Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Read the Words of a Great Christian Whom Jesus Himself Would Acclaim
11:48 AM /
Editor /
 
Links to this post:
14 Comments:
A delightful post by an exceptionally gifted writer.
When he stays away from matters involving China and events there, his blog is, frankly, all the better for it.
Will you be appearing on "Dialogue" soon to offer your incisive comments on this subject?
Or have they censored you the same way that you took down a post of mine relating the story of why you no longer appear on that august program? That was a mite unfair.
So much for defending the rights of free speech. Convenience apparently trumps content, eh?
One is who one is, someone once related to me. Your accomplishments are numerous and no doubt merited. But "Dialogue" thought you were someone else and you let them believe that (as an intern there a couple of years back, I knew this firsthand). When they found out that you were not the foreign affairs expert or China hand that they were led to believe, they threw you over the side of the bloody boat. Probably best for all.
But try not to censor blokes, OK? I'll repeat here what I wrote before--and did a few others. If you are such a defender of the rights of journalists worldwide, why don't you resign your position in protest at the detention and jailing of reporters like you back in China? What is keeping you from doing so? I have to believe that you have principles. So, what gives?
And yes, I am posting this anonymously, for I have been in the maw of that media and do not want retaliation. Just because they do not take action against you does not mean that you are protected or respected. It only means you are harmless.
As a former intern on CCTV 9, I can tell readers of this blog that the reason why Bosco is no longer on CCTV 9--and he has not been on for a very long time from what my friends there tells me--is that they quickly discovered he was not what they were led to believe he was--an expert, on China, or whatever issue they were speaking about. Some thought he spoke at least some Chinese (he does not) or was an expert on international issues (he was teacing courses on US foreign policy I think, somewhere in Beijing). Others thought he could comment on international issues. Well, he was on a few shows 2-3 years ago (some related to China), and the results were not pretty. So he was not invited back.
A number of people in my old place had egg on their faces when this was discovered. This had nothing to do with his views; it was that he didn't have any worth viewing.
Bosco seems like a fine guy, but he knows little or nothing about China--something he appears to finally admit here. You can also see he is all over the sea here: actor, commentator, journalist, defender of the faith, and again.
The ironic issue for me (an Australian, if you must know) is his remark about China reaching "her true greatness". I wonder how he would know. But anyhow, China's current true greatness seems to be jailing journalists. If Bosco really wants to truly teach his students about his love for journalism, perhaps he should resign in protest.
Anonymous Ex CCTV 9 Intern,
Do not flatter yourself, I did not censor you individually; I censored everyone, mostly myself and every sordid detail of an unseemly conflagration that never should have happened. I took the whole thing down; that decision had nothing to do with you. It was because I suddenly realized I had actually stooped to using an extreme vulgarity online and even threatening to fight with a commentator. By the time I awoke yesterday morning I was determined to pull the whole mess down; I did the same at WOW. (I have reposted your first comment so folks will know what is going on.)
The fault lies with me because I love my students too much, and because I still have a combative temper that I thought I had successfully excised from my personality after my last barroom brawl over racist politics a decade ago ended up in major daily newspapers in America. But then a lot of it lies in the fact that so many folks do not like my leftist American politics; for that, however, I am proud.
But holy smokes and jeezumgoddamntally. I haven't had so many folks denouncing me so thoroughly since my book on the O.J. criminal trial outraged some 70% of white Americans a decade ago! While all of it hurts a bit, I have had to get used to it since every book I wrote with William Morrow & Company, Inc. during the 90s stirred up great controversy--even half of the baseball world screamed bloody murder at THE BOYS WHO WOULD BE CUBS: A Year in the Heart of Baseball's Minor Leagues (William Morrow & Company, Inc. 1990). But then the other half loved it; one major daily newspaper reviewer said it was one of the 5 best baseball books ever written (which of course is ridiculous, but it made me feel good for a few moments).
But your words hurt especially deeply, because if what you say is true, then some close Chinese friends of mine are liars. While it is surely an exercise of pissing into the wind--it gives some relief, but it gets your white linen suit quite stinky--I am going to attempt to counter some of your vitriol.
I did not ask to be on "Dialogue"; it never occurred to me. I was certain, and not displeased, that I had left my television commentary career (along with the 'murder business') in America when I came to China in August 2002. In my first year in Beijing (my second year in China), within less than a month at the China Foreign Affairs University (teaching a ridiculous course called "Media & Foreign Policy," which I did not name, but only designed after I was told what it was they wanted), a longtime American China scholar and IR specialist, who had enjoyed my television commentary in America--most particularly, my extensive commentary during the years of the Simpson trials in Los Angeles--thought my experience (and animated style) as a television commentator and journalist in America would be a bit of fresh air on the show and suggested that "Dialogue" invite me on. They called, asked if I would appear, and I said yes. They continued to call, I continued to say yes; their viewership went up every time I appeared and displayed something other than a boring talking head because if nothing else I am a showman. Why do you have a problem with that?
What truly baffles me about your scathing animosity is that at no time did I ever present myself as an expert on China. I have never done so anywhere at anytime. It is recorded fact: in these pages and, if they exist, on tapes of the dozen or so shows I did not only for "Dialogue," but for CCTV 9's live news hour during two of the Six Party talks in 2003 - 2005 (I do not remember the dates at this moment), and the first expansion of NATO. My commentary, by the way, was from an American viewpoint. When I said live that a North Korea with nuclear weapons would also have an impact on the Taiwan reunification issue, you should have heard the screaming in my earphone, and the electronic "hook" that followed close behind.
I have written about my first experience on "Dialogue" in a post further down this page titled, "Chinapol, Shove it! In Defense of Philip Cunningham," where I categorically state my lack of qualifications as a "China expert" then and now. As I also state in that post on Philip Cunningham (scroll down), and elsewhere, once Yang Rui and others finally understood what I had tried explaining to them, even giving them my C.V.--namely, that I am an American author, journalist and screenwriter with ZERO background on China--they mostly stopped inviting me to appear. But a whole year had gone by.
I say "mostly" because I still occasionally get invitations, and taped a handful of shows in this past year; due to some of my political "principles" and what I said, only the show on blogging in China aired. Even the show I taped on hurricane Katrina, which destroyed 6 homes of the Bosco family on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, did not air because of my politically incorrect American statements--at that particular moment China did not want to be too offensive to Bush.
But even more baffling is the reason for your obsessive and unnecessary zeal for "exposing" my relationship with CCTV Channel 9. Since I have never touted my non-existent "China expert commentary," what is the point? Do I owe you money? Did I steal your girlfriend? Do you have a relative or friend in America who is a criminal I wrote about during my career working the murder beat in America? Did I inadvertently step on your cat's tail?
Whatever axe you're grinding and why perhaps will soon be explained when we learn who you are. I have sent your comment above, and your earlier one, to some senior producers at "Dialogue" I am still in contact with, mostly when they want to run a program idea by me, or ask me to recommend other western "experts." If you were what you say you were at "Dialogue" during the timeframe in question (my first year in Beijing, 2003 - 2004) they should be able to remember you and identify you.
During this whole brouhaha over WOW, some great advice from my first editor at William Morrow & Company, Inc., concerning book reviewers, has been much in my mind: "You are never as good as some people say you are; and you are never as bad as other people say you are." But you are a strange breed of naysayer; harder to categorize because it is personal with you somehow but the reason for it is so illusive.
Moving on: You ask me to resign my post in protest of the barbaric imprisonment of my fellow Chinese journalists? How futile; how ineffective; how self-indulgent? To my knowledge, I am the only accredited American journalist who can afford to and is willing to teach western-style, English language journalism fulltime to China's journalists of tomorrow.
Have you read the Journalism and the State Series on WOW? A series that is completely about the arrest, and illegal detainment (and now conviction, of Zhao Yan) written by Chinese journalism students? Do you know that because I have a bit more access (confidential, and always will be) to information on the case than most, I run my posts about it by people knowledgeable on his legal defense before I publish them because my goal is not a scoop but his freedom? Have you read "A Moment in Beijing," commissioned and published by Quill, the magazine of the Society of Professional Journalists, of which I am a member?
Do you know that I am on the Freedom to Write Committee of PEN, the most effective international writer's rights organization in the world, of which I am also a member of longstanding? PEN does not recommend that members of its Freedom to Write Committee be activists in their host countries, otherwise, very little news would come out of those respective countries by PEN members, because they would no longer be there. Is that a difficult concept for you to understand?
Do you know that I am one of the very few journalists in America who has twice faced a contempt of court charge and jail for refusing to testify about my sources or turn over to the court my unpublished research material? I have proven my cajones where it really counts, in the goddamn trenches where the jails are real and the power arrayed against you is all but invincible. A lecture from you on journalistic balls is less than meaningless.
Of course you know none of the above. Because you care not about reading what I have actually written, only with coming online and scattering personally hurtful gossip concerning someone you know nothing about. You don't want progress in China. You want a revolution that you are a bystander to and for which you will clap safely from the sidelines; the late John Lennon answered that idiocy a long time ago. If it is protest and revolution you want, go do it in your country where the blood on your hands will at least be the blood of your countrymen
I know the good I am doing with my students; some three-dozen of whom are now getting advanced degrees in the west based somewhat upon my recommendation to professors who know me at least by reputation. I also know the pioneering--slowly--work that former students are already doing at Xinhua, People's Daily and China Daily, among others. They call me or email me for help on a story: and I am always here for them, even though they are no longer my students, but fulltime employees. Why? Because, like it or not, for good or for bad, China will define the 21st Century and I want objectively trained journalists here to report it.
I do not teach in China because I need the job; I teach in China because I want to be a part of tomorrow not yesterday. This is a place where journalism most needs to be taught for the good of China; and for the good of the world it is again central to after almost 500 years of isolation, both voluntary and later forced upon it. I, and every single person with communication skills, right wing, left wing, no wing, all wing, or even wing nuts, are needed here; join me and help a bit instead of only bitching. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get western professionals in any field to come here to actually teach and stay long enough to be effective? Academic types on sabbaticals and fellowships looking for an exotic thrill come and go as quickly as the Pittsburgh Pirates' pennant hopes.
Whatever it is you now do, you surely will be of no help to anyone here. Your silly demeaning comment on the post above, an essay I am uniquely qualified to write proves that you are not only mean-spirited, but extremely small-minded. China does not need you; and, frankly, I would suggest neither does whatever country it is you now niggardly call home.
Regards,
Joseph Bosco
Addendum to Aussie TV Intern,
I have glanced back over your earlier comment and realized just how full of yourself you are, and so obviously misinformed and truly myopic. My relationship with "Dialogue" continues, so whose friends are lying to whom?
Are you so simple-minded that you have a problem with people who have achieved professional success in several competitive fields? You write such jealous trash as this:
"You can also see he is all over the sea here: actor, commentator, journalist, defender of the faith, and again."
All of it is a fact Jack! Check it out: New York stage actor with national credits in my 20's; commentator on television in America too many times to count; a journalist with a history deeper than the callous that is your brain; and I have been defending real people and real causes, which is also on public record, since the 60s.
You want my qualifications for giving an opinion on the "greatness of China"? How about decades of study in what has only been given an academic field of study title for less than a quarter century: World History. What is yours?
The "harmless" person is he who does nothing and stands for nothing. How can one stand for anything if he is afraid of "retaliation" as you so wimpishly admit you are. You have been in the "maw" of nothing substantial in your life, whereas I have been doing it publicly, in my name, since the age of 15.
It will soon be revealed that your so-called "friends" at CCTV 9 are lying to you--or you are lying here--either way your identity will be revealed. Will you run or stand behind your words? I stand with mine even when I am wrong and immediately admit that I am wrong--all of it under my name!
An Australian wuss you are; I did not think it possible for there to be one. I am wrong yet again.
Regards,
Joseph Bosco
Not the same Anonymous, but with a view.
If you acknowledge yourself not to be an expert on China, then how can you be sure that your teaching of journalism is not far and away removed from the actual realities on the ground in China?
I fear that in asking that question I will be setting you off on another long list of your credits and accomplishments and so. I mean the question seriously, for I do not think you would claim to be an expert on the Chinese media. Perhaps you read Chinese and have worked at a Chinese newspaper regularly; I do not know, so perhaps you could mention it.
That is one question.
Another is how can you be sure that the people at Channel 9 are indeed not lying to you--especially if they tell you what you might prefer to hear (or any of us in that situation)? There is a bit of face involved, no?
That channel is expressly involved in presenting the prettiest face of China to the outside world that it can, one supposes. If what the genetleman from Australia says is correct, one would hardly expect that the people at said channel would readily admit what he says. They are in the business of propaganda.
Thank you for this space.
Am I the only one here who thinks that Bosco's effort to contact people at channel 9 to expose who this guy is or whether or not he is telling the truth remind one of the sorts of tactics associated with the very agencies (NSA, FBI, and others) he accuses of harassing him?
This is getting very weird.
I have disagreed with you before but now is the time to lay that aside and wish you a happy birthday and yours a more peaceful year than last.
To Last Anonymous,
I cannot adequately express how grateful I am for your so very kind words. If we continue to disagree at times, please let us remember this great gesture of yours reminding us of our shared humanity.
May all your days be happy and your life long and prosperous in the things that matter the most: friendship, health, knowledge and freedom.
Thank you,
Joseph Bosco
To the Next to Last Anonymous,
My efforts were successful and gratifying. I learned what I needed to learn and am joyous over what I learned. I am so very tired of this constant wrangling. Can we not put it to rest?
The gentleman who felt the need to hurt me the worst, where I live, teach and write (Yang Rui's wife is my colleague and immediate supervisor at BFSU) had his own reasons for wishing to do so, which I am not privy to, and in the end he was not successful.
Instead, I learned that "face" in China is not the be-all and end-all so many believe it to be. I learned the truth from true friends, and I am pleased and grateful that for whatever reasons he was greatly misinformed, or at the very least--and the kindest spin I can place upon it--listened to common TV personnel gossip and bickering, and that he heard it from several layers removed, and repeated it here as if it was gospel. He did not work for "Dialogue" or CCTV International, Channel 9, during the time in question. I do not wish to expose his identity, have no fear or qualms about that.
However, I am going to quote part of one of the most important e-mail responses I received from my colleagues at CCTV International, Channel 9, from one of its most senior producers:
"First, I cannot recall anyone who [was] a foreign intern (I can judge from his writing that she or he is a foreigner) at Dialogue or at CCTV during [that] period of time. (my wild gusss is that he worked for [another] department )
"People always argue about the performance of the guests on the show, and we got many nasty comments everyday to both the anchors and guest speakers. It is part of our job, right.
"I remember that you were invited to speak on China or foreign affairs ... during your stay in Foreign Affairs University. When you left for BEIWAI, you [were] invited to the show (mostly by me) to talk on Katrina, the Teri Shivo (sic) Case, Blog in China, (the first one on this issue on Chinese English TV!)..., mainly concerning "soft" issues due to your post in journalism in BEIWAI, which is reasonable."
...
"I didn't hear such kind of comments as [were] posted from my colleagues, however, I think it is not a decent thing to do, especially to a [person] who can stand up for his opinions (for the record, the Katrina show was killed due to its harsh criticism of the Bush administration).
"I think you may also find that you are not the only American who appeared less often on the show recently, there [are] other things going on, which [are] not in my control, that is what I can tell you.
"But as a friend and colleague, I can just say, you deserve every respect. Just go ahead what you think is right, acting, commentating. Leave the dogs bark---at the wrong tree."
I will attempt very hard not to answer further comments on this issue. The matter is closed, and I hold no animosity towards my detractors--they come with the territory I chose to live and work in.
Regards,
Joseph Bosco
The naivete being displayed here is amazing.
What did you expect the people at CCTV-9 to tell you? "Yes, this person is right, that is what happened"?
I was one of those reviewed the tape on Katrina. It could not be used because there was no audio. They did not "kill" the show because of what was said. The show did not air because the sound tech did not turn on the switch.
A shame that. Tey cover up their own incompetence and you bloody buy into it. This person is lying to you there, and so what do you suppose he is doing elsewhere in that response?
Your idea of how the Chinese media operates floors me. You are right on one thing, that is: you are not an expert on China.
I wonder what your students think when you talk about journalism back there and train them to work in a system that you yourself do not comprehend.
"their viewership went up every time I appeared"
do you have any evidence for this or is it just another in a long line of bosco bullshit? be warned, I work in the ratings industry here in china and may have a few surprises up my sleeve.
To Last Anonymous,
This is a much belated shove it, but that's what it is! The bullshit here is yours. "Ratings industry here in China," you say? Now, that is truly funny! Whatever you have up your sleeve or ass, show it!
I know what happens to viewership whenever I appear on any CTTV program, or TV commercial, for that matter--but not from what I am told by "management," which very easily can be polite lies. I know because of the recognition from Chinese people on the streets of Beijing; and even more so when I venture into other provinces, particularly country-side areas.
So come out of your anonymous hole in the ground and give us some of your "surprises"!
I have been in broadcasting--in America--since before you were born; show business (news, commentary, talk-shows, commercials, movies, mini-series, etc., it's all show biz) is what I do!
What are your on-camera credits?
All the best,
Joseph
Hi! I thought you and your readers might be interested in some post-Easter news about Pope Benedict XVI...
The Pope's car is being auctioned off to raise money for Habitat for Humanity:
www.buyacarvideos.com/popecar.htm
The bidding is already more than $200,000! Personally, I think this is a really fun and creative way to raise
money. The auction goes until April 14th if you and your readers want to check it out.
|
