【外交政策 20131022】“民谣”与“官谣”

满仓

【中文标题】“民谣”与“官谣”
【原文标题】How to Say 'Truthiness' in Chinese
【登载媒体】外交政策
【原文作者】DAVID WERTIME
【原文链接】http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/10/22/how_to_say_truthiness_in_chinese


（译者注：“truthiness”一词的创造者是美国讽刺明星斯蒂芬•科尔伯特。2005年10月，科尔伯特在自己主持的脱口秀节目《科尔伯特报告》中首次使用了这个英语单词。科尔伯特对“truthiness”的解释是，“来自内心、而不是来自书本的真相”。）



“官谣”并不是一种矛盾形容法，这个词已经成为了中国网民手中的武器，来对政府的监控采取游击战。在政府领导的对“网络谣言”的打击行动中，网民的反抗战争趋于白热化。政府打击网络谣言的目的是压制喧嚣的社会媒体，所采取的行动包括逮捕、拘留了几位高调的网络意见领袖。更让中国网民愤怒的是，中国最高法院在9月9日新发布的一项司法解释，说发布诽谤信息的阅读量如果超过5000，或者转发量超过500，会导致最高三年的监禁。

当言论自由的权力遭到攻击，中国的草根试图把镜子转向官方，他们搜集了很多官方和国有媒体曾经发布过的、后来被证实是错误的言论。结果是中国语言中出现了两种“谣言”：民谣——中国民众发布的或许真实也或许不真实的言论，和官谣——官方谣言，也就是中国当局发布的假话。

“官谣”是一句双关语，意指“官窑”——官方的窑炉制作出最上等的瓷器，在古代供帝王使用。在中国最大的搜索引擎百度上搜索官谣，可以发现这个词最早出现在2010年中。但是官谣的搜索量和媒体提及频率在2013年9月迅速上升，原因是政府加紧打压网络言论。从那以后，这个词迅速进入中国的辞典，中国网民试图扭转词语的原意，抱怨民谣和官谣的标准不一。在新浪微博上，这个词近期被提及了60万次。

尽管官谣整体指代政府当局所有不真实的言论，但也有不同的表现形式，尤其是当官方或者官方媒体用否认，甚至反指的方式回应指责的时候。10月18日，有自由倾向的《北京新闻》发布了六种典型的官方谣言：“上级介入后承认”、“不见视频不认错”、“反咬一口”、“护短遮羞”、“自欺欺人”、“瞒天过海”。作为“反咬一口”的实例，《北京新闻》引用了前中国能源部部长刘铁男下台的过程，能源部负责监管中国的能源基础设施。2012年12月，记者罗昌平在新浪微博上举报刘收受贿赂，能源部新闻办公室坚称罗的举报是“纯粹的诽谤和谣言”。但刘在5月份被解职接受调查。

《北京新闻》把河南省一个小城市项城宣传局局长田洪志的下台，作为“护短遮羞”的典型事件。5月的一个晚上，中部城市郑州的一家夜店做出了一个错误的决定，他们在电子屏幕上打出一个粗俗标语欢迎当地官员：“中海化控股集团张总、王总热烈欢迎项城市田局长来郑州做客，祝田局长身体健康，全家幸福”。月底，田被解除职务，并受到惩罚。但是在此之前，市政府的发言人声称总共有6位姓“田”的局领导，那天晚上都在外出差，所以标语照片“或许是恶作剧，也可能是这家夜店在搞噱头”。官方媒体《中国青年报》评论：“应该说，有关方面对网络舆情的反应是迅速的，对违规者的处罚是及时的，值得称赞。但在这件事中，有人向公众撒了谎，却没有受到任何处罚，这是不应该的。”

作为官谣的对立面，民谣的兴起并不代表二者是平等的。不可否认，老式的草根谣言——民谣——的确在中国的互联网上大量出现，其它国家也是如此。官方和民间同样有可能歪曲、忽视事实，但是如果官方这么做，他们背后有政府撑腰。一家地方报纸《重庆时报》在10月20日的一篇文章中说：“官方是权威的，但权威并不代表着真相，甚至不少时候，官方都会用这种权威掩盖真相。”这种伪善为政府反谣言的行动设定了错误的方向，而且官方还发表声明说，需要引导民众发表更具有“建设性”的观点。微博用户、上海作家严祖佑更直截了当地说：“要惩处民谣，须先惩处官谣。”



原文：

"Official rumors" is more than just an oxymoron. The phrase -- pronounced guanyao -- has become a useful weapon in Chinese Internet users' linguistic guerrilla warfare against government censorship. That battle has intensified during a government-led crackdown on "online rumor-mongering," which has sought to rein in China's rambunctious social media, partly through the arrest or detention of several high-profile online opinion leaders. Making things worse for China's Internet users is a new judicial interpretation, issued on Sept. 9 by China's highest legal authorities, stating that posting defamatory messages read more than 5,000 times or shared more than 500 times can lead to up to three years in jail.

In the face of these assaults on their right to speak out, grassroots Chinese are trying to turn the mirror back on officialdom by calling out instances where officials or state-owned media made statements that turned out to be false. The result is two types of "rumors" in Chinese argot: minyao, or rumors spread by Chinese citizens which may or may not be true, and guanyao, official rumors, which are falsehoods uttered by Chinese authorities.

According to Baidu, China's most popular search engine, mentions of guanyao -- a pun for state-owned kilns (guan) that churned out the finest porcelain (yao) for emperors in China's dynastic days -- date back at least to mid-2010. But searches and media mentions for guanyao spiked in early Sept. 2013, as the government's crackdown on online speech heated up. Since then, the term has rapidly entered the Chinese lexicon as netizens try to turn the proverbial tables, complaining that citizen lies and official lies are held to two different standards. On Sina Weibo, China's Twitter, alone, the term has received over 600,000 recent mentions.

Although guanyao can refer to any untruths by government authorities, the typical manifestation occurs at a particular point in the life cycle of a P.R. crisis, when officials or official media react to accusations of wrong-doing with denials or counter-accusations. On Oct. 18, the liberal-leaning Beijing News published a graphic detailing six archetypes of official rumors: "practicing deception," "admitting [the truth] after higher government authorities intervene," "covering up," "not admitting a mistake before seeing the [incriminating] video," "self-deception," and "biting back."

Examples abound. The Beijing News cited the downfall of Liu Tienan, the former chief of the Chinese National Energy Administration (NEA), the entity that governs China's energy infrastructure, as an example of "biting back." In December 2012, journalist Luo Changping took to Sina Weibo to accuse Liu of taking bribes; Liu was removed from his post and put under investigation in May, but not before the NEA's press office insisted Luo's claims of corruption were "pure slander and rumor."

For a classic "cover-up," Beijing News recapped the downfall of Tian Hongzhi, propaganda bureau chief for the medium-sized city of Xiangcheng in Henan province. One May evening, a nightclub in the provincial capital of Zhengzhou had the bad judgment to greet the official with a bawdy neon sign, reading in part, "A Warm Welcome to Xiangcheng Bureau Chief Tian." By late May, a photograph of the sign had spread rapidly on Chinese social media. Tian was removed from his post and punished by month's end, but not before a spokesperson for the city government claimed that none of the six bureau chiefs surnamed Tian had been out of town on business that evening, so the incriminating photographs were "maybe a prank, or maybe the nightclub's effort to stir up hype." As the popular official newspaper China Youth Daily opined, Tian's punishment "should be praised, but in the process, someone lied to the public, and that person was not punished. This should not happen."

The rise of guanyao as a counterpoint to minyao does not mean that the two are equivalent. There's no denying that good old-fashioned grassroots rumors -- minyao -- are legion on the Chinese Web, as they are in any other countries. Officials and ordinary citizens may be equally prone to bend or break the truth, but when officials do so, they have the power of the state behind them. As an Oct. 20 article in the local paper Chongqing Times explains, "Perhaps officials have authority. But authority does not represent the truth, and at least sometimes, officials use their authority to hide the truth." That hypocrisy sets the wrong tone for the government's anti-rumor campaign -- one accompanied by official statements about the need to guide public opinion to be more "constructive." Weibo user Yan Zuyou, a Shanghai writer, put it most succinctly: "To punish citizen rumors, you first must punish official rumors."

深柳茶客

民窑没有官窑值钱，所以民窑造的不好是要坐牢的。

补充内容 (2013-11-3 19:48):
所以说，造窑的话，还是以官方的为准。

qinyelv

支持一下吧，确实是不错的贴子。












秦野绿http://qinyelv.m4.cn

红旗跃过汀江

面对无边界的网络世界，官方应对失措。

天涯浪子0907

“更让中国网民愤怒的是，中国最高法院在9月9日新发布的一项司法解释，说发布诽谤信息的阅读量如果超过5000，或者转发量超过500，会导致最高三年的监禁。”

放P.

我怎么看到很多网友利用这个打击那些“造谣”的人。

为什么不多把西方的科技、经济、地理方面的翻译过来？

至于我们自己的社会状态怎么样，难道西方比我们还清楚吗？西方关心我们的社会状况难道不是别有用心吗？翻译介绍这种文章难道不是给西方帮忙吗？

为什么不学习《参考消息》的翻译选材？？

真是“中国人去西方学习中国文化”的翻版！！

{:soso_e148:}{:soso_e148:}{:soso_e148:}

满仓

天涯浪子0907 发表于 2013-11-2 22:10
“更让中国网民愤怒的是，中国最高法院在9月9日新发布的一项司法解释，说发布诽谤信息的阅读量如果超过5000 ...

呵呵。

天涯浪子0907

满仓 发表于 2013-11-3 19:43
呵呵。