Chinese Blogger Chosen As Head of Investigation

Lew Perin writes "China hasn't developed much of a reputation for government transparency. And in Yunnan province, the case of a guy who died in police custody was starting to look like a cover up. But then the provincial government startled everyone by choosing a prominent local blogger to head the official investigation into the death. 'The unorthodox move to make popular bloggers heads of an investigation committee is a tacit admission by the Yunnan government of the power of the internet — especially blogs — in shaping Chinese public opinion. It also belies the widespread suspicion of the official version of Li's death.'"

Comments

Skids greased?

[palegray.net]

I wonder how much they're paying this prominent local blogger. There might be other methods of persuasion involved, too... forgive me for my automatic suspicion of any "investigation" the Chinese government conducts.

Re:Skids greased?

[kandela]

I'm guessing they won't be able to blog on the investigation whilst it is ongoing.

Re:Skids greased?

[A. B3ttik]

In other news, a prominent Chinese Blogger was admitted to a local hospital with two broken kneecaps and three missing toes, injuries he reportedly sustained after falling down a flight of stairs.

Re:Skids greased?

[mea37]

I don't trust them either, but I also know that I'm in no position to know one way or the other. Everything I "know" about the Chinese government, I heard from someone else.

I read an interview with some journalist -- I can't remember who at the moment, but it's not important -- in which he described the difference between skepticism and cynicism as the difference between "I don't know; I'm going to find out" vs. "I already know; I don't need to find out".

Of course, most Americans (including myself, I assume including you) aren't in a position to "find out". We can watch and wait, but even in the end we'll get information filtered through many hands we can choose to trust or not trust. If the blogger finds evidence that supports the story was being covered up, will we trust the people who say it proves the idea worked or those who say the blogger had an axe to grind? If he finds no evidence, will we trust those who say there was nothing to find, or those who say it proves the whole thing was a stunt? And that's if we ever see any follow-up to this story at all...

So I want to take a skeptical view when any government makes a move like this. It feels like it could be a pubilcity stunt. But I also know that barring a major change in my career and lifestyle, I cannot know for sure who is, or isn't, making an honest effort.

(Note that my above comment is not limited to the Chinese government. There's a definite propaganda spin that can be read from "embedded reporters", too.)

Absent the ability to independently verify, I guess the difference between a cynic and a skeptic is intent. So here's my question for everyone who claims standing to presume the intentions of the Chinese government: If presented with evidence that this was legit, would you hear it or would you dismiss it out of hand?

Re:Skids greased?

[hackingbear]

Yes, the investigation itself has been become suspicious widely by Chinese netizens. (Links in Chinese.)

The report of the investigation does honestly say that the police still not allowing them to see any real evidence or witness.

On the plus side, the case has been widely discussed in China's internet.

Re:Skids greased?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm interested enough in China to have learned Mandarin and visited several times.

My impression is that central govt is genuinely trying to implement reforms, particularly in the legal system. I don't think they are interested in human rights but they understand the importance of uncorrupt institutions to prosperity.

However, these reforms are usually stymied by the local corruption they are trying to root out. China is a big place.

This effort with the blogger may well be genuine. It may well come to nothing.

My 2 cents.

Re:Skids greased?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also having been there, I got the same *exact* impression as my parent post. His description was perfect. I just wanted to corroborate what he said.

Re:Skids greased?

[palegray.net]

Very good points, very well presented. Thanks for a great reply :).

Re:Skids greased?

[palegray.net]

On the plus side, the case has been widely discussed in China's internet.

Emphasis mine, of course. I think that statement alone nicely illustrates the core problems with this whole concept.

Re:Skids greased?

[Ash Vince]

Do you speak and write fluent Chinese?

No? In which case one part of the internet will always be China's Internet while the English bit is everyones. This is because everyone speaks English as a second language.

We cannot moan about being excluded from certain discussions simply because most of the people directly affected by the discussion choose to have the discussion in their first language rather than ours.

Re:Skids greased?

[palegray.net]

Language has nothing to do with it, and you know it. Ever heard of the Great Firewall of China?

Stop trolling.

Re:Skids greased?

[Daemonax]

Having also spent some time in China I completely agree with you. From what I've seen coming out from the central government they are really trying to improve things, but the local government branches are very corrupt. My favourite examples are the illegal brothels that just pay off police and others. You can often seen a police office situated right next to a brothel in some areas. Now this doesn't mean that I'm against prostition, I just think it's a simple example of the corruption there.

Re:Skids greased?

[DigiShaman]

Kind of hard to root out corruption when the self-appointed politicians are being bought and paid for by big-business.

Re:Skids greased?

[jandersen]

I don't think they are interested in human rights but they understand the importance of uncorrupt institutions to prosperity.

I think you are probably wrong there. For one thing, Communism is, despite what we've all been told over and over, about the rights of common people; go and look it up if you care. They are not the same set of rights that people in the US subscribe to, but "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights" was, after all, something drawn up by the UN just after WWII - ie by the US, UK and France, mostly, and consequently it reflects values that are very Eurocentric and very Capitalistic.

Another thing is that people far too often assume that politicians in general are completely void of any sort of idealism and higher principles, which I think is manifestly untrue - even in America. Wasn't the problem with the Bush administration that they were too idealistic - that their belief in their ideology overruled their grasp of reality? A pragmatic leader would never have thrown the country into a war in Iraq or given gigantic tax cuts to the richest in the belief that this would somehow be good for everybody, in spite of what common sense and a hundred years of experience tells us.

In fact, I think politicians in general are more likely to be idealists than the average person. It's just that in the US, their ideology is very often some twisted version of fundamentalist Christianity or Ultra-Capitalism, whereas in China they are more likely to base their ideals on Communism - which is, when you think about it, a version of Humanism. To me, what makes the big difference is whether you believe your ideals are more important than people's lives and reality in general; and as far as I can see, the current Chinese leaders believe more in reality than in ideals. Which is good.

Re:Skids greased?

[Yvanhoe]

The Chinese government is a pretty big organization. Its left hand doesn't know what its right hand is doing. If there was local corruption, it was probably not with the complicity of the central offices. As the government needs to get as clean an image it can get, it handles diligently these cases. There is a real fear of civil unrest in China with the economical crisis. The government must look like a competent one, they are very aware that it is their survival that is at risk. I expect to see during the next years a softening of the Chinese Communist Party, maybe some new freedom and a crackdown on internal corruption.

Re:Skids greased?

[Ash Vince]

Why am I trolling?

It was a serious well meant point on the way I thought the original poster (who spoke Chinese) was using the expression "Chinese Internet".

Re:Skids greased?

[Grishnakh]

I don't know about China, but here in the US, I think politicians are typically sociopaths. The Bush administration didn't do things because of idealism, they did them because of money and power. The war in Iraq may have been idealism in part, but mostly is was a big give-away to military contractors like Halliburton. It's no coincidence that Cheney, the VP, was also the former head of Halliburton, which profited tremendously from the Iraq War. Giving gigantic tax cuts to the rich is just the rich scratching each others' backs.

I'm still not sure if Bush was stupid or evil. I think he may have just been a puppet, controlled in reality by Cheney, Rove, and others.

Lastly, one point about gigantic tax cuts for the rich, if you look up the IRS taxation rates, the rich already pay far more in taxes than other people (both as a percentage of their income, and in absolute dollars), so a "gigantic" tax cut for them still doesn't put them ahead of the middle and lower classes. A lot of people seem to have this idea that rich people don't have to pay very many taxes compared to other people, and that simply isn't true. They already pay very high taxes. Of course, it can be argued that they benefit more from our society's services (police, military, stable government, relatively strong economy (until just lately :-), etc. After all, in Mexico, they'd have to hire private security to protect them from all the kidnappers and corrupt cops, whereas here they're usually pretty safe without that), so it's only fair they pay more, but don't make it out like they're just freeloading off everyone else. Of course, they do have ways of sheltering money that other people don't usually use.

Re:Skids greased?

[jandersen]

The Bush administration didn't do things because of idealism, they did them because of money and power

Well, to me that looks a lot like what certain aspects of American, political ideology is all about - money and power. Just because it isn't noble doesn't mean that it isn't idealism of sorts.

I'm still not sure if Bush was stupid or evil.

Oh, there is no doubt he was stupid, which isn't the same as being unintelligent. Stupidity, to my mind, is what you get when people have learned to avoid learning from new knowledge; and as always with learning, the more intelligent you are, the better you get, so it takes a very intelligent person to become very stupid.

Is he evil? Much of what he did was certainly evil, but no person is exclusively evil; I don' think it is possible.

... but don't make it out like they're just freeloading off everyone else.

I wasn't suggesting they were, I was only expressing my opinion, that it makes very little sense, whether in terms of basic fairness or economic reality, to give money to those who need it the least and then hope this will somehow makes the economy stronger and better. Trickle-down economics seems to be part of the Neo-Conservative faith, and according to my definition above a very stupid one, since experience has shown it to be false.

Should the rich pay a higher percent of their income than the not so rich? That's a good question - I think they should, but there is no absolute truth about this. To me it makes sense; a person can only meaningfully use a certain amount of money and other resources, whether that is the equivalent of $1M per year or whatever. Once you get over that limit, it no longer makes any sense that one person holds on to those resources, and it seems reasonable that they are shared to the benefit of the community in some way. It is quite possible that the state is not the best to decide how to share, but that is another matter.

As for the "gigantic tax-cuts" - when your personal income is an absurd several hundred millions per year, any tax-cut will be gigantic by any reasonable measure. A rich person gets a lot more mileage out of 1% than Joe Average. I wonder how much more the worst-off would have got if those whose income was over $1M p.a. hadn't got a tax-cut at all and the whole amount had been given to the poorest?

Re:Skids greased?

[Grishnakh]

I wasn't suggesting they were, I was only expressing my opinion, that it makes very little sense, whether in terms of basic fairness or economic reality, to give money to those who need it the least and then hope this will somehow makes the economy stronger and better. Trickle-down economics seems to be part of the Neo-Conservative faith, and according to my definition above a very stupid one, since experience has shown it to be false.

Again, you seem to be a little confused. Lowering taxes on the rich isn't giving them money, it's taking away less money that they already have. Except for government subsidies (like subsidies to corn-growing farmers) and war profiteering (like Halliburton), and of course welfare, and now bailouts to rich banks so they can give out billion-dollar bonuses, government doesn't usually give money away to people, it only takes. The argument is how much it should take.

As for giving away money, that seems to be big with those of the Liberal faith. Lately, they've shown they don't just like to give away money to poor people with welfare, they also like to give away billions to bankers on Wall Street so they can have parties and give out huge bonuses.

Should the rich pay a higher percent of their income than the not so rich? That's a good question - I think they should, but there is no absolute truth about this. To me it makes sense; a person can only meaningfully use a certain amount of money and other resources, whether that is the equivalent of $1M per year or whatever. Once you get over that limit, it no longer makes any sense that one person holds on to those resources, and it seems reasonable that they are shared to the benefit of the community in some way.

This seems to be a liberal mantra too, the idea of the "maximum salary". And where'd you get the idea that people can only use so much money? Ever watch the film "The Aviator" about Howard Hughes? He had a fortune, and he put it to use, first making a ridiculously expensive movie that everyone thought would never be finished, yet it turned out to be quite successful. He did a lot of other things with his own money after that, and still ended up very rich, and along the way employed a lot of people and supported the economy. These days, huge projects are normally taken on by corporations, but corporations are frequently quite bad at taking on high-risk projects or anything requiring real vision, because they're too concerned with "shareholder value", and exhibit too much committee-like behavior, whereas very wealthy people can do whatever they want. Sometimes, they just sit on their money or spend it on stupid stuff, but other times, like Hughes, they invest in big things and end up being a net gain to the economy. People with lots of money frequently invest it in things, and investment is what builds the economy. You can't create new companies, new technologies, etc. without capital, and capital comes from people with money.

It is quite possible that the state is not the best to decide how to share, but that is another matter.

Well obviously not. The State has shown how intelligent it is in "sharing" by not only for a whole generation giving welfare to people who don't want to work, and paying poor people to have more children by different fathers, but lately the State has shown its brilliance by giving away billions of dollars to financial firms with no strings attached, so they can throw expensive parties and give out billions in bonuses to their executives. And they still want to hand out even more money to failing companies, as if somehow that's going to make those companies suddenly start making better business decisions. You want the architects of this idiotic bail-out to decide how money's to be allocated?

Re:is www.microsoft.com down ?

[palegray.net]

No.

Simpsons already did it

[genner]

[Homer], ``Your first duty would be to step out on the balcony, and tell that crowd this plant is safe.'

Credibility at last?

[pzs]

I'm pretty impressed by this. It seems to me that Western mainstream media still regards bloggers (I'm not talking about journalists who happen to have blogs, I'm talking about pure bloggers) as some kind of group of fringe weirdos.

I'm still waiting to see a good argument that traditional journalists are still necessary, and cannot be completely replaced by enthusiastic amateur bloggers and a good aggregation service. I'm not saying such an argument does not exist, but I'm still waiting to see it.

Also, see this Slashdot thread.

Re:Credibility at last?

[castironpigeon]

and a good aggregation service

Fine with the rest, but goodluckwiththat. Online and offline news services still have the upper hand because you can go to one place and get all your news. Oh and amateur anythings suck at organizing themselves so I don't see this changing anytime soon.

Re:Credibility at last?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm still waiting to see a good argument that traditional journalists are still necessary, and cannot be completely replaced by enthusiastic amateur bloggers and a good aggregation service. I'm not saying such an argument does not exist, but I'm still waiting to see it.

Enthusiastic amateur bloggers can't afford to travel across the world. Most bloggers just take content that's created by traditional journalists and then provide analysis and aggregation. Without traditional journalists, there wouldn't be many bloggers. I respect what bloggers do, but let's face it, most of their work rides on the coattails of real journalists and other bloggers.

Re:Credibility at last?

[palegray.net]

It seems to me that Western mainstream media still regards bloggers (I'm not talking about journalists who happen to have blogs, I'm talking about pure bloggers) as some kind of group of fringe weirdos.

It seems the climate is changing somewhat, as CNN uses the concept of "iReporters" pretty heavily these days.

Re:Credibility at last?

[Anonymous Coward]

Please show proof of western mainstream media labeling bloggers as on the fringe. If you mean that the media hasn't always treated bloggers as cite-able news sources then I can agree with you. But this is far from regarding bloggers as on the fringe.

I think this is a good arguement as to what traditional journalism brings to the table:

Traditional journalists and journalism provides a level of standardization that the bloggosphere cannot match (yet). Some of this may be unimportant (such as an adherence to an arcane written form), some of the standards may not be met (i.e. journalistic ethics are often ignored, important stories ignored), but a traditional and established system provides a framework in which readers, historians, and other journalists can share information.

Take web standards as an example. There may be thousands of better implementations than HTML 4.0 for individual tasks, but if everyone were to adopt their own way of coding their webpages (i.e. there are no traditional standards), in the long run there would be no relatable and relevant information on the net.

Re:Credibility at last?

[Hal_Porter]

That's not true. If there were no journalists the bloggers would just analyse and aggregate the analysis and aggregation of the other bloggers, like in video feedback.

Actually most journalists pretty much do this anyway.

My Dad stayed in Japan for a few months and liked it enormously. Now the UK media always runs the same sort of "weird Japan" stories. He pointed out that with most stories in the UK media about Japan you can tell that they flew to Japan, stayed in a hotel for a night or so, went to the bar and maybe a shopping district and went home. So the point is the weird Japan stuff is something they learned about back in the UK, probably by reading stories from other UK journalists on the internet. They're much to lazy to go and discover anything during their trip. The stories are pretty much analogous to video feedback.

And actually most of the stories in the UK are like this - they find out about conventional wisdom from the UK media and write a story about it. Not much reality gets mixed in.

Re:Credibility at last?

[everett]

Thank you for explaining The Sun to me, it makes a lot more sense now.

Re:Credibility at last?

[spazdor]

amateur anythings suck at organizing themselves

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open_source_software_packages

Re:Credibility at last?

[infaustus]

Open sores software just proves his point.

Re:Credibility at last?

[Cyberax]

You forget one smaaaaallll thing - there are _local_ bloggers just about anywhere.

Re:Credibility at last?

[Hal_Porter]

Actually he was talking about the Guardian, Independent, and so on. I think it applies to all UK printed media, except maybe the Economist on a good day. I think the share prices are accurate too.

Everyone knows the tabloids are crap, but it's sort of worrying that almost all the 'quality' papers are too. And BBC journalist have the "make up story by talking to people at home, take a short trip abroad for credibility" disease too.

Re:Credibility at last?

[ultranova]

I'm pretty impressed by this. It seems to me that Western mainstream media still regards bloggers (I'm not talking about journalists who happen to have blogs, I'm talking about pure bloggers) as some kind of group of fringe weirdos.

Western mainstream media is competing with - and losing to - bloggers, so of course it tries to paint them as "weirdos". It won't work: too many "news sources" simply repeat what others have reported without doing any investigation themselves.

The only advantage a traditional newspaper has over a blogger is the ability to do some journalism: send reporters to interview people, investigate things, etc. That costs money, thought, so the quest for profit has optimized that away, reducing the whole paper to nothing more than a printed blog. Now its time to pay the price their lack of vision.

Still, in the end it's a good thing: those newspapers doing actual journalism will survive, since there's actual value to have access to prime sources, while worthless ones which just repeat rumours won't. Good riddance: blogs save paper and energy for distribution and are thus better for the environment.

Re:Credibility at last?

[Grishnakh]

I can't argue for why traditional journalists are still necessary, but I'll point out some reasons they're not.

1) Quality writing. 50 years ago, you could look to traditional journalists for quality writing. Not necessarily college-level writing, but it was still all proper English, with proper spelling and grammar. These days, forget it: even the largest newspapers' articles are full of spelling and grammar errors on par with a middle school class paper, except that middle school kids can probably write with better logical structure, which frequently seems to escape modern journalists who leave out all sorts of obviously necessary information. Do bloggers have quality writing? Some do, some don't, but at least they aren't claiming to be "professionals" while delivering crap writing.

2) Biased reporting. The bias in today's mainstream media is so obvious and blatant, it's ridiculous. Are bloggers biased? Probably. But at least it's pretty easy to pick ones you agree with, no matter what your opinion is. They're certainly no worse than the MSM.

Basically, the conventional wisdom is that bloggers are just amateurs, and traditional journalists are "professional", and presumably of higher quality. However, it's just a facade. The reality is that the traditional journalists are no better than, and frequently much worse than amateur bloggers. So why have them any more, if they can no longer uphold a higher standard? They certainly don't deserve any money for their services.

A blogger?

[4D6963]

Isn't it as if we made Ted Koppel lead the official investigation on the missing White House e-mails?

Re:A blogger?

[garcia]

No, it would be more like having Minnesota Democrats Exposed handle the Franken/Coleman recount.

Re:A blogger?

[Gorobei]

Dear God, that site feels as if it were written by a tenth grader who plans on becoming a lawyer: unfocused drive-by posts spiced with pointless emphasis. What plays well as a soundbite on the network news just doesn't work on the internet: compared to, say, TPM or Firedoglake, it just lacks coherence. The republicans' best bet at this point is to just get the internet shut down: it's a medium that favors the intelligent and educated.

tacit?

[Lord Ender]

It is not a tacit admission. It is an implied admission.

Don't use words unless you know what they mean. It won't make you look smarter; you will screw it up and look even dumber.

Re:tacit?

[palegray.net]

The word "belies" is used incorrectly as well. Engrish!

Re:tacit?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tacit means implied by an action...

Re:tacit?

[Hognoxious]

Wrong, it means silently - such as approving by not expressing disapproval.

Re:tacit?

[Lemmy Caution]

No, tacit means wordless, silent.

A tacit admission would be standing there, blankly, when someone accuses you of something and challenges you to contradict them.

This isn't a tacit admission of anything. This is an implicit recognition of the importance of the internet. The write-up is horribly written.

Re:tacit?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, tacit means wordless, silent.

Tacit, adj

3. Archaic. Not speaking. Silent.

If you need a definition of the word archaic, you can look it up yourself. You really should, because it's very important. The non-archaic and perfectly valid use of tacit that is being used in the summary is

2. a. Implied by or inferred from actions or statements

In other words, if it wasn't directly said, but can be inferred from a statement, tacit is still a valid use. Citation here

Re:tacit?

[adamchou]

I'm sorry, but you clearly don't know the definition of tacit

See here for the correct definition: http://www.tfd.com/tacit

Definition 2 clearly states "Implied by or inferred from actions or statements". The action in this case is appointing the blogger the head of investigation

so the reality of the situation is, it might make people look dumb when you incorrectly use a word, but you're making people dumber by getting modded up for incorrectly using a word.

Re:tacit?

[moondawg14]

We really need a +1 "Smackdown" option....

Re:tacit?

[Anonymous Coward]

Id settle for a -1 'pointless word usage bickering'

Belies indeed.

[Anonymous Coward]

"See? We are using prominant blogger to investigate! No cover up here!"

Silently to blogger: "Keep waving to the crowd!" *pokes gun in blogger's back*

Re:Belies indeed.

[TheCycoONE]

Prominent blogger found dead. Investigations are underway.

Re:Belies indeed.

[Anonymous Coward]

another blogger is heading the investigation

Re:Belies indeed.

[phoenix321]

If you're running a blog critical of the government in China, you've got to be pretty fearless, a lot stubborn and above all idealistic.

The obstacles They will throw in your way are worse than a thousand cuts but at least as numerous.

This guy was a complete strawman from the beginning, they have bribed him beyond anything imaginable or he's genuine.

It would be a pretty useless, threatening him or his family - They could not do anything without seriously exposing them to public outrage. The Chinese public is a bit tender right now due to widespread loss of jobs, a hard drought hitting the northeast, the overspending of money and conflicts over housing for the Beijing Olympics, the riots in Tibet last year and the aftermath of the earthquake disaster in Sichuan province.

Nope, I don't think the Party will risk anything in these times. China has come a long way towards wealth and peace in only the last ten years and it would be a shame and absolutely unreasonable to even the most simplistic peasant somewhere in Guandong to endanger this progress.

After all, this is a corruption like everywhere else in the world and nothing that couldn't be solved by executing the conspiracy leaders. China has quite a track record in executing even high Party officials when they committed serious and verifiable crimes- and they did it publicly.

Re:Belies indeed.

[InsaneProcessor]

Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer.

Kid's game

[Samschnooks]

In wake of the widespread disbelief expressed across the Chinese internet with regard to the official explanation that a 24-year-old man died from serious brain injuries while playing hide-and-seek in a detention center...

Um, a 24 year old playing a kid's game. That's believable? Did I misread TFA?

What, the next time they'll say a guy died from playing patty-cake in prison?

Re:Kid's game

[A. B3ttik]

What, the next time they'll say a guy died from playing patty-cake in prison?

Obviously you've never been forced to play "Patty-cake" in a prison.

Re:Kid's game

[steelfood]

They call it a pound cake.

Re:Kid's game

[dubbreak]

They call it a pound cake.

That's dessert. It nicely rounds off the cock-meat sandwich.

Hide-and-seek?!?

[jlb0057]

Jinning police told Li's parents that he had sustained the head injuries, as well as kicks and blows, while playing hide-and-seek with other inmates

From the People that brought you an amazingly lame excuse, now accept this only-slightly-less-lame PR exercise.

Free side dish with investigation?

[NickyGotz22]

I like my unbiased blogger findings served with a side of SUSPICION!!!

I think I heard about this...

[Tetsujin]

Isn't that the plot of the new re-imagined Charlie Chan movie?

Typical day in the life of a blogger

[Gizzmonic]

The faded gold lettering on the door says "Philip Marlowe." My digs aren't in the greatest part of town, but that suits me just fine. I'm a blogger-one of the few honest ones out there. Work was a little slow-I was spending some time on important research-reading Slashdot. I was just about to hit the submit button on a post entitled "Frosty Piss!" when the dame shrugged her way through my door. If I'd have known what was going to happen next, I would have stuck to trolling.

She was tall for an Oriental, but not unappealing. She wore a black silk dress cut in traditional Chinese manner, studded with soft pink roses. Her eyes were black and silky as the dress. They didn't stay still. "Are you Marlowe?" she asked, scanning the room.

"Sure," I replied diffidently.

"Your blogging reputation proceeds you. The Chinese government has a job for you."

"Nuts to that. I don't work for commies."

"I could make it worth your while, Mr. Marlowe."

"If I sold out to every fancy-pants who walked through that door, would I be working in this place?"

"I understand your position, Marlowe, but listen. There's a 24-year-old kid who got beaten to death while in police custody. The police say it was from playing hide-and-seek. We need an official investigation, and you're the best investigational blogger we know."

"Sure it wasn't from 'ring around the rosie'?" I smirked nastily. She took a sharp breath.

"Listen, Marlowe, don't you want to help improve the situation? I know you've had certain...shall we say...run-ins with hyperactive authority figures in the past. Surely this could help your reputation."

"MY reputation?" I practically yelled. "Lady, I've been called a troll, a spammer, and an astroturfer more times than you can count on your abacus. I've been modded down, banned, accused of violating TOSs, but I'm still here. So don't think you can tell me about my reputation. I'll do it for $100/day plus expenses."

"Very good, Mr. Marlowe," she purred.

"Oh, and one more thing," I stood up and got my hat. "I'd better be on the official Chinese government blogroll by sundown, or you're gonna have to find yourself a new patsy."

Re:Typical day in the life of a blogger

[H0p313ss]

"Aren't you going to make me an offer I can't refuse?"

No mod points today, but my hat is off to you sir. Well done. And give my regards to Mr. Cairo...

Re:Typical day in the life of a blogger

[Gizzmonic]

Goddamnit, I wrote "proceeds" instead of "precedes." I need an editor!

Re:Typical day in the life of a blogger

[Tetsujin]

You know, I think Cyrus Redblock would be amazingly well suited to this story, if we could work him into it...

Re:Typical day in the life of a blogger

[A. B3ttik]

Awww, you stopped writing!

That was great, I want to keep reading!

Re:Typical day in the life of a blogger

[spazdor]

A+++++, excellent slashdotter.
WOULD DO BUSINESS AGAIN

Re:Typical day in the life of a blogger

[Quinapalus]

$100/day plus expenses? Who is he, Jim Rockford?

Nice post.

This could be interesting.

[jd]

The particular case is unlikely to ever be resolved to anyone's satisfaction, but the concept of having a blogger head an investigation is an interesting one. I'm not sure it's necessarily a good idea - a blogger lacks the contacts and insider information to be effective, but having a blogger somewhere on the team should improve communications.

This is only my opinion, but I'd wonder about the notion of splitting any investigating team into three sub-groups - the "regulars"/insiders, the independent experts, and the bloggers. The experts would have the means to call the bluff of the insiders (or, if it's a sincere investigation, provide better guidance than the insiders would have on their own) and the bloggers would have the means to communicate effectively.

My reasoning goes something like this. In the US and the UK, it's well-known that standard committees either start off corrupt or end up corrupt, that there's just too much pressure that doesn't get seen and never has to be answered for. Experts who, unlike bloggers, can actually be highly constructive within the committee are no less subject to pressure because their real identities will be well-known.

Bloggers, especially if they take on more of a jury role with a juror's anonymity within the system, would be anonymous to those outside pressures and therefore would make an ideal safety valve. It's hard to coerce people you don't know.

Just a thought.

Re:This could be interesting.

[gzipped_tar]

The problem is that this blogger appeared to be a law n00b. Should the head investigator be an independent lawyer (arrrgh) it would be much more convincing.

AFAIK the investigators haven't got anything useful so far, according to local news.

The irony of government

[MikeRT]

People would trust their government a lot more in general if government officials were held accountable for everything like the general public. God knows we'd have very few lawsuits against police departments in the U.S. if police departments were the first ones on the case to reprimand employees for breaking the law. The main reason why China's government needs so much secrecy is the rampant corruption, brutality and criminality in its ranks.

Government 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

They are still a long way from "Government 2.0," which is starting to catch on here in the U.S.

And even in the U.S., we are still quite a long way from true "open source governance."

Re:Government 2.0

[Hordeking]

They are still a long way from "Government 2.0," which is starting to catch on here in the U.S.

And even in the U.S., we are still quite a long way from true "open source governance."

Nice try.

When you feel like it, feel free to come play with the rest of us in the real world.

Old strategy

[mewsenews]

My father told me once that my Grandfather was a poor student and had discipline problems. One of his teachers noticed his rebellious attitude and successfully countered it by giving him additional responsibilities over his classmates.

I think it's a variation on the adage "if you can't beat'em, join'em". If you are in a position of power and someone is criticising the way things are being handled, invite them to help you handle them. They will be forced to put up or shut up, and if they criticise further they will be criticising themselves, which humans don't enjoy doing publicly.

China gave us Sun Tzu and the Art of War, they have an ancient civilization that was only opened with opium, black powder, and cannonballs. Their everyday politics are probably fascinating.

Re:Old strategy

[TheHawke]

They are, and will drive you nuts in the process with how they go about their day to day operations.

some background

[gzipped_tar]

In case you are interested, here's some background info based on my readings..

The victim who died in police custody, Li, is a criminal suspect waiting for his trial in custody (according to Chinese court procedure). His death, according to the police, was the result of a physical conflict between him and another suspect. It was believed that the two suspects quarrelled over a dispute after playing some kind of game to kill time (games are usually forbidden, but they did it when the policemen were not watching). The quarrel escalated to physical conflict and Li, who was substantially weaker than his adversary, succumbed to his blow.

Li's death raised serious concern among "the blogosphere". It was suspected that Li might be a victim of torture by the police. Rumor has it that torture is a common practice of the Chinese police, and this is an often-discussed topic here.

The investigate which took place Friday proved to be very difficult. According to Chinese law, most information from the custodians are classified (e.g. security video record). The investigation team also tried to interview Li's attacker, but they were refused because the only one allowed to exchange information with the pre-trial suspect is his attorney. The blogger (whose moniker is "end tip of the wind") was far from being a professional investigator. He apparently lacked a grasp of criminal law and court procedures, and wasted much time on the stuff he had no hope of obtaining from the beginning. (I guess he needed an "IANAL" tag from /.)

The problem with this affair is the timing. Everything happened in the short time window of pre-trial custody, the least transparent period of criminal prosecution. This gave arise to reasonable questions as well as wild guesses.

They should have sent a pro. This blogger was supposed to be part of a gesture of "transparency" but he's a noob. IMHO he only made the situation worse. Conspiracy? Maybe or maybe not.

Disclaimer: I'm a Chinese (teh horror!) and IANAL (of course).

Re:some background

[Anonymous Coward]

>I'm a Chinese

Is that right? "A Chinese"? I didn't know it was currently in use as a noun. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm legitimately asking.

Re:some background

[Lew Perin]

Just a minor point: You say the blogger calls himself "end tip of the wind". Isn't that a bit too literal a translation? Wouldn't the meaning come through more as "the latest fashion"?

Autonomy

[Anonymous Coward]

Yunnan, due to its significant minority populations, is an autonomous region of China. They do get a fair degree of 'freedom' into how they run things, relative to the rest of the country.

Re:Autonomy

[gzipped_tar]

Yunnan is not an autonomous region. There does have quite a few autonomous prefectures/towns there, though.

belies?

[wealthychef]

I don't think that word means what you think.

beÂlie
tr.v. be-lied, be-ly-ing, be-lies
To give a false representation to; misrepresent: "He spoke roughly in order to belie his air of gentility" (James Joyce).
To show to be false; contradict: Their laughter belied their outward grief.

A 'local blogger,' in a police state. Riiight.

[Hasai]

"So; you'll do this for us?"

"Um, yeah; sure."

"Gee, thanks. We know you'll do the job to everyone's satisfaction.... Oh, nice family, by the way. Be a shame if anything happened to them...."

Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

You can get a little more perspective by reading sites like chinaSMACK. It's pretty good for finding out how the average Chinese netizen sees things (with the caveat that the average of netizens may not be the same as the average person, though net cafes do seem pretty widespread).

Nice play...

[Anonymous Coward]

Chinese Minder #1: "We must reshape public opinion about our government to white wash our torture practice."

Chinese Minder #2: "hmm... if only find someone investigate but no investigation qualification, and people still believe them..."

[silence... as they ponder...]

In Unison: "BLOGGERS!"

This means little.

[MaWeiTao]

Americans seem to think that by hiring a blogger they're somehow displaying some level of openness. The problem is that Americans are looking at this from a Western mindset where people like to believe, or pretend to be, anti-establishment.

Chinese, in general, are very pro government on a level most Americans cant even fathom. I've encountered many Chinese who've been here in the US for years who manage to remain surprisingly supportive of China.

So this doesn't really mean much at all. It's probably just an attempt by the government to show that their hip and connecting with the people.

Re:This means little.

[simonsleeper]

Er...But China/P.R.C. Government/China Communist Party are 3 totally different things. The Chinese being supportive of China probably are just being patriotic, instead of pro government or pro CCP. That's why CCP is trying very hard to make people believe that "CCP = P.R.C. Government = China".

it takes 2 mods to implement

[spazdor]

-1 (Flamebait) + 1 (Informative) = 0 (Smackdown)

the result of the investigation committee

[wuxier]

So now the result of this investigation committee comes out: No, they weren't threatened or bribed, and ....

By law, regular citizens (and all committee members are) are not allowed to meet the custody staff, or inspect any related file. So during the one day of "investigation", they recorded honestly what they saw and heard in the policy custody. And it's "absolutely impossible" for them to uncover any possible secret....

A nice PR try, that's all.

But still a progress.

http://news.ifeng.com/opinion/200902/0222_23_1026999.shtml

bullshit

[z-j-y]

the summery is total bullshit. it's a group of civilians chosen and invited by the government to take a closer look at the incident and the process of official invistigation. they don't have any authority, they had a tour for a day, got some briefs from the cops and read some documents. to call that blogger Head of Investigation is like to call Huffingtonpost the Ministry of Truth.

the gov department who organized this PR event is the Department of Propaganda(that's the official name), Communist Committee, Yunnan Province.

not saying that this is not a good thing. in USA who would give a shit to a dead prisoner anyway. but slashdot is becoming so retarded. what's up with linking that stupid blog in the summary? just link to the original article, idiot.

Re:bullshit

[Lew Perin]

just link to the original article, idiot.

You mean the Xinhua article, diplomat? I linked to the GoKunming blog because its article was more informative and because it isn't controlled by the Chinese government.