Mainstreaming human rights

The massacre at Tiananmen Square was the climax of a momentous human rights drama that had been building for years in China. But the U.S. media had rarely mentioned human rights violations in China since the Democracy Wall Movement was crushed in 1979 and its leaders were thrown in jail. Shortly after the suppression of that movement, Deng Xiaoping introduced economic and legal reforms. “A wave of euphoria swept through U.S. government and press circles,” recalled Roberta Cohen, a Carter human rights aide. The enthusiasm for free market initiatives and other reforms became the new rationale for turning a blind eye to the continuing repression in China,” such as the between two and five million people who languished in Chinese labor camps as of 1987. U.S. media remained tight‐lipped when Reagan approved sales of police equipment to China's internal security force, expanded military ties, and encouraged loans and investment, despite serious human rights abuses by the Chinese government. The brutalization of Tibet and the relentless suppression of dissent in China were off the press agenda until late in Reagan's second term. Meanwhile, thousands of prisoners were being tortured, and others faced illegal arrests, unwarranted search and seizure, and other forms of harassment. Journalists were outraged when Deng and company imposed harsh press restrictions during the Tiananmen crackdown, but U.S. reporters appear to have practiced a form of self‐censorship with respect to Chinese human rights violations for nearly a decade. No news stories on China and human rights are listed in the New York Times index from 1984 through 1986. Ditto for Time magazine, which selected Deng Xiaoping as “Man of the Year” in 1985. Newsweek managed only one story on the subject for these three years. The soft treatment of China prior to the Tiananmen massacre raises broader questions about reporting on human rights. Are U.S. strategic interests paramount in determining whether abuses are scrutinized? What other factors influence coverage of human rights issues? Why does the U.S. press remain a quiet spectator in some countries, whereas violations in other parts of the world receive prominent attention? To explore these questions, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) undertook an extensive research project on the media and human rights. We interviewed more than fifty people, and although opinions varied on how well the media have performed, there was general agreement on at least one point: If the gravity of human rights violations were the sole factor in determining the amount of coverage that a country received, reporting on human rights would be substantially different.