The New York Times has unveiled a new Chinese-language web site at cn.nytimes.com. As Christine Haughney reported, the Times will not adjust its news coverage despite targeting readers in a place where there is significant censorship, mainland China:
As seen in the above example (from the article here), options are also available to share on Twitter and Facebook -- notable since both of these services are currently blocked in mainland China. If either of those options are selected while behind China's Great Firewall it is not possible to post the article. It is also notable that there does not appear to be a button to share articles on Google+, an option that is readily available on the main www.nytimes.com site.
However, people in mainland China may not be the only Chinese readers being targeted with the site as evidenced by the option for displaying the text in Traditional Chinese. That is the style of characters commonly used in a number of Chinese-speaking areas outside of mainland China, such as Taiwan and Hong Kong. In those places Twitter and Facebook are freely available.
I tested posting articles onto Twitter while using a VPN in China to get through China's Great Firewall and had no problem. However, I ran into a problem when I tested the Facebook option. For any article I tried I was brought to this page:
I have never heard of Paulie Sharer, and I wonder whether his last name is somehow tied to this obvious error. A quick online search suggests that the problem is not specific to me nor the Times, but at this point there is not much more I can say definitively. Although I am sure this is not the result the Times desires, I can only imagine whether Paulie Sharer is noticing an unusual number of friend requests.
Regardless, I consider it a positive that The New York Times will be able to reach more readers in mainland China. And many will be watching to see if China later blocks the site -- just like what recently happened to Bloomberg's news site (H/T Edward Wong).
The Times Company, which is well aware of the censorship issues that can come up in China, stressed that it would not become an official Chinese media company. The Times has set up its server outside China and the site will follow the paper’s journalistic standards. Mr. Kahn said that while the Chinese government occasionally blocked certain articles from nytimes.com, he was hopeful that the Chinese government would be receptive to the Chinese-language project.Although the Times claims it will not be "tailoring it to the demands of the Chinese government" there are several signs that design changes have been made to better suit Chinese readers. One obvious example is the ability to easily share articles on popular online services in mainland China such as Sina Weibo, QQ, and Renren.
“We’re not tailoring it to the demands of the Chinese government, so we’re not operating like a Chinese media company,” Mr. Kahn said. “China operates a very vigorous firewall. We have no control over that. We hope and expect that Chinese officials will welcome what we’re doing.”
As seen in the above example (from the article here), options are also available to share on Twitter and Facebook -- notable since both of these services are currently blocked in mainland China. If either of those options are selected while behind China's Great Firewall it is not possible to post the article. It is also notable that there does not appear to be a button to share articles on Google+, an option that is readily available on the main www.nytimes.com site.
However, people in mainland China may not be the only Chinese readers being targeted with the site as evidenced by the option for displaying the text in Traditional Chinese. That is the style of characters commonly used in a number of Chinese-speaking areas outside of mainland China, such as Taiwan and Hong Kong. In those places Twitter and Facebook are freely available.
I tested posting articles onto Twitter while using a VPN in China to get through China's Great Firewall and had no problem. However, I ran into a problem when I tested the Facebook option. For any article I tried I was brought to this page:
I have never heard of Paulie Sharer, and I wonder whether his last name is somehow tied to this obvious error. A quick online search suggests that the problem is not specific to me nor the Times, but at this point there is not much more I can say definitively. Although I am sure this is not the result the Times desires, I can only imagine whether Paulie Sharer is noticing an unusual number of friend requests.
Regardless, I consider it a positive that The New York Times will be able to reach more readers in mainland China. And many will be watching to see if China later blocks the site -- just like what recently happened to Bloomberg's news site (H/T Edward Wong).
No comments:
Post a Comment