Comments on: About Hu Jia and the Sakharov Prize

By: justrecently

justrecently — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 10:32:06 +0000

As a blogger, I understand the need to write frequently. That's what blogging is about, and I'm not writing a smart post every time either, so I wouldn't criticize the Peking Duck for that. But discussing at hindsight if a choice such as for the Sakharov prize is adequate looks somewhat cheesy to me - advocating other candidates prior to the award decision would make more sense. There are cases where I don't really understand the criticism that TPD and InsideoutChina are meting out. They seem to dislike the idea that an uncompromising dissident gets an award, while courageous investigative journalists such as from Southern Metropolis - who have taken a commendably courageous, but more low-profile approach - do not get a prize. But in my books, that's no convincing point to make. I share Ms Eberlein's assessment that the Southern Metropolis Daily journalists' work is tactful and effective. But that doesn't devalue the approach Hu Jia has taken. Besides, what sense would it make to award the Southern Metropolis the Sakharov prize? They would hardly feel encouraged by the Sakharov kind of an prize. They would probably feel rather threatened by it.

By: Mark Anthony Jones

Mark Anthony Jones — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 05:19:37 +0000

Perhaps I missed a good deal of the discussion, as I have been consumed with work of late, but my undertsanding is that the majority of the composers who collectively make up the English language China blogsphere, rather than dismissing Hu Jia as a worthwhile recipient of the Sakharov Prize, simply agreed that there were others who were arguably more worthy.

By: C.A. Yeung

C.A. Yeung — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:41:36 +0000

JR:

That’s right, we are not attempting at character assassination. Not at all. I didn’t include a single piece of information about Richard that he has not already openly admitted in his blog. That’s very different to Richard’s attempt at vilifying Hu Jia. I did not go around interviewing Richard’s co-workers about how they thought of him as an annoying gadfly. Now that’s character assassination.

Please also give me some credit for not dragging some historical issues between TPD and CDT into this discussion.

But I do agree with you that enough is enough. I’m happy to let it go and move on to something more important, such as the proposed land reform. See my comment at your blog.

P.S. JR – Your Comment #10 contains more than 2 hyperlinks. That’s why it’s been zapped into the moderation pool. But it’s fixed now and you should be able to view it.

By: Ned Kelly

Ned Kelly — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:29:29 +0000

“But why do you want to paint a picture of Richard’s character?”

We’re not painting anything. Richard has been perfectly capable of painting and tarnishing his own character in his own words.

By: justrecently

justrecently — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 07:47:52 +0000

Oops. These two comments crossed, too. I’ll take a break now and will be back later today.

By: justrecently

justrecently — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 07:45:14 +0000

Hi Catherine, I agree that Richard's comment on Xujun's blog is ugly - I haven't read the post there before. But even an underlying suggestion that he's an EXPERT wouldn't be a lie, because he probably believes that himself. Even this is just speculation from my quarters though, and not "exposing the truth about Richard". I think such an approach would be both inaccurate and way too defensive. There is enough that speaks for Hu Jia, and against the point Richard is trying to make. He became defensive when some commenters on his site started challenging his position, and he doesn't look good there - he's started defending himself. But why do you want to paint a picture of Richard's character? That's apparently what he's trying to do with Hu Jia's standing. Aren't the issues enough?

By: C.A. Yeung

C.A. Yeung — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 07:30:08 +0000

JR,

My comment just crossed yours.

You asked, “But what Richard writes about it on his blog isn’t a lie, is it?”

Not a lie, but only partially true. Sometimes half truth is worse than lies. The other half of the truth is that Hu Jia’s critical comments about the Beijing Olympics would have made Richard’s work as a PR consultant for the sponsor of the torch relay very difficult indeed. He once commented somewhere at TPD that he almost lost his job because of the torch relay debacle. It is therefore understandable why he is so hostile towards Hu Jia. Now, this is the part of the “truth” that Richard is not telling you.

By: C.A. Yeung

C.A. Yeung — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 07:13:18 +0000

Justrecently wrote:

“As I don’t want to get nasty, I’m not going to speculate about what motivates them.”

I don’t consider it nasty to call a spade a spade. We don’t need to speculate at all when it comes to a certain blogger’s motivation. He says it all himself, unashamedly. And I have no reason to doubt whether he really meant what he said.

Here I quote Richard’s comment at Xunjun’s blog:

“That Guardian article says it all about why the coverage of Hu Jia has been so poor. Read the article carefully. There is almost no substance to it. Brought roses to Tiananmen Square, got arrested…. It’s good to be pure and dignified. But many people are pure and dignified, and have a far more impressive roster of achievements to the causes Hu was fighting for. The level of cynicism about this award among the international AIDS-prevention/treatment NGOs, that saw Hu as an annoying gadfly, cannot be exaggerated.”

As you can see, Richard really feels short-changed on two accounts. This is the two points that Richard is trying to make: 1. Why would the Guardian choose someone so “unqualified” to make a comment about Hu Jia? Don’t they realise that I AM the PR expert who is LIVING in China? Do they know that I am PAID in RMB? 2. How can Hu Jia claim that he fights for AIDS sufferers? He is not even GAY. Don’t they know that AIDS is a gay disease?

By: justrecently

justrecently — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:54:20 +0000

I think that some of the answers Richard (Peking Duck) gets on his blog – from Kevin and Marc for example – are putting things into perspective. Richard seems to feel challenged when other Chinese NGO workers, or officials with the UN, ask what Hu Jia “actually achieved”. I believe that envy is one of the driving forces behind much of that criticism. But what Richard writes about it on his blog isn’t a lie, is it?

By: Ned Kelly

Ned Kelly — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:37:37 +0000

My blog defends Hu Jia and martyrs for truth. Others cynically call for “fairness and balance” in assessing, inter alia, China’s practice of forced infanticide. Acknowledging ugliness is not at all the same thing as creating it.