China's multi-billion dollar media campaign 'a major threat for democracies' around the world

• China's former president Hu Jintao committed $9.3b on a media expansion project in 2009
• Beijing is also buying up broadcast space on foreign airwaves and inside newspapers
• Media freedom in China is among the worst in the world — ranking 176 out of 180 countries

By Sean Mantesso and Christina Zhou

In September 2018, billboards adorned with kangaroos and pandas began popping up around Australia's capital cities as part of a $500 million advertising campaign urging viewers to "see the difference" on China's Central Global Television Network (CGTN) — available on Foxtel and Fetch TV.
But "seeing the difference" comes with an important caveat.
China's media is being wielded as a tool to shape public opinion and serve the ideological aims of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) across the globe.
And, as a part of its efforts, Beijing is training up foreign journalists, buying up space in overseas media, and expanding its state-owned networks on an unprecedented scale.
When the international arm of China Central Television (CCTV) news rebranded and became CGTN in 2016, Chinese dictator Xi Jinping urged the media organisation in a congratulatory letter to "tell China stories well" and spread China's voice.
The message was seen as part of Beijing's ambition to build a new global narrative around China while also challenging liberal democracy as the ideal developmental and political framework.
But as China continues to extend its reach across the world, some Western countries are pushing back.
In the same month CGTN billboards sprung up across Australia, the United States ordered the network and China's state-run media agency Xinhua to register as foreign agents over fears they could be used as tools for political interference.
And observers say that China is quickly understanding the importance of information warfare, and the power of media to shape public opinion not just at home, but around the world.

China splashes billions on global influence campaign

Chinese dictatorXi Jinping urges CGTN to "tell China's stories well". 

Under Xi's leadership, China's role on the world stage has transformed.
Graeme Smith, a research fellow at the Australian National University's College of Asia and the Pacific, told the ABC that while China was "sort of very happy to hang back" in the past it was now actively seeking to exert its influence.
"In the expression of [China's former paramount leader] Deng Xiaoping, to 'hide your strength and bide your time' — the hide and bide maxim has now very much gone by the wayside," said Dr Smith, who is also the host of the China-themed Little Red Podcast.
The CCP's aspiration has grown beyond just controlling news domestically — where many Western media outlets, including the ABC, are now blocked in one of the most restrictive media environments in the world — it now wants to create a "new world media order" beyond its borders.

New Xinhua propaganda vehicle, China Messenger, in @Telegraph: “China’s reform... breaks the “end of history” and”Western-centered” mentality. 

In a Wall Street Journal opinion editorial published in 2011, Li Congjun, former president of Xinhua, called for the "resetting of rules and order" in the international media industry where information flowed "from West to East, North to South, and from developed to developing countries".
Meanwhile, a five month investigation published in The Guardian in December revealed the "astonishing scope and ambition" of China's world-wide propaganda campaign over the past decade.
This included a commitment by Xi's predecessor, Hu Jintao, in 2009 to spend 45 billion yuan ($9.3 billion) on a media expansion campaign to develop CCTV, Xinhua and the People's Daily newspaper.
According to a report released by the Pentagon this month, Xinhua launched 40 new foreign bureaus between 2009 and 2011 alone. 

That number jumped to 162 in 2017 and it aims to have 200 by 2020.
CGTN has just opened a bureau in London in addition to ones already established in Nairobi and Washington, broadening the presence of its already-large number of correspondents around the world, including in Australia.
It claims to be broadcasting to 1.2 billion people in English, Russian, Arabic, French and Chinese — including 30 million households in the US — which would make it the world's largest television network.

'Tell China's story well'
CGTN claims to be broadcasting to 1.2 billion people in English, Russian, Arabic, French and Chinese. 

The emergence and relative success of non-Western, state-sponsored global media players like Russia Today and Al Jazeera have provided China with potential business models to replicate.
"In a sense what they want CGTN to be is what the BBC is to the British people, so an agent of soft power and, as Xi Jinping puts it, [to] tell China's stories well," Dr Smith said.
"There seems to be a lot more ambition about what CGTN is expected to do in the world."

Billboards adorned with kangaroos and pandas are popping up in Australia's capital cities. 

Buzzfeed reported in June last year that CGTN was on a recruitment drive to hire more than 350 journalists for its London bureau.
In a climate of job cuts and dwindling revenues for Western news outlets — there was little surprise there were reportedly 6,000 applicants for the first 90 job openings to "report the news from a Chinese perspective".
But prospective CGTN journalists be warned — "telling China's story well", as Xi implores, means in no uncertain terms joining the ever-growing propaganda apparatus of the CCP.
Haiqing Yu, an associate professor in the school of media and communication at RMIT University, said China had the "most extensive network of media organisations" in the world, and employed thousands of non-Chinese mainly native English speaking journalists, editors, managers and PR personnel.
Dr Yu said those people were known in Chinese as "wu mao" — or 50 cent — a colloquial term for internet commentators hired by Chinese authorities to manipulate public opinion.
"Even though they would not agree to the term, I would say many of them are willing collaborators, or [work for] practical reasons, because the pay is really good," she explained.
A central tenet of China's media expansion has been to repudiate Western values of journalism and supplant them with party-friendly principles.
A leaked 2013 government edict — known as "Document 9" — openly attacked Western media saying "the West's idea of journalism undermines our country's principle that the media should be infused with the spirit of the party".
Media freedom in China is among the worst in the world — Reporters Without Borders' (RSF) World Press Freedom index ranks China 176 out of 180 countries.
"In China … it's impossible for professional journalists to publish anything that would not be in line with the party's views," Cedric Alviani, director of Reporters Without Borders' East Asia bureau, told the ABC.
"It's harder and harder even for civil bloggers or netizens to be able to post views that aren't in line with the party's."
Many Western media outlets are blocked in China due to the Great Firewall.

Meanwhile, Beijing has also actively cracked down on international news websites including the ABC's while claiming that the internet is "fully open".
Mr Alviani said the major problem now is that not only might Chinese citizens lose their hope to have press freedom but China's move to influence the media world beyond its borders was also posing a major threat for democracies.
"If the Chinese new world media order happens someday … it will be a world in which basically journalists are the mouthpiece of the states all around the world," he said.

'Brainwashed' by 'Western values of journalism'
Media freedom in China is among the worst in the world

According to RSF, China also has one of the world's highest incarceration rates for journalists — and its leaders make it no secret the media is an arm of the state.
In 2016, Xi told journalists that "all the work by the party's media must reflect the party's will, safeguard the party's authority, and safeguard the party's unity".
"They must love the party, protect the party, and closely align themselves with the party leadership in thought, politics and action," he said.
China has one of the most restrictive media environments in the world. 

In a slick 2017 video produced as part of a documentary series showcasing some of China's best journalists, CGTN host Pan Deng said many outside China are "brainwashed" by "Western values of journalism".
Meanwhile another CGTN presenter slammed Western media on air for its partiality in painting the CCP "in a one-dimensional, superficial way".
"That has been the fallacy of the Western media when it comes to reporting on China, not lying, but never telling the whole truth," she said.
With little room to stray from the party line, examples have emerged where staff felt they acted more as agents of the state than journalists.
According to a report in Canada's Ottawa Magazine, Xinhua reporter Mark Bourrie was assigned to cover a visit by the Dalai Lama to Ottawa in 2012 and was asked to find out what was said in a private meeting between then prime minister Stephen Harper and the Tibetan spiritual leader.
The Australian Financial Review started publishing content from China's Caixin Global last year. 

Mr Bourrie reportedly confronted the bureau chief Dacheng Zhang when he discovered his report was not to be published.
Zhang told Mr Bourrie the information gathered was to be sent directly to Beijing for intelligence purposes — leading Mr Bourrie to resign on the spot.
The bureau chief later denied the allegations, saying Xinhua's policy was to "cover public events by public means" and that it was up to the agency's editing rooms to decide how and what to publish.
While Dr Smith, the host of the Little Red Podcast, said he didn't think it was the primary role of journalists to act as agents, he believed they could end up collecting material for the Chinese state that was never intended to be broadcast.
As China's media continues to expand internationally, questions are also being raised over the CCP's influence over both private and state-owned companies abroad.

'Borrowing the boat to get to the sea'
Chinese language radio airwaves in Australia have been bought by China Radio International or CRI affiliated companies. 

The expansion of Xinhua and CGTN is happening alongside a more opaque campaign of buying up broadcast space on foreign airwaves and inside newspapers.
The Chinese saying "borrowing the boat to get to the sea" has been used to describe the covert way in which Beijing has been able to infiltrate local media across the world by using overseas airwaves to disseminate its message.
A 2015 Reuters investigation revealed there were at least 33 radio stations across 14 countries "that are part of a global radio web structured in a way that obscures its majority shareholder: state-run China Radio International (CRI)".
US officials charged with monitoring foreign media ownership and propaganda admitted they were unaware of the Chinese-controlled radio operations until contacted by Reuters.
And when the ABC pulled out from broadcasting via shortwave in the Pacific region in 2017, CRI wasted little time taking over those very same frequencies to broadcast its own news.
The decision was met by an outcry from affected listeners, but the ABC insisted at the time the shortwave technology was out of date and it would save $1.9 million by cutting the service, which it said would be reinvested in expanding content and services.

According to Dr Smith, Chinese language radio in Australia is being bought up by CRI or CRI-affiliated companies across major Australian cities.
"They have effectively monopolised the Chinese language airwaves," he said.
"If you're looking for an alternate voice you either have to go on the internet … there aren't many alternatives if you're just turning on the radio."

Caixin signed an agreement to share content with the Australian Financial Review.

A 2016 report in the Sydney Morning Herald quoted Australian Chinese media sources saying that the majority of the Chinese language media in the country was owned or controlled by the Chinese state or its affiliates.
"At least in that space they've gotten quite good at ensuring that their stories are the ones that are told and not the others," said former CIA analyst Peter Mattis, who is now a fellow in the China programme at the think tank Jamestown Foundation.
"We can see that not only in Chinese language media, but also in content sharing agreements reached within Australia and plenty of other newspapers in Africa or Latin America, to ensure that their positions and their China coverage are the stories that get out."
These "content sharing agreements" are commercial arrangements that allow China to publish its own coverage in newspapers around the world in the form of handouts or inserts.

China's 'soft power could drive the wheel of its friendship'
China Watch was a monthly supplement published by China Daily that used to be distributed in papers including the Sydney Morning Herald. 

Newspapers adorned with full-page spreads and glowing assessments of Xi Jinping can now be found from Europe, to Africa, to Latin America.
Fairfax media — now taken over by Nine News — raised eyebrows when it included the China Watch lift-out in its newspapers on a monthly basis as part of a paid deal with the state-run China Daily, although it is understood to have been removed since November 2018 along with other supplements that have since ceased.

Full page advertisement in Sunday Lankadeepa Sinhala Newspaper promoting Chinese dictator Xi Jinping

China Daily's deputy editor-in-chief Kang Bing said at the time that Fairfax Media's presence in both Australia and New Zealand "means the influence of China Daily will be spread to cover the two most important countries in Oceania".
He added that China's "soft power could drive the wheel of its friendship with Australia and New Zealand", according to quotes carried by the Chinese newspaper.
But the surreptitious nature in which these inserts are included means many readers are unlikely to be aware that they're consuming content sponsored by the Chinese Government.
"Yes they look different, yes it's a little bit culture, but it still looks like it's part of a newspaper, maybe it's a special magazine part of it," Mr Mattis said.
"And you see the articles up on the website in these organisations, it's not always clear that they are completely distinct from them.
"The casual reader could quite easily miss it, especially if they weren't primed to look for it in the first place."
Questions have also been raised about the Australian Financial Review's decision to sign a content-sharing agreement with Beijing-based Caixin Global last November.

Who's winning the information war?
China Radio International is the little-seen power behind a global web of radio stations. 

Beijing announced last year that it would amalgamate its state radio and television arms — CGTN and China Radio International — to eventually form the world's largest propaganda network, the Voice of China.
Its name would indicate that it hopes to rival America's state-sponsored media arm, Voice of America.
However some experts say China's foreign media push, while astonishing in scale, is more a lame-duck in execution.

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen: "A hell of an ad. I know inserts from China Daily are also used in prints, but I am seeing these more and more on online news sites".

Unlike Russia Today and Al Jazeera, China's foray into global media has been unable to draw much journalistic clout, and how many people are tuning in is unclear.
CGTN's 73 million Facebook followers may appear robust (more than Al Jazeera and the BBC combined), but two-thirds of the network's traffic is thought to come from China.
CGTN America's YouTube videos often attract fewer than 1,000 viewers — those on the BBC regularly attract more than 50,000.
Sarah Cook, a China expert from US think tank Freedom House, claims more people in America's major cities watch content produced by NTDTV — a network created by the Falun Gong, a spiritual movement that is banned in China — than that of CGTN.
Observers point out the network's failure in numbers could in part be due to the often dreary and predictable programming, as well as the ongoing blocking of major video platforms like YouTube within China's borders.
"It's caught between these two goals, it wants to be the BBC, but at the same time it wants to please the party bosses — and what pleases the party bosses isn't the kind of thing that's going to get you tuning in to be entertained," Dr Smith said.
Dr Yu, citing Yuezhi Zhao from Simon Fraser University in Canada, said China's soft power push for national branding or reshaping its national image, was "mission impossible".
"It's wasting money, it's against the common interests of most people and it's not sustainable," she said.
"She mentioned the importance of … [how it] is not about how you want to influence people, it's about having the confidence in your own values.
"[It's about] what kind of values system do we have as Chinese that's convincing, that's shareable with the rest of the world. That should be the [basis] of China's soft power."

Not the kind of thing that'll make you want to watch TV
When Beijing's domestic CCTV outlet rebranded as CGTN back in 2016, little changed in the way of programming.
"Literally the very first few minutes of CGTN's life was a series of dot points of Xi Jinping with these kind of Sphinx-like [cryptic] quotes, 'China must understand the world' and 'the world must understand China'," Dr Smith said.
"It was really, not the kind of thing that would make you want to tune into a TV station".

Other sections have proved controversial.
A video produced by Xinhua's official YouTube channel New China TV at the height of China's border stand off with India in 2017 highlighted the sometimes clumsy and unsophisticated nature of China's media apparatus.
Titled the Seven Sins of India, it used racist language and depictions, many thought it revealed a level of ignorance to social conventions acceptable on the world stage.
CGTN was also criticised for a racist rant against foreigners and Jews in 2012 on Weibo by the host of its leading talk show Dialogue — Yang Rui is still presenting the show.
Xinhua and CGTN — unlike Russia Today or Al Jazeera — have not yet created a palatable international brand.
"They've got a challenge that they haven't really dealt with previously," Mr Mattis said.
"How do you build an audience? How do you make something interesting, useful, informative while at the same time undermining Western narratives? It's not an easy thing."

'A much more effective strategy' in Africa
Audiences in the West may prove a challenge to win over — but there is concern that Africa is more vulnerable to China's creeping media buy-ups.
"It's very different in Africa I think and it has been a deliberate strategy on the part of the Chinese state," Dr Smith said.
A 2018 report by the Pew Research Centre indicated an overall decrease in China's global favourability rating — but African nations were among the most likely to express favourable attitudes towards Beijing.
With a less robust media environment and countless cash-strapped local networks, China has been more active in infiltrating and controlling African media.
"If you look at the kind of offerings [that] are available in CGTN for Africa, you have these very sophisticated programs that look just like the BBC — and yet they're reporting about Africa with African hosts," Dr Smith said.
"So I think in Africa it is a much more effective strategy."
China has also been active in influencing the reporting of local media. 

In just one example, Beijing offered financial and logistical assistance to extend the FM range of Zambia's public broadcaster.
Ostensibly, this was done to improve a public service, but independent analysis from the Centre for International Media Assistance later found bias for the ruling party in its content.

Soft power or soft invasion?
Beijing is yet to shake off global perceptions that it's an authoritarian state. 

The scale and, at times covert, nature of China's push has rattled security pundits across the Western world — but questions remain over how effective Beijing's media projections are.
It has developed a more robust and sophisticated media strategy but its broadcasters appear hamstrung by the requirements of toeing the party line which hinder its ability to produce widely appealing content.
But Peter Mattis warns this is not fundamentally a soft power campaign.
"I think a really key thing to remember about this is that it's often referred to as a soft power push — and this isn't soft power," he said.
"Soft power as it was defined is innately passive, it's about the attractiveness of one's culture, values and political systems, and the behaviours that result from those things.What China's doing is not soft, it's actually active and it's invasive."
That may be the real kicker.
Beijing is yet to shake off global perceptions that it's an authoritarian state, without a message of hope or change, to sell to the world.
Instead its tactics are increasingly bullish in attempting to control the medium — not just the message.
"I think over the last ten years … the push has been less about messaging and more about the medium," Mr Mattis said.
"This way they can crowd out other stories, they can have essentially a monopoly on the information environment — that makes it easier for their narratives to be received and accepted."
The ABC sought comment from CGTN and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs but received no reply at the time of publication.

China’s $6 Billion Propaganda Blitz Is a Snooze

Beijing’s propaganda works at home, but it can't compete globally.
BY HILTON YIP

A man walks past a roadside poster of Chinese dictator Xi Jinping in Beijing, on Oct. 24, 2017. 

In a world on the brink of chaos, China has decided that what people everywhere need is more good news — as long as it’s about China. 

China is creating a giant media outlet called Voice of China, combining the three state television and radio broadcasters aimed at overseas audiences: China Global Television Network, China Radio International, and China National Radio. 

The hope is that by combining resources and output, China will have a broader platform to spread its message overseas.
But will Voice of China succeed in boosting China’s international image, especially given the dubious performance of previous global state media pushes?
Chinese dictator Xi Jinping has made no secret that he has very high hopes for China as a new superpower on the world stage, having broken away from his predecessors’ low-key approach. 

Like Xi’s “Chinese Dream,” “Voice of China” is a calque, directly copied from a U.S. model — in this case, “Voice of America.” 

But despite the country’s economic, industrial, and technological might, China has a serious problem with its international image. 

The Chinese Dream doesn’t sell abroad, at least in the developed world — and the censorship and restraints that have always held back Chinese media abroad have been redoubled in the age of Xi.
That’s why the Chinese leadership has put significant effort into improving China’s soft power globally, with state media playing a key part.
Voice of China is the latest move in a global $6.6 billion media expansion campaign involving TV, radio, and newspapers that started in 2009 during the presidency of Hu Jintao, Xi’s predecessor
The merger of the three state media broadcasters was also part of a significant government overhaul in March to streamline departments and centralize control, re-emphasizing the Chinese Communist Party’s ultimate authority. 

Voice of China will also be directly overseen by the State Council and managed by the Communist Party’s Central Publicity Department. 

It’s a long-running idea; there are reports in Chinese media from 2001 about a proposed merger of these three organizations, though nothing apparently came of it until now.
Besides the groups set to merge as Voice of China, the country’s giant state media machine includes newspapers such as the English-language China Daily, the party’s flagship newspaper the People’s Daily, and the Global Times, owned by the People’s Daily, which is a nationalist tabloid with both English and Chinese-language editions. 

(I was an editor for the Global Times in Beijing between 2013 and 2015.) 

All these outlets have expanded significantly since the global media campaign launched in 2009. Large numbers of foreign professionals, such as myself, were hired at media outlets in Beijing, while China Central Television (CCTV) launched bureaus in Kenya and the United States. 

The English-language edition of the Global Times was launched in 2009.
In theory, the global push has been successful. 

CCTV is broadcast in 140 countries in multiple languages, while China Radio International broadcasts in 65 languages. 

CCTV even rebranded its foreign-language news channels as China Global Television Network (CGTN) at the end of 2016. 

The rebranding also included the launch of a CGTN app and increased social media presence on platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, all banned in China. 

China Daily puts out international editions in Hong Kong, the United States, and Europe.
In contrast to the staid People’s Daily and China Daily, the Global Times’ English edition has attracted lots of attention — but not necessarily for the right reasons. 

Its aggressive editorials pull no punches excoriating any country or foreign politician whom China has an issue with, such as calling U.S. President Donald Trump “as ignorant as a child” or branding the United Kingdom as fit only for travel and education. 

In March, one feisty editorial urged China to prepare for a “direct military clash” in the Taiwan Strait.
However, despite almost a decade of overseas expansion, China state media are still widely — and largely correctly — seen as being editorially biased and full of propaganda, and they still struggle to attract large audiences.
That’s not going to change. 

In fact, it looks likely to get worse.
Voice of China was formed with the goal of “propagating the party’s theories, directions, principles and policies” as well as “telling good China stories,” according to a Chinese Communist Party document released by Xinhua, the nation’s official news agency, on March 21.
Herein lies the problem. 

The redoubling of efforts to push the party’s theories and principles abroad is at odds with boosting China’s overseas image. 

In this age of widespread internet use and the popularity of social media and nontraditional forms of media, people have become more averse to clumsy state-run propaganda than ever.
“The creation of Voice of China is about centralizing control and consolidating resources, [in the belief] that this will allow China to project its voice more effectively. But the challenge for China’s leadership will be how to project voices that somehow resonate with people around the world while maintaining a unity of voice,” says David Bandurski, co-director of the Hong Kong-based China Media Project and a fellow of the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin. 

“This is an internal contradiction China has struggled with for years in its external propaganda. And it’s possible that this consolidation could only worsen the problem.”

It’s also basically impossible to use media to promote China overseas while domestic journalism languishes. 

Not only is media in all forms heavily censored in China, but journalists also have been the target of a crackdown in recent years. 

As a result, there is growing disillusionment in the profession as journalists are allowed to do little more than parrot the official line.
A reporter’s eye roll on live TV during the National People’s Congress in March was a perfect example. 

By rolling her eyes at another reporter asking a long-winded question during a press conference, a Chinese journalist seemed to speak for many in the country who are tired of the charade that local media has become. 

The reality in China is that any journalist who dares ask a government official critical questions would almost definitely face serious punishment. 

The eye roll media storm was followed by censorship, a predictable response from the authorities, and then an official ban on video parodies.
Investigative journalism has been severely curtailed, while reporting has become increasingly censored. 

Beijing’s expulsion of at least tens of thousands of migrant workers last November and December, for instance, saw limited and heavily restricted domestic news coverage.
State media outlets, even the firebrand Global Times, are the ones most subject to these restrictions. At times, Global Times journalists were once able to put out relatively daring pieces on issues like local corruption, rural poverty, and gay and lesbian discrimination. 

But these are increasingly rare — and are drowned out by bombastic nationalistic editorials and news stories on problems in foreign countries or toned-down domestic news reports. 

Sensitive topics like Taiwan, Tibet, or Xinjiang are delicately reported on, and the official party line is adhered to. 

From personal experience, even innocuous quotes such as those from a foreign executive about pollution in Beijing are removed completely.
Voice of China might take its name from Voice of America, but the two will likely be worlds apart. 

A quick look at Voice of America’s website shows stories covering news such as the gun reform rally on March 24 in which tens of thousands of Americans marched on their capital. 

That story would be impossible to run in China. 

For instance, the CGTN website features news sections such as “China Cares,” “China Breakthroughs” and “Tradition of China.”
CGTN pales even when compared to Russian state media, themselves no slouches in the propaganda game. 

Despite the strong anti-Western sentiment of RT’s reporting and programs, they at least feature some newsworthy content. 

This is something CGTN can hardly do, with stodgy news reporting and bland programs dominating its lineup. 

Russian state English-language TV network RT, formerly Russia Today, has gained attention for its strident anti-West reporting and interviews. 

It often features controversial figures such as Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Nigel Farage, a former leader of the British far-right UK Independence Party, and Edward Snowden, whereas even informed viewers struggle to recognize CGTN’s guests.
RT doesn’t mind whether it goes to the far-left or the far-right. 

But Chinese state media, reporting, and punditry can only act from a very narrow, officially approved scope, and the risk of the political extremes is too much. 

Instead of fascists and radicals, then, Chinese media is left with elderly politicians and business executives. 

Producers and reporters can be punished or fired for reporting on topics or expressing views that go beyond the official stance. 

Even in the relatively liberal era of the 2000s, it was common for reporters to be fined significant sums of money or even lose their jobs for making “political errors.” 

So while CGTN’s studios might seem slick and their overseas bureaus as numerous as those of their Western counterparts, the actual content is a mix of brutally tedious propaganda and bland documentaries. 

The audience is always the bosses in Beijing, not the average viewer overseas.

Yet there is one area of international media where China might actually dominate — overseas Chinese-language media. 

But rather than using state media to make inroads, China has simply bought up existing media outlets or obtained the loyalties of their owners. 

Around the world, from Australia to Hong Kong to Europe, many Chinese-language media outlets are owned by individuals or companies with strong links to the Chinese Communist Party. 

Overseas Chinese communities are increasingly exposed to media coverage that is heavily pro-China and toes the party line in refraining from reporting on sensitive news events in China.
Among Chinese communities with little exposure to wider media, the CCP’s efforts might be paying off. 

But when it comes to reaching a global audience, no amount of repackaging and rebranding can succeed if the product itself is unchanged. 

As long as China’s leadership cannot differentiate between propaganda and journalism, the Voice of China will stay unheard.

Chinese Peril: China holds sway over New Zealand's media

New Zealand's Chinese media has gone from being independent to being merged with the servile domestic media in China
By Colin Peacock

Law changes to limit Chinese influence on business and politics in Australia prompted calls for similar moves here this week. 

One of those sounding the alarm tells Mediawatch our government now needs to look at links between China and our media. 

What’s the problem? ​
Australia’s government this week unveiled sweeping reforms to national security laws designed to stamp out foreign influence over local politics. 

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull insisted the moves were not made with any one country in mind, but the media there weren’t shy about pointing the finger at China.
China wasn’t happy. 

Diplomatic protests followed and the Canberra bureau chief of China's state-run news agency Xinhua accused Australian media of "bombing the public with fabricated news about the so-called Chinese influence and infiltration in Australia."
It wasn’t the first time anxiety over this had been in the headlines there this year.
Back in June, the ABC’s investigative TV show Four Corners teamed up with Fairfax Media for a major media investigation which also highlighted the media. 

Four Corners said Australian Chinese-language media outlets have forgone editorial independence in exchange for deals offered by China as part of the strategy of the Chinese Communist Party.

Anne-Marie Brady.

On Morning Report this week, Prof Anne-Marie Brady from University of Canterbury was urging New Zealand to take the issue seriously.
“We can't pretend it's not happening here. All our allies are dealing with this problem and we should partner with them,” she said.
"New Zealand's Chinese media has gone from being independent to being merged with the domestic media in China," she said. 

"When you pick up one of our local Chinese papers or go to Chinese language sites they look a lot like you would find in mainland China," she said.
"I've been reading our Chinese language media since the late 1980s and listening to the radio stations. It was a real delight hearing an authentic New Zealand Chinese voice. We're really not getting that now," Prof Brady told Mediawatch.
All  Chinese media outlets in China are strictly controlled by the state, which is in turn dominated by the Chinese Communist Party.
How does China influence what Chinese New Zealanders are getting from their media?
“Under Xi Jinping's leadership, the CCP is really keen to influence international perceptions and debates about China globally,” she told Mediawatch
Much of this she also covered in a paper called “Magic Weapons: China's political influence activities under Xi Jinping."
"Initially it was through Xinhua. Since the 1990s it's been offering New Zealand's Chinese media free content. More recently the policy has been to 'harmonise' overseas Chinese language media with mainland Chinese media. The links are much closer now," she said.
"That means closer interactions ... and instructions being given to our Chinese language media," she said.
New Zealand Chinese media get instructions relayed by Chinese officials at meetings.
Her Magic Weapons paper says an event at the Langham Hotel in Auckland in June -- attended by CCP media officials and representatives of the Chinese media in New Zealand -- was one such occasion.
Media were given "oral instructions on content and working relationships" at the event, which was also attended by Labour MP Raymond Huo.

New Zealand's Chinese fifth column: Beijing stooge Raymond Huo

Raymond Huo's Labour Party biography says he is a is a regular Chinese media commentator on current affairs and a former Asian affairs journalist at the New Zealand Herald. 

He still calls himself "journalist" on Twitter.
Mediawatch asked him if he saw any discussions about in editorial policy or instructions passed on by Chinese officials at the Langham Hotel event.
"Not at all. I have no idea where that allegation is coming from," he told Mediawatch.
"The presentations I attended were purely on the influence of Chinese language social media," said Raymond Huo.
He said he attended the event because he had returned to Parliament in March and wanted to update himself on matters that were relevant to the Chinese constituency.
He told Mediawatch it was "difficult to say" if Chinese-language media were free to do what they wanted in New Zealand. 

Signs of things to come?

John Fitzgerald.

Chinese state-owned media companies signed six agreements in Sydney last year with Australian outlets including Fairfax Media, the biggest owner of newspapers in New Zealand. 

State-run Chinese news outlet People’s Daily reported it signed a news and video sharing deal with Australia’s Sky News which would create ”a high-end talk show on the Chinese economy.”
China Radio International reached a deal to share news with Australia’s Chinese-language radio station 3CW.
"Individually, the deals offer compelling commercial opportunities. But viewed collectively, they underline the coordinated nature in which China's propaganda arms are seeking to influence how the Communist Party is portrayed overseas", the Sydney Morning Herald's Beijing correspondent Philip Wen wrote at the time.

China Watch.

As if to illustrate the government's influence over Chinese media, a supplement prepared by state-run China Daily newspaper appeared in the Dominion Post the following week. 

It featured the New Zealand visit of the head of China's central publicity department -- Liu Qibao -- and his meeting with the-then Prime Minister John Key just after overseeing those media deals in Sydney.
At the time, Australian expert on China Dr John Fitzgerald told Mediawatch those media deals were "a victory for Chinese propaganda".
Anne Marie-Brady said some of those companies were operating here.
She said China Radio International had a subsidiary called Global CMAG which took over Auckland's 24-hour Chinese-language radio station FM 90.6 in 2011. 

She said it now sourced all its news from CRI and its Australian subsidiary. 

Global CAMG also runs Panda TV, Channel 37 on Freeview, and the Chinese Times newspaper.
Prof. Brady said the Commerce Commission should investigate whether offshore intervention in New Zealand's Chinese-language media breached competition laws and requirements for a free and independent media.