Reuters is not. The Wall Street Journal and USA Today are also confirmed to be on the list.
Furthermore, according to Danwei sources, the invited media have not agreed to pool their reporting and video, meaning that the left out newspapers and new agencies will have to rely on their competitors for second hand information, photos and video.
But the debate may be merely academic: sitting in Beijing with a mobile phone and a modem, anyone with sufficient curiosity probably has access to better information than any of the Potemkin nonsense that the junket journalists will probably see. This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
 Cropping out the stone throwers ESWN has summed up reactions from Western media organizations to the Chinese bloggers, followed by the state-run Xinhua news agency, to the misleading us of photos and video shot in Nepal during stories about Tîbet.
He has also translated part of a post from Chinese blogger Drunkpiano:
I feel that in this matter, the following things should be condemned:
1. Some Tibetans committing looting, vandalizing, arson and assault (even deadly) on Han and *** civilians
2. The Chinese government locking down information and restricting freedom of religion, and even slaughtering innocent people (the last point remains to be confirmed)
3. The majority of western media were deliberately producing misleading reports.
I feel that some people deplored items #1 and #2 but they did not feel that they have to say anything about item #3. Meanwhile other people condemned item #2 and completely ignored item #1 and #3. To say it out aloud, this is the idea of "taking positions." Once you take a position, your actions are determined. Why do you have to "take a position"? I feel that both positions are "asinine to the extreme."
Someone said that all media will have their own predilections and therefore it is up to the readers to reach a fair and balanced conclusion by checking different media. This is not wrong, but the assumption is that the sum total of the multi-faceted facts and reports must be proportionate in order for the conclusion to be relatively fair. For example, A and B are having a fight; A punches B and B punches A back. But if the media only talk about A's punch while glossing over B's punch, then the impression would be that A is bullying B. In the reports on Tibet, I did not find the right proportions in the reporting. The Economist called the rioters rioters, and they were the only one. That is why many westerners (if not the majority) will get the impression from their media that "a group of peaceful demonstrators were mercilessly mowed down by the the Chinese government."
This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
Here are two perspectives on recent events in Tîbet:
Black days for the Dålai Låma
On the China Matters blog:
Amidst the horrific violence of the last few days, somebody’s been working overtime to marginalize the Dålai Låma and undercut him as the leader of the worldwide Tîbetan movement.
Not just the Chinese.
This long post looks at the increasing militancy of the exile movement the Tîbetan Youth Congress and its president Tséwang Rîgzin, and how this will effect the situation in the Himalayan former kingdom. There's another informative post on the same blog called Tibetan Intifada that examines why the world may come to regard "direct action in Tibet as a Buddhist intifada led by confrontational hotheads, with monasteries and nunneries filling the role of extremist madrassahs". The blog is on Blogspot, which is blocked in China.
China and India: Oh to be different
An opinion piece by The Hindu's Beijing correspondent Pallavi Aiyar contrasting China's economic achievements with her native India's political achievements.
This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
 Tiger Temple Tiger Temple is Chinese blogger who has been documenting a group of homeless people being ruthlessly displaced by urban renewal in Qianmen, just south of Tiananmen Square. That's almost within spitting distance of the annual legislative meetings of the NPC and CPPCC (' liang ***') currently driving foreign journalists, who have to listen to endless mind-numbing speeches, to tears of boredom.
On Monday Tiger Temple published a post titled "Things of Qianmen" on his blog. Below is a roughly translated excerpt:
For reasons that everybody knows [i.e. the liang *** meetings], the pitiful homeless group of Qianmen was inevitably going to meet with unexpected problems.
The unexpected came on the third day of the liang ***.
Lao Wang [one of the Qianmen homeless] phoned me and said "There's a meeting in the Great Hall of the People, they have come again to destroy our makeshift shelters. This time they totally destroyed them, there's nothing left, they cleaned everything up."
I asked: "Did they really clean up the area?" I did not really believe that those lazy government departments who love surface appearances so much would take so much trouble. If they had already destroyed the shelters, cleaning up the scene seemed like a little too much work. Sure enough, Lao Wang said "They totally destroyed our shelters, but they left the place in a total mess."
I said, "Isn't this just messing you around for no good reason!?" But there was nothing I could do.
Actually, anyone could have anticipated what would happen to the Qianmen homeless. Other netizens had expected it, so had I. Even the homeless people themselves expected it.
That is to say: the Homeless People had to be removed because the Great Hall of the People is holding the National People's Congress!
*****
There is a confused idea that is common in China, namely:
"Foreign media just like to report on China's dark side; these are our problems and the foreigners should not concern themselves with such things."
There is nothing I can do about this, but it's not only foreigners who like to report such matters. There are certainly even more Chinese journalists who like to report such things. Massaging wounds is good for the health.
But do Chinese reporters dare to write about such things? If they do write, do their publications dare to publish? The publishers have the sword of Damocles hanging above their heads: there are people specially designated to watch over them, watch what they should or should not say...
As for the foreigners reporting on China's dark side, it gives us Chinese people a feeling of shame. It's not easy to accept. Well, let's take an example from a Jia Pingwa novel [see link below]. See if it reminds you of yourself: when a man sees his cat or his wife's belly grow bigger every day when he did not do it, the man feels ashamed, as though he himself had been raped.
But if his wife, or his cat, wasn't horny, how could she get pregnant?
If China did not have those human rights issues, what the *** would you be scared of?
Links and Sources
This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
CCTV is making up news stories again with a report titled Olympic press freedom hailed by foreign media:
It's been a year since the government issued regulations giving foreign journalists more freedom to cover stories in the country.
China will provide better assistance, a better environment, and better access for foreign reporters to work in the country. Senior officials reiterated this commitment at an annual reception for journalists from around the world.
Liu Jianchao, Foreign Ministry Spokesman said "Throughout the year, we've found the journalists have enjoyed better access to information. We expect more journalists to come to China provide better assistance for them."
It's a shame the only evidence of foreign media hailing the new press freedoms that CCTV could find was one Ukrainian journalist who said "This regulation is needy and timely, we felt it much easy to work, more access to officials to report. I hope this will not be an end."
At least they left that last sentence in.
CCTV apparently did not feel the need to get any opinions from the Foreign Correspondent's Club of Beijing, an organization not recognized by the Chinese government but which actually does represent the interests of foreign journalists in China. The FCC had this to say in a report issued in August 2007:
Although many correspondents say reporting conditions are improving, "China has yet to meet its Olympic pledge to give international media complete freedom to report, a majority of survey respondents believe. Harassment of foreign correspondents, their staff and sources remains common."
For more on this issue, you may wish to download a report about press freedom and 2008 from the Committee to Protect Journalists: Falling Short. This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
While the Danwei Propaganda Department has not yet decided the verdict of the case Net Nanny vs. Great Firewall, another news vocabulary question has become urgent:
What is the best translation of cheng guan (城管)?
These are the thuggish city management officials who are supposed to keep order on the streets but who often end up abusing citizens, as the recent murder of Wei Wenhua, a man who tried to photograph cheng guan officers beating people up near Tianmen in Hubei Province.
Different English language media reports have used 'urban and 'city inspectors', 'city management forces', 'para-police', 'urban enforcers', 'city administrators', 'municipal officers', 'municipal government security force' and several other translations.
What, Danwei readers, is the best way to render 城管? This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
The current issue of Access Asia's weekly email contains their yearly awards for journalists and media companies that cover China, republished here with their permission.
The Access Asia Prime and Sub-Prime Media Awards 2007
The media’s China obsession continued to become more obsessive this year, and so we give you our annual round up of the best and the worst coverage of China. PS: the choices below are our personal ones. However, judging by your e-mails, this year the easy winner in the sub-prime category for repeated silly reporting on China would be BBC World’s Rico Hizon, so we’ll dedicate a whole issue to the wee fella’s incessant hyping of China sometime soon. Also, we know that many of you also e-mail us regularly about your dislike of CNN in-house buffoon Richard ‘call me Questy’ Quest, but we’re not including him as he’s not really China-focused, is a bit obvious and puts us off our dinner.
Prime – Give Them an Award – BBC correspondents Andrew Harding and Jonathan Head should be given an award, or better yet a pay rise (unlikely at the BBC given the stupidity of senior management at the moment) for their reporting in and around Burma this year. By far the best of the tele bunch, despite the BBC’s head honchos trying their best to gut the news division.
Sub-Prime – Time to Think a Bit Harder – Boos for Time, who this year ran a number of distinctly dodgy articles on North Korea that really didn’t stand up – notably one on supposedly brave and daring foreign entrepreneurs, most of whom had not actually made any investments in the hermit kingdom, and a couple who hadn’t even actually been there! Prime – the BEEB again – The excellent documentary series, from the BBC’s Carrie Gracie, on White Horse Village, that was being flattened by communist fiat to make a city to the resident’s general screwing over. A swimming pool, concert hall and tennis courts were supposed to appear but obviously didn’t. A fascinating insight and superb footage. Once again, this proves what a bunch of w*****s those seeking to slash the news budget at the BBC are. PS: while slashing spending on news, don’t forget the BBC felt able to pay £75m for the Lonely Planet guidebooks business.
Sub-prime – This was the year that it became necessary to declare the South China Morning Post's business section officially and irretrievably DEAD. Spectacularly, the paper’s biz section has managed to out-Xinhua Xinhua, and now runs on a par with the Shanghai Daily, but with the added silliness of Tom Holland’s column, that remains consistently a good six months behind the curve, while the slightly embarrassing Lai See business gossip column has failed to have one funny piece all year. We can only hope for a resurrection, but we’re not holding our breath.
Prime – Worth a Read – We’re going to give a cheer to Lindsey Hilsum, who’s semi-regular columns on China for Britain’s New Statesman we’ve found interesting and slightly off beat, compared to most of the fodder served up as commentary by the media on China from armchair analysts in Islington. However, null points to the New Statesman for running an article about how architects are becoming environmentally friendly, which was full of lavish and unchallenged praise for dodgy-Dongtan (click here). The author? Chris Luebkeman, a director and leader of Arup's global Foresight and Innovation initiative. Another victory for the Arup press machine.
Sub-Prime – BEEB Fails to Score Thanks to Keane – To prove we are fair, this time the BBC went deeply sub-prime covering the tenth anniversary of the Hong Kong handover. Too many cooks spoiled the broth, which included the pompous whingings of Hong Kong bore David Tang, and the tired old excuses of British gold medalist bore Chris Patten. However, by far the worst was the BBC’s biggest nightmare – Fergal (the most over-emoting, ‘it’s all about me’, ‘I bare the world’s problems on my shoulders’) Keane, and true to form, it was all about him and therefore very boring and analysis-light. If there must be cuts at the BBC, then let Keane be the first and the deepest. Despite the terribleness of Keane, the BBC made a late and brilliant recovery when Quentin Somerville found a university student who decided to cash in on soaring pork prices and return to being a pig farmer – inspired!
Prime – The Financial Times had more China coverage than ever, featuring fairly lavish supplements including their heavyweights such as Martin Wolf and Quentin Peel, and also giving their Beijing correspondent Richard McGregor his own occasional column, complete with stern mug shot that makes him look like a tough headmaster at a Scottish public school. Shame they got the Chongqing stampedes so wrong, and continue to back dodgy luxury booster conferences, but you can’t have everything. After a couple years of falling sales, the FT’s circulation shot up nearly 10% this year thanks to the sub-prime crisis – we suppose someone always gets the silver lining while someone else gets the s**tty end of the stick.
Sub-Prime – The King of the Idiots? – Wunderkind of the London chattering classes Will Hutton of course, who’s awful book on China thankfully sunk faster than the Titanic after its brief moment in the sun – available for a pound or two in numerous remainder shops across the UK now, but still overpriced. Hutton confirmed his position as a China-numpty and king of the dumb punditocracy in the Observer, when he wittered on about the NPC being the most important political event of the season ever, anywhere, for a couple of thousand words. Hutton, as per usual, displaying his quite amazing lack of grasp on China.
Prime – Surprisingly Al Jazeera English had some good China coverage this year, including, notably, a great series of documentaries: Moving China – on the plight of migrant workers. Click here to see. Also, house points to Al Jazeera English for being one of the few media organisations to question the Arup dodgy Dongtan project. This article is from Danwei.org
|
-
In 1995, when your correspondent arrived in China, the Western press was publishing stories about about the "sexual revolution" in China symbolized by the opening of sex shops that sold vibrators and aphrodisiacs. Since then, the foreign press has never tired of noting that Chinese people do, golly gosh, enjoy sex.
Japan's Mainichi Daily News has just published another such story. Although the article contains nothing new and is not worth reading, the headline is inspired: The 'Sleeping Dragon' next door wakes up with a woody. This article is from Danwei.org
|
|
|
|