四月青年社区

 找回密码
 注册会员

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

查看: 5634|回复: 36

【2010.8.13我看中国】重塑中国形象,需要的是诚实,而不是宣传

[复制链接]
 楼主| 发表于 2010-8-15 02:13 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
本帖最后由 和解团结 于 2010-8-15 02:29 编辑

【中文标题】重塑中国形象,需要的是诚实,而不是宣传
【原文标题】Re-branding China Requires Honesty, Not Propaganda
【登载媒体】我看中国博客

【来源地址】http://chinageeks.org/2010/08/re ... age-1/#comment-6549
【译者】和解团结
【翻译方式】人工
【说明】

本文作者是“我看中国”博客的Charlie Custer。Custer为《环球时报》英文版的评论部分写过很多文章。这篇文章是他对《环球时报》几天前刊登的一篇文章《How can we make the world like us》--“如何才能让世界喜欢我们”的回应。他在博客中表示他对自己的这篇文章感到非常骄傲,并且认为这是他迄今为止为《环球时报》写过的最好的一篇文章。但《环球时报》的编辑拒绝发表这篇文章,认为此文”不够有说服力"。于是Custer将此文放在了他的博客上,让读者来判断。

【译文】
几天前,《环球时报》英文版发表了一篇评论性文章,“如何才能让世界喜欢我们?”这是一个有意思的问题,而且中国最近对此的讨论也很多。政府已经为他们媒体的扩张而投了很多钱进去,希望这样能获得世界的接受,此外,最近他们还宣布了制作一个电影短片的计划,以及一个将会在不同国家播放的长三十秒的电视广告。这个电视广告中将包含五十个中国明星。

星期三的这个评论性文章赞赏这些举动,认为相对于中国之前多用经济发展的新闻故事来重塑自己形象的尝试,这是一个巨大的进步。但事实上,我认为实际情况况恰好相反。那些基于不可否认和清楚事实的关于中国经济发展的新闻,在改变人们对中国发展的认识上,是相当成功的。但是,在让人们喜欢中国这一点上,不管是这些新闻故事还是广告都不会有多大作用。事实上,包括世博和奥运对此也没什么用。是的,这些东西展示了一个强大的中国,但是强大并不意味着被喜欢。那么,中国的问题究竟在哪里?

《环球时报》的原文说“中国人民长期以来一直认为,要想赢得世界的尊重和喜爱,国家的强大是根本。许多中国人至今依然默默承受着过去贫穷的记忆以及因此而带来的耻辱。”虽说强大的实力也许在赢得尊敬方面有帮助作用,但它和赢得喜爱却毫无关系。有些强大的国家在国际上是受人喜爱的,但另一些却是被鄙视的,而且被喜爱和被鄙视是很容易转换的。举例来说,美国就见证了它的形象从“希望之乡”到“帝国主义恶霸”的转变,这主要就是因为美国在展示它的军事力量。强大的实力并不能孕育喜爱的种子。其实,很多时候,它所孕育的是恐惧。


经济合作伙伴同样不能拯救中国。外国不会因为经济原因和中国成为朋友,就像你不会和你家旁边杂货店的收银员成为朋友是一个道理。的确,发展中国家今天可能为了分得中国经济的一杯羹而支持中国,甚至其他的超级大国们也无法忽视中国,但这只是做生意的需要。虽然生意关系在中国经常意味着友好的关系,在国外却经常不是这样的。这都是经济;中国不会因为夸耀自己的经济力量而被喜爱。


即使那种可能是存在的,中国的地位也使中国不可能那么做。不管他们的抱怨是否公平,越来越多的外国公司高管抱怨说外国公司在中国市场上受到了不公平待遇,而且政府在给本地公司不公平的优势。这种处理问题的方式当然不会为中国在海外赢得很多朋友。


而一个由虽然微笑但“依然默默承受着过去贫穷的记忆以及因此而带来的耻辱”的明星组成的,向世界展示着一个经过漂白了的中国形象的商业广告也不会对中国的形象有所帮助。全世界都知道中国不是一个完美的地方,因此试图将它展示成完美的,并且掩盖那些缺点的行为只会被认为是不诚实的。


虽说对存在的缺点更诚实会让人们愈加喜欢中国的说法似乎听起来有些矛盾,但这也是道理所在。在人际关系中,那些把自己展现成完美无缺的人是不受欢迎的;他们被称作傲慢的人,而且在背后被人取笑。当这些人失败的时候,那些看热闹的旁人会感到高兴。而中国现在就处在这种情况之中。外国人嘲笑新华社和其他国内的媒体。不是因为工作在那里的人不优秀,他们是优秀的,而是因为那些加在他们身上的限制,什么能说,什么不能说的限制实在是太大了。他们不可以诚实,因为那是不允许的。结果就是,当世界看他们的时候,带着的是猜疑,而不是喜爱。


回到人际关系的比喻中,谦虚的,自贬的人一般是很容易找到朋友的。人们更愿意信任一个不把自己装做是完美的人。那为什么根据BBC今年四月的一个调查,一个现在正在进行不止一场,而是两场在外国土地上不受欢迎的战争的美国,在国际上依然比中国更受欢迎。我觉得,一个原因是,在美国,信息的流入和流出是相对自由的,这使得它的政府看上去相对来说更诚实,即使它本身也有相当多的缺陷。


当然,承认一个人的错误,不等于宣扬这些错误。举例来说,没人会建议中国购买外国电视的广告时间,然后做一个关于中国煤矿如何危险的广告。但是,更多的诚实将会是一个良好的开端。


如果中国不能通过一个更诚实的国内媒体吸引其他国家,那这将清楚的表明相对外国人是否喜欢中国这个事情,中国政府还有更重要的问题去解决。如果中国希望被喜爱,那它就需要更诚实的面对自己的缺点,而且要认真的解决那些问题。


如果中国不这么做,它可以继续增强自己的实力和勉强获得的尊重。但是中国不会因此被喜欢。而且几乎毫无疑问的,它会得到更多的敌人。



【原文】


A few days ago, the Global Times ran an opinion piece called “How can we make the world like us?”That’s an interesting question, and one that China seems to be asking a lot these days. The government has put a lot of money into expanding their media outlets with the hope of gaining global acceptance, and recently announced a plan to create a short film and accompanying thirty-second commercial that will run on TV in various foreign countries. The commercial will feature a fifty Chinese celebrities.

Wednesday’s opinion piece praises this as a big step forward over China’s previous attempts to rebuild its image, which mostly invovled news stories about economic progress. But actually, I think the opposite is true. News stories about China’s economic growth – which were based in undeniable and clearly evident facts – were a remarkably successful way of changing people’s perceptions of China’s development. But neither those stories nor the commercial is going to help much in terms of making people like China. Neither is the Expo, and neither did the Olympics, really. These show a China that is powerful, yes, but not necessarily one that is likeable. So where has China gone wrong?

The original article says “the Chinese people have long regarded national strength as fundamental to winning respect and affection from the rest of the world. Many Chinese people still swallow the bitter memories of past poverty and the humiliation associated with it.” And while strength may be instrumental in winning respect, it has nothing to do with winning affection. Some strong countries are liked internationally, but others are despised, and the tides turn easily. America, for example, has seen its international image go from “the promised land” to “bully imperialist” primairly because it was demonstrating its military strength. Strength does not breed affection. Too often, in fact, what it breeds is fear.

Economic partnership will not save China either. Foreign countries are no morel likely to be friends with China for econimic reasons than you are likely to be friends with the people working the cash register at your local grocery store. Sure, developing countries may toady up to China for a seat at the table, and even other superpowers can’t afford to ignore China, but that is business. And while business relationships are often also friendly relationships in China, they generally aren’t abroad. It’s all economic; China cannot win affection by flaunting economic power.      

Even if that were possible, China certainly isn’t in a position to do so. Whether their complaints are fair or not, an increasing number of foreign CEOs are complaining that foreign companies aren’t treated fairly in the Chinese market and that the government gives unfair advantages to local companies. That kind of approach certainly isn’t going to win China many friends abroad.

Neither is a commerical full of smiling celebrities who quietly “swallow the bitter memories of past poverty and humilation” while presenting a whitewashed image of China to the world. The world knows that China is not a perfect place, so presenting it as one and trying to cover up all of its flaws comes off as dishonest.It might seem paradoxical that being more honest about flaws will make people more likely to like China, but it makes sense. In interpersonal relationships, people who present themselves publicly as perfect are disliked; they are called arrogant and mocked behind their backs. When they fail, bystanders rejoice. This is essentially what is happening to China now. Foreigners laugh at Xinhua and other domestic media outlets. This isn’t because the people working there aren’t talented – they are – but the limits placed on what they can and cannot say are too great. They are not allowed to be honest. And as a result, the world sees them with suspicion rather than affection.

Returning to the metaphor of interpersonal relations, humble, self-deprecating people generally have little trouble finding friends. People are more likely to trust someone who doesn’t pretend he’s perfect. Why is the US, which is currenly engaged in not one but two unpopular wars on foreign soil, still more popular internationally than China according to a BBC World Service poll from April of this year? I suspect one of the reasons is that the relatively free flow of information into and out of America makes its government seem comparatively honest, even if it is also deeply flawed.

Of course, there’s a difference between admitting one’s faults and advertising them. No one would recommend that China purchase airtime in foreign countries and then run an advertisement about how dangerous Chinese coal mines are, for example. But more honesty would be a good first step.

And if China can’t attract foreign countries by being more honest in its media output, then that’s a clear sign that the government has more important problems to attend to than whether or not foreigners like China. If China wants to be liked, it needs to get honest about its flaws and serious about fixing them.

If it doesn’t it may continue to gain strength and a grudging respect. But it wont gain affection. And it will, almost certainly, gain enemies.







评分

1

查看全部评分

发表于 2010-8-15 03:17 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 和解团结 于 2010-8-15 03:21 编辑

一些对此文的回复
jg on August 13, 2010 at 17:27        
没人会愿意听你说的这些!尤其是《环球时报》和TG。如果他们没法完美的撒谎,那撒谎还有什么意义?你已经警告他们了。这是你能做的最好的了。即使它失败了,被嘲笑的下了台了,他们都不会明白这一点。“恐怕我们当初应该用100个明星。让艾未未从他德国的医院病床上起来!还有巩俐。。。等等,她是新加坡人?”



Jeremiah on August 13, 2010 at 21:10        
在何伟的《江城》这本老书中,他写道当他和他的学生讨论历史的时候,他的学生列举出了所有中国的敌人以及敌对的原因(英国/鸦片,美国/朝鲜战争,日本/你知道的。。。)何伟听着他冗长的叙述,然后问了一个难住他学生,并让她无语了的问题:谁是中国的朋友?

这就是中国笨手笨脚,耳朵失聪一样的软实力花言巧语的问题所在。

                                       

Bob Page on August 13, 2010 at 22:23       
查理,我同意你关于新华社只有在不和政府勾结,真正的报道他们所发现的东西的时候,才能被认真的当成一个新闻机构来对待。

你和《环球时报》提出了一个很好的问题。如果中国现在的营销节目是笨拙和不可信的,那什么才可以取代它?究竟哪些中国的资产和资源可以被利用起来,把中国的故事用一种可以相信的方式讲出来?

你的博客,以及
ChinaHush, Danwei, EastSouthWestNorth, ChinaSmack, ChinaLawBlog, The Peking Duck所组成的资源,已经对世界展现着一个诚实,真实,以及一个时常让人喜爱的中国。这恐怕是一个新的中国形象起飞的重要地方。

                                       
查普山,北加州,美国


outcast on August 14, 2010 at 00:20        
不诚实,尤其是为了面子,是中国文化的核心。如果你真的想改变这点,就要找到这个问题的根源:毁掉那个制造这个东西的文化。


pug_ster on August 14, 2010 at 00:28        
我想中国可以为了中国的形象而极尽所能。但是,因为冷战思维,西方媒体渲染了一幅落后中国的图景,不管是政治上,社会上,文化上还是经济上都是如此。你在西方媒体上能读到中国都做了什么,以及他们这么做时不可告人的目的,从而制造这种不信任。中国的旅游部门做什么都是无济于事的,它不能和西方媒体竞争。西方媒体在这方面是技高一筹的,不管是二战时的德国和日本,六十年代的越战,七十八十年代的日本还是今天的中国。至少中国的“宣传”将这种愤怒引向了他们的政府,而不是人民。
                                       


                                       
Crystal on August 14, 2010 at 04:45       
简单的说,你是要公开和透明的政策--那个在前苏联尝试过的叫做“公开化”的东西。我不认为中国希望得到同样的结局。
                                       


richard on August 14, 2010 at 08:05 (对上面留言的回复)
楼上的Crystal,你是不是再说中国不应该尝试诚实和透明,因为当俄国人试着诚实和透明的时候,苏联崩溃了?拜托,不要以为苏联是因为透明化而垮掉的。它已经处恶化/崩溃中好几十年了;戈尔巴乔夫实行公开化是因为他知道苏联的模式已经摇摇欲坠了,而且他也知道他们需要一切能找得到的朋友
                                       
没有什么比那个根深蒂固的说法--“感谢上帝,中国没有拥抱民主/透明,要不我们就会和俄国人一样”--是更令人生气的了。好像是透明无可避免的导致了混乱和崩溃一样。
Custer,你说的不错。看《环球时报》怎么处理这个东西会很有趣。我曾经给他们写过一些东西,但被十分莫名其妙的理由给拒绝了。




stuart on August 14, 2010 at 09:35       
同意,写的好。中国在准备好发表这样的评论文章之前,是不会长大的,这样的文章甚至不能被认为是煽动或者敏感。
                                       
对 Jeremiah"谁是中国的朋友?这就是中国笨手笨脚,耳朵失聪一样的软实力花言巧语的问题所在。"

当我在中国教书的时候,我遇到了相同的态度。我的课堂没有一次可以积极的回应那些胡和温见面的外国领导是否可以被信任或者是中国的朋友。我记者普京得到了一个一分为二的回复,但依然带着疑问。其他每个人都是“反对”中国的,也不能被信任。我想这就是问题的核心,也就是内部宣传和外部宣传的区别。对内,中国提倡对外国的不信任和怨恨;对外,中国想制造一个仁慈,宽容,和善的形象。换句话说,中国想让别人把自己当成朋友,但不想在国内哺育对外部世界真正的友好感觉。

这让中国的软实力攻势显得十分虚伪。











                                       

评分

1

查看全部评分

回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 05:10 | 显示全部楼层
一个国家的形象居然要靠拍广告来维护。我不知道这是悲哀,还是其他什么?
木桶理论不知大家看过没有。为什么有这么荒唐的 事情发生
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 06:28 | 显示全部楼层
一场战争比什么宣传都好
中共高层都是饭桶
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 07:15 | 显示全部楼层
我对tg没感情
不过楼上的要当了领导人我立刻移民到宇宙帝的火星上去
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 07:17 | 显示全部楼层
对于那些一分对自己曾经做的孽都没赔过的国家的人的评论
拿来送我当草纸我都不要  真是浪费老子时间来看兽类心理分析
拜托某些动物先进化成人的心灵  然后再来跟人类讨论道德好法
—————————————————————————————————
版主分割
请您文明发言
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 08:02 | 显示全部楼层
中国更喜欢面子形象
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 08:16 | 显示全部楼层
真实的中国诚然没有《新闻联播》中展示的那么和谐,但它也绝不是西方主流宣传的那么不堪。执着于细节争论的“瞎子”们,如果可以后退几步,接受事物的全部,才能看见整头“大象”。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 08:41 | 显示全部楼层
中国人是为了面子,白人换个说法,是为了荣誉!
两面性!换个说法,然后,味道就全变了
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 08:50 | 显示全部楼层
外国的屎都是香的,中国的花都是臭的,就是这样。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 09:44 | 显示全部楼层
作者应该拿这篇文章对着美国的行为去思考下,自己是不是很天真幼稚。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 10:22 | 显示全部楼层
干嘛要让外国人高兴喜欢????????
中国国内的不喜欢不高兴的还多这呢,看看哪国政府办事是为了外国喜欢高兴????????这真是贱到骨子里了。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 10:27 | 显示全部楼层
写作的十三点人士,你怎么不去给发达的美国人上上形象课去?真是见识了有的人的骨子里的娘胎里带的贱劲,人真是分三六九等的。。。。。。。。。。。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 15:59 | 显示全部楼层
应该说宣传片只是重塑形象采用的方式之一,效果怎么样,不同的受众会有不同的感受。如果你对某个国家一无所知,看到该国的宣传片,也许会引起兴趣希望更多了解;如果你已经通过各种途径对该国产生良好印象,那么宣传片也许能够达到让你喜爱这个国家的目的;如果你常常看到对该国的负面报道并留下不良印象,那么宣传片只会让你不信任让你感到虚假,对重塑形象丝毫不会起到作用。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 18:44 | 显示全部楼层
干嘛要让外国人喜欢我们
美国人受到世界人民的喜欢了吗?
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 19:35 | 显示全部楼层
当中国走上德国道路的时候,世界会震惊,伤痛,哭泣,愤怒,最后中国会得到尊重~
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-15 21:03 | 显示全部楼层
对于那些一分对自己曾经做的孽都没赔过的国家的人的评论
拿来送我当草纸我都不要  真是浪费老子时间来看兽 ...
diojojojo 发表于 2010-8-15 07:17



    哦,您说的是美国还是日本啊?
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-16 04:07 | 显示全部楼层
中国人更爱面子需要宣传?
上面一群废物知道好莱坞是什么吗?
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-16 05:51 | 显示全部楼层
我的回复

I find it awfully naive and foolish to believe that a different form of propaganda would help improve China's image globally. Regardless of the nature of the information put forth by the Chinese government, China and the United States will always remain as competitors, and given that most of the "Western world" is included in a mutually beneficial international political and economic system largely constructed and managed by the United States, which also serves as its symbolic leader, any attempts at finding allies without being backed by a significant amount of economic and military power is bound to fall short of its intended goal, honest or not.

To illustrate my point, let us examine the United States. Many would use the fact that so many people are willing to immigrate to the United States as proof that it is well-liked internationally. But on the other hand, many more would claim that the United States acts in a violent and self-serving manner on the international stage, increasingly adopting an increasingly imperialistic manner, and is economically ravaging the third-world countries around the globe, and thus cannot be considered to be a well-liked country.

Some would see a contradiction in the facts above, but I propose that they are, in reality, the same thing - that the American government, while exploitative toward less-developed countries internationally, is capable of providing its citizens with such a high living standard (through the exploitations of other countries) that instead of fighting the American hegemony, citizens of the exploited countries are willing to simply move to the United States, and thus become one of the exploiters.

Furthermore, we can also see that most of the allies of the United States have been included in an international economic and political system established by the United States (e.g. Marshall Plan, which tied the Western European economy to the US), and as long as they benefit in this international system, they will remain as allies to the United States.

This simple truth is identical for China, or for that matter, any other country. To garner support within or without, all that is needed for a national government to do is to construct a national (or international) political-economic framework, within which the participants, which would be either the citizens or external allies, may benefit from. So long as the framework holds and most participants benefit from it, the alliance between them remains stable.
It is comparatively easy to establish a national system of resource distribution (also known as economics, stated here explicitly for effect) that allows a majority of the citizens to benefit from it. China has made great strides in this direction since the 90s, and is likely to proceed further in the same direction in the near future. Of comparatively greater difficulty is the construction of an international political and economic framework. How would a country, almost friendless at the moment, go about creating allies? More explicitly, how would it go about replacing the current international system created by the United States 60 years ago, which is showing no signs of weakness?

The rise of the United States in the early 20th century was rather easy to predict, but it also had a significant coincidental nature. Although it was blessed with a land relatively undeveloped by previous civilizations, a political scene unobstructed by millenia of tradition, a people of rather homogeneous makeup, and challenged by no neighboring powers on the continent (aside from Mexico, but by the early 1900s, Mexico's power was clearly declining), the declining British Empire, which allowed the formation of a global power vacuum, the two World Wars, which destroyed the established order in Europe and beyond, and the Cold war (and associated anti-Communism), which served as the unifying force behind Western states, also played crucial roles in the rise of the United States. Can China replicate the path the Americans took? Not directly, of course, but all things are bound to come to an end, Pax Americana included. All China has to do in the mean time, then, would be to follow its policy of "韬光养晦", and be prepared to seize the opportunities as they arise.

Ever since China left behind the ideological foolishness of the 1960s and 70s, it has been guided by nothing more than pragmatism. When applied to international politics, I believe that this principle of "no principles" will fundamentally benefit not only the Chinese leadership and the Chinese citizens, but all of its future allies as well.

Alternatively, China can play a game of balance like the British once did on the European mainland, but that's probably even more difficult, so I won't discuss it here.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-16 08:36 | 显示全部楼层
我不喜欢美国,但又怎样呐?在国家往来中就诚实来说中国比美国强,但又怎样了呐?
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册会员

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|免责声明|四月网论坛 ( AC四月青年社区 京ICP备08009205号 备案号110108000634 )

GMT+8, 2024-9-23 11:22 , Processed in 0.059260 second(s), 24 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2023 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表