German Public Broadcaster Sacks Top Chinese Reporter Over Her Tweets Protesting Tiananmen Massacre Whitewashing

By Rose Tang

German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) today (August 19) sacked prominent Chinese journalist Su Yutong in relation to her Tweeting and signing a petition in protest against the whitewashing of the Tiananmen Massacre by a German columnist who runs a Bejing-based media company with partnerships with Chinese state media and DW.

德国之声今天(8月19日)突然辞退中文组著名记者苏雨桐,8月18日“六四”学运领袖吾尔开希访问德国之声,今天德国之声总监和总编亲自宣布,让苏雨桐 立即离职。事件疑与泽林在德国之声发布为六四辩护的失实文章一事有关。 事情非常严重,请媒体朋友关注。(中文报道及背景资料在英文报道后)
Su Yutong, who works for DW’s Chinese-language section said: “Frank Sieren (DW columnist) published articles in DW defending Chinese government’s role in Tiananmen Massacre. I signed a petition opposing Sieren’s views. Managers at DW said I have violated regulations of DW by spreading the news about Sieren.

DW Director General Peter Limbourg , Editor-in-chief Alexander Kudascheff and Director of Programming Gerda Meuer were very annoyed. Today Kudascheff and Meuer notified me directly about my immediate sacking. The heads of the Asia Section and the Chinese section were not notified by them and were shocked at my news.”

The timing of Su’s sacking is peculiar — it followed yesterday’s visit to DW from former Tiananmen leader Wu’er Kaixi who issued a statement earlier protesting against Sieren’s whitewashing of the massacre. He’s among a number of prominent Tiananmen leaders who sent DW protest statements, such as Wang Dan, and high profile writers and activists including Bao Pu (publisher and son of Bao Tong, former advisor to Zhao Ziyang, the late General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party who was ousted by Deng Xiaoping days before the massacre and was under house arrest until his death in 2005 ), German-based writers Liao Yiwu and Liao Tianqi who drafted a petition (in a link below) in protest against Sieren. The petition has been widely circulated which Su has also signed.

In July, Feng Haiyin, head of the Chinese language section of DW, was demoted. DW management explained the reason was because Feng’s “principles” did not comply with those of the Director of Programming. But Feng’s demotion was related to Sieren’s column, according to Su. In early June, DW management pressured its columnist Chang Ping not to publish articles about Sieren and not to name Sieren, according to Su. On June 11, an altered German copy of Chang’s piece was published briefly before it was deleted. But Sieren soon published a piece defending himself.

Sieren was hired by DW in February to write a column five times a week to be published on DW’s website in German and Chinese. Sieren and his girlfriend have been running a media company in Beijing that has partnerships with Chinese state media and DW. His company websites: http://www.sinocom.tv/pages/team.php?lang=DE
http://www.cmmintelligence.com/

Su said DW Director General Peter Limbourg earlier this year told staff that he visited Chinese Ambassador Shi Mingde in Berlin before Limbourg took office. Limbourg demanded the staff at DW’s Chinese language section promote the Chinese government, not just criticizing it. Before taking the DW top job, Limbourg attended several China-Germany Media Forums, sponsored and organized by Global Times (top Chinese propaganda machine)”. Chinese media (in English) coverage of Limbourg’s China visits. http://english.sina.com/china/2010/0520/320676.html
Chinese language coverage: http://baike.baidu.com/view/9909662.htm

Su said: “Frank Sieren has won so much support from the DW management and published numerous articles with false facts, attacking people who are critical of the Chinese government. As a journalist who knows China well and familiar with and in support of Chinese human rights, I protest that Sieren’s views being promoted on the platform of DW. I protest that the DW Director General and Editor-in-chief continuously support Sieren. With their support, Sieren even published a piece smearing artist Ai Weiwei, using the language of Global Times. In his recent column, Sieren ridiculed Ai, saying Ai was going after the market and fame.”
Sieren’s piece: http://www.dw.de/weltsprache-kunst/a-17717226

DW columnist Chang Ping (English translation) detailing the Sieren incident: http://chinachange.org/?s=frank+sieren&submit=

From New York-based activist Wen Yunchao 温云超: 8月18日“六四”学运领袖吾尔开希访问德国之声,今天德国之声总监和总编亲自宣布,让记者苏雨桐立即离职。事件疑与泽林在德国之声发布为六四辩护的失实文章一事有关。 事情非常严重,请媒体朋友关注。

DW Director General Peter Limbourg台长,先生,peter.limbourg@dw.de

DW Director of Program Gerda Meuer 总监   女士 gerda.meuer@dw.de

DW Editor-in-chief Alexander Kudascheff 总编  先生  Alexander.Kudascheff@dw.de

如下是德国之声记者苏雨桐叙述的 ”泽林事件“:
泽林是在今年的2月1日起,为德国之声工作,每周发来五篇德语文章,经中文部编辑翻译后,以中德文发表;六月四日当天,Frank Sieren以德文和中文在德国之声发表文章.

Frank Sieren获得台领导的大力支持,不断发表违背事实的攻击性文章,指向对象都是中共想要打击的人。作为一位对中国很了解并支持中国人权活动的记者,我无 法接受Frank Sieren文章中,长期以来的政治倾向和在德国之声这个平台上传递的价值观,所以提出抗议。同时也对德国之声总监和总编面对这个问题,继续支持泽林表示 遗憾和抗议。也正因为有他们的支持,才会有泽林继续用《环球时报》手法,抹黑艾未未的文章出现,在泽林最新的文章中,对这位艺术家的独立批判精神以“阴谋 论”的方式进行了嘲讽,指向他的政治异议行为是为了获得更大的市场和名声:http://www.dw.de/weltsprache-kunst/a- 17717226

1,Frank Sieren’s article (Chinese 泽林关于六四屠杀的文 (中文):
http://www.dw.de/%E4%BB%8E%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E5%88%B0%E8%8E%B1%E6%AF%94%E9%94%A1/a-17683958

2,泽林的文章发表后,引起了很大的争议,最先向德国之声发来抗议信的是北京知名异议人士鲍彤之子鲍朴,他也是六四的亲历者,目前是香港新世纪出版社的负责人,他的抗议信见附件二照片

3,June 6, German-based writers Liao Yiwu and Liao Tianqi drafted a petition  in protest against Sieren. 6月6日,旅德作家廖亦武、独立中文笔会前会长廖天琪发起联署抗议信: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1n_ww2fy8R57NdOwRmduTBVDMjulV5sglSigarOI-uDM/viewform
Signers and comments 签名人和留言:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsKDF8_HXe4IdHNqUXZBQzVDenRDMUozcGxQemZveEE&usp=sharing

4,记者长平的反驳文章在6月8日发出,但受到德国之声电台总监和总编的阻拦,要求他尽量不提或少提泽林的名字,甚至要求长平在泽林看过之后才能发表,6 月11日,这个反驳文章的德文版被编辑的篡改后发表,长平要求撤下,后来在总监与总编与德国之声见面会后,得以发表:http://www.dw.de /%E5%85%AD%E5%9B%9B%E5%B1%A0%E6%9D%80%E4%B8%8D%E6%98%AF%E4%B8%AD%E5%85%B1%E4%B8%80%E6%97%B6%E5%A4%B1%E8%B6%B3/a-17711914

5,Frank Sieren针对长平文章又发表一篇德文文章,奇怪的是,长平的文章只在德国之声版面上停留了很短的时间,泽林竟然有备而来,于6月12日发表了这篇文 章:    http://www.dw.de/fairness-statt-wut/a-17702613

6,泽林在6月21日发表的对长平进行个人攻击的文章,德国之声对泽林的个人情绪化表达大开绿灯:

http://www.dw.de/%E6%9E%81%E7%AB%AF%E5%A4%B8%E5%BC%A0/a-17726707

7,Frank Sieren获得台领导的大力支持,不断发表违背事实的攻击性文章,指向对象都是中共想要打击的人。作为一位对中国很了解并支持中国人权活动的记者,我无 法接受Frank Sieren文章中,长期以来的政治倾向和在德国之声这个平台上传递的价值观,所以提出抗议。同时也对德国之声总监和总编面对这个问题,继续支持泽林表示 遗憾和抗议。也正因为有他们的支持,才会有泽林继续用《环球时报》手法,抹黑艾未未的文章出现,在泽林最新的文章中,对这位艺术家的独立批判精神以“阴谋 论”的方式进行了嘲讽,指向他的政治异议行为是为了获得更大的市场和名声:http://www.dw.de/weltsprache-kunst/a- 17717226

8,直到今天,泽林在德国之声稳稳占据平台,继续发表讴歌中共的文章,文章有很多事实和逻辑的错误,写作手法和环球时报相类似,如这篇文 章:http://www.dw.de/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E6%8B%AF%E6%95%91%E8%8B%B1%E5%9B %BD%E5%A5%B3%E7%8E%8B/a-17733738

与事件相关的一些信息:

9,关于德国之声新任台长Peter Limbourg ,在去年上任之初来到德国之声中文部时,亲口告诉部门员工他在上任之前拜访了中国驻德国大使史明德,他还要求中文部员工不能只批评中国政府,也要鼓励他 们……Peter Limbourg 在就任德国之声台长之前,曾多次参加中国官媒环球时报主办和资助的中德媒体论坛:
http://english.sina.com/china/2010/0520/320676.html
http://baike.baidu.com/view/9909662.htm
他就任后,也在今年4月以德国之声台长身份参加该活动,与中共官媒互动频繁,是否违反德国之声法?

10,Frank Sieren本人,和他的女友在中国开设的公司:

http://www.cmmintelligence.com/contact ;(战略合作伙伴包括德国之声)
http://www.sinocom.tv/pages/team.php?lang=DE(曾和德国之声合作项目)

11, 德国之声雇佣与自己有商业合作的人做驻北京站记者是否违反德国之声法?

12, 6月16日,德国之声总监和总编与中文部员工见面时,反复强调德国之声中文部不能办成异议之声,对我来说这些指令明显违反德国之声法 (http://www.dw.de/grundlage-f%C3%BCr-unabh%C3%A4ngigen-journalismus/a- 3004485)其中:“在那些本国媒体不自由和不能全面报道的国家里,为使人们有畅通的获取信息的通道,外国媒体是重要的补充”,会议结束后,总监要求 与会者保密,我拒绝了,因为泽林事件是一个公共事件。
13,觉得还有一件事情值得关注:近期在新浪微博上,出现一条据称是从中国使馆流出的消息:德国之声近期将调张丹红回到中文部,2008年的张丹红事件曾 引发世界范围内对德国之声的争议和关注,如果未来德国之声真的公布此项任命决定,我更感兴趣的是,为何中国使馆会先于我们内部员工知道此事?张丹红对泽林 也一直是极力推崇.

就这个事件,我(苏雨桐)想强调的是:

1,泽林现在是德国之声的北京记者,德国之声关于中国的重大议题和公共事件,只有他一个人可以用评论的方式发表观点(其他记者只能做报道,不能发表评 论),德国之声中文部主任冯海因也有这样的权利,但他写得很少,这就形成了一种局面:事实上,只有泽林一种声音;

2,泽林的发表的书、文章的观点,大多是用环球时报的手法,讴歌中国政府的成绩,鲜少直接触及实质问题;他本人、他的女友在北京的公司都和中国官方媒体有很多合作,这样的背景成为德国之声中文部唯一就中国评论的声音,和德国之声法的宗旨相抵触

3,泽林美化六四屠杀的文章,不是单一事件,从某种意义上,代表德国之声对中国报道的方向,泽林在发表了美化六四屠杀的文章后,由于他的观点得到了电台负 责人的支持,他在以后又发表了攻击艾未未的文章,和继续讴歌中国政府的文章,德国之声为何不能聆听一些听众的意见?聆听一些编辑的意见?

4,德国之声中文部和德语组,作为节目部门,为何不能决定稿件是否可以使用,德国之声台长、总监和总编以行政命令的方式指令节目部门必须刊登泽林的稿件,我必须说这点是错误的。

Source: http://rosetangy.blogspot.de/2014/08/german-public-broadcast-sacks-chinese.html

Visits: 61

发表评论?

0 条评论。

发表评论