Barring access and ‘positive’ news: how the Chinese government has controlled the narrative during the Tibet floods

The ongoing floods in Nepal and Tibet have sparked a heated debate on social media about how the disaster is being reported. The focal point of the controversy is the BBC's China correspondent, Laura Bicker, who reported that China has censored videos of the floods. The Chinese government claims this censorship is due to fears of instability in Tibet, a politically sensitive region. However, some social media users have debunked this claim by posting screenshots of the footage that the BBC actually broadcasted.

The Chinese government has a history of complaining about Western media's "bias" when reporting on Tibet. This narrative seems to have gained even more traction this week, with Chinese social media users focusing on the BBC's coverage. However, Chinese social media users have previously been subject to the authorities' control over information, as Bicker pointed out in her report. Videos of the disaster initially circulated on Weixin and RedNote platforms, but users eventually lost access to them.

Another aspect of control is the restricted access for independent and foreign journalists. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Allyson Horn mentioned that she had repeatedly requested to visit Tibet, but her requests were denied. This makes it difficult for foreign media to independently verify the Chinese government's account of the events. The absence of independent reporting, combined with the removal of footage from social media, has allowed Chinese state media to dominate the narrative.

Chinese media's coverage of the disaster has focused on the People's Liberation Army's rescue operations, President Xi Jinping's leadership during the crisis, and Premier Li Qiang's visit to the disaster zone. While there has been some coverage of road reopening and delivery of disaster-relief supplies, there has been less reporting on how the disaster has affected local villagers, their homes, and communities.

In contrast, foreign journalists have been able to interview survivors without restrictions on the Nepali side of the border. Critics argue that the Chinese government is hiding the true number of casualties due to the restricted access to the disaster site. However, no outsiders have been able to verify these claims because of the same restrictions.

China's media environment has been less controlled in the past, such as during the 2008 earthquake in Sichuan province, which killed over 70,000 people. Chinese state media provided extensive live coverage of the quake, updating the death toll and reporting on rescue efforts almost daily. Western media also questioned the government's response and sought to expose any potential injustices.

The initial coverage of the Sichuan earthquake was considered a "breakthrough in Chinese media reporting of emergencies and natural disasters."

However, within weeks, the Chinese government began to clamp down on information about the schools in the affected area due to fears that the issue could drive anti-government sentiment. In general, China's state media outlets are instructed to emphasize "positive reporting" during crises while removing criticisms online. This practice was evident in the media coverage of a fatal train accident in Wenzhou in 2011.

Unlike the Sichuan earthquake, the government kept tight control over the media, limiting reporters' access to the scene, frequency of reporting, and the content of their stories.

In the current situation, the Chinese government's approach to media coverage mirrors this pattern of restricted coverage and emphasis on positive news. The disaster has occurred at a time of growing distrust between China and the West, which may be contributing to perceptions of biased coverage.