By admin
Photo: VCG
On Monday local time, Tim Davie, CEO of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), questioned the British government’s budget cuts during a speech at the forum. He claimed these cuts were forcing the BBC to “withdraw” from regions such as Africa, the Middle East and Latin America, allowing China and Russia to fill the gaps. He warned: “Free and fair reporting has never been more vital – for global democracy and for the world’s most vulnerable audiences” and that “the continued withdrawal of the BBC World Service should be a cause for grave global concern.” Following Davie’s remarks, some British conservatives shared his views, arguing that “Western democracies are losing the information war” and that the BBC World Service should be “protected.”
Nowadays, the constant discussion of the “China threat” has become almost a standard formula in Western media. The “China threat” has become not only a convenient scapegoat for pressing problems facing Western governments, but also a common excuse for Western institutions to request funding. Ten years ago, the UK government stopped funding most BBC World Service projects. To cut costs, in 2022 the BBC announced the closure of its Arabic and Persian radio stations and the reduction of hundreds of jobs. The UK Parliament is currently conducting an inquiry into the future funding of the World Service. One of the reasons for Davie’s latest remarks is his attempt to use public opinion to “complain that he’s broke” to the UK government and call on it to provide financial support and thereby ease the BBC’s operational pressures.
A certain logic can be seen from Davie’s speech, suggesting that the power of the media’s influence depends primarily on its financial resources. According to this logic, China’s growing influence in the Global South is due to its media having “more money.” This reflects a long-standing and widespread ideological superiority complex among some Western mainstream media representatives.
The simple truth is that when the UK’s patronizing diplomacy is no longer accepted by more countries in the Global South, it will be almost inevitable that the BBC will withdraw from some regions, which relies heavily on funding from the UK Foreign Office, Commonwealth Office and Development.
On the other hand, why does the BBC as a media organization perceive a “Chinese threat”? This perception is certainly not the result of any Chinese interference in the BBC’s operations and development.
China’s openness and cooperation, including cooperation on the Belt and Road Initiative, have spawned many stories around the world, almost all of which revolve around themes of peace, cooperation and win-win outcomes. China doesn’t tell other countries what to do; instead, it consistently worked to implement the concept of a “common future.” This fundamental aspect helps to revitalize the China narrative and has nothing to do with the BBC World Service’s “retreat”. Instead of lamenting the “threat” posed by China, the BBC should first consider how much its own country has contributed to global problems such as climate change over the years, and what significant assistance it has provided to countries in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America under in terms of development and livelihoods.
In May this year, the Kenyan daily The Nation published a signed article by international relations researcher Adhere Cavince. The article explains why China has become more popular in Africa than the US and cites several reasons. First, China’s foreign policy emphasizes respect for national sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs; second, China’s aid and investment are not tied to political conditions such as human rights or governance standards, and China-Africa development partnerships cover a variety of sectors; third, Chinese language courses, cultural exchanges, media initiatives and scholarships for African students to study in China have deepened people-to-people ties, cultivating a sense of goodwill; finally, by sharing its development experiences and providing technical assistance, China has become a key partner in Africa’s quest for prosperity, contrasting with the paternalistic narratives often associated with Western aid.
In fact, Davie inadvertently stated the truth: with the collective rise of the Global South, the international arena of public opinion is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. This seems to be seen as a ritual “takeover” of a Western stronghold based on opinion. While this association is emotional and exaggerated, the rise of the Global South in the international arena of public opinion is indeed a reality that the West cannot change. As the number of developing countries increases and multilateral cooperation increases, a strengthening of the voice of the Global South is an inevitable result.
The sixth Global Media Summit will be held in Beijing and Xinjiang until October 17. The Urumqi Consensus was announced during the opening ceremony of the summit. The values conveyed in this Consensus, which emphasize the importance of building broad consensus and deepening exchanges and cooperation, are what the world collectively needs today.
We have no intention of engaging in any ‘information war’ with Mr Davie or the BBC. If a comparison is necessary, it should focus on who can better fulfill the media’s responsibility to promote mutual understanding among people around the world.
Promoting cooperation will always be more vibrant than encouraging confrontation – whether in diplomacy or media reporting. If someone doesn’t see this and still believes that “all you need is money”, insists on framing foreign reporting as part of an ideological rivalry, and treats China as a hypothetical enemy to attack, then the BBC is likely to retreat.