Copyright Columbia Journalism Review
For foreign correspondents in China, breaking stories that the censored Chinese press canâ€™t touch has long been a core part of the mission.
In the recent past, this often happened via behind-the-scenes cooperation: Stymied Chinese investigative journalists discretely shared details with foreign counterparts, reasoning that at least the news would be on the record somewhere, and with a bit of luck, word might eventually filter back into China.
I was the occasional beneficiary of this sort of thing during six years of reporting from China forÂ The New York Times, from 2003 to 2008. When censorship made it impossible for local reporters to write about modern slave labor in the brick-making industry, for instance, local reporters passed along information to me and other foreign correspondents in the hopes that international coverage would blow the story open. And it did.
In 2012, though, this newsgathering model itself was blown away. Against the backdrop of a once-a-decade leadership transition in China, three big American news organization, one after the other, began breaking historic ground with original investigative work, ground on which no one in the Chinese media, however plucky, had ever dared to tread.
This new wave of extraordinary American reporting was far more than coincidence, but the result of fierce competition between news organizations over a critical story: political maneuvering and corruption at the highest levels of the Chinese political systemâ€”a subject that had traditionally been almost entirely hidden from the world.
The competition would yield unprecedented scrutiny for Chinese political and economic elites and a new cornucopia of information for readers. And it would tip one news organization into crisis from which it has not yet emerged.
Two of these organizations,Â The Wall Street JournalÂ andÂ The New York Times, were already long-established leaders of international reporting. Between them, they had racked up six Pulitzer Prizes for International Reporting from China alone. By comparison, the third player, Bloomberg News, a wing of financial-data giant Bloomberg LP, was an upstart. And yet it was Bloomberg, with its reporting on the immense, shadowy fortunes of close relatives of the incoming Chinese president, Xi Jinping, that many people who follow China closely believe broke the most ground and deserved the news industryâ€™s greatest plaudits.
When it was instead theÂ TimesÂ that won a Pulitzer from Chinaâ€”yet againâ€”in 2013, Bloomberg reporters and editors described an immense letdown. But they were rallied by the companyâ€™s editor in chief, Matthew Winkler, who urged the China staff to keep its competitive fires stoked. According to one employee, he wrote to the team that produced the work on Xi, calling their reporting â€œfabulous stuff,â€ adding, â€œweâ€™ll just keep going.â€
Encouragement like this quickly led to another long-term reporting effort into the morass of political corruption at Chinaâ€™s highest levels. In a stroke, Bloomberg was becoming an important player in international newsâ€”and now, just as suddenly, it has tainted its corporate identity and journalism brand to a degree that could last for years. All because of its China coverage.
– See the complete article at: http://www.cjr.org/feature/bloombergs_folly.php?page=all#sthash.Ovp24X3e.dpuf