Tan, Jia. "Provincializing the Chinese Mediascape: Cantonese Digital
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Tan, Jia. "Provincializing the Chinese Mediascape: Cantonese Digital Activism in Southern China." China’s iGeneration: Cinema and Moving Image Culture for the Twenty-First Century. Ed. Matthew D. Johnson, Keith B. Wagner, Tianqi Yu and Luke Vulpiani. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014. 197–212. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 24 Sep. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781501300103.ch-011>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 24 September 2021, 10:01 UTC. Copyright © Matthew D. Johnson, Keith B. Wagner, Tianqi Yu, Luke Vulpiani and Contributors 2014. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 11 Provincializing the Chinese Mediascape: Cantonese Digital Activism in Southern China Jia Tan The recent events of the Arab Spring have shown some positive applications in the revolutionary potential of digital technology, which suggest that social media such as Twitter and Facebook have found a way to change the world. Such an optimistic view on technology is critiqued in Evgeny Morozov’s The Net Delusion in terms of ‘cyber-utopianism,’ which refers to ‘a naive belief in the emancipatory nature of online communication that rests on a stubborn refusal to acknowledge its downside.’1 When it comes to digital contention in China, similar tendencies of techno-utopianism have gained prominence, overpowering any detractors’ rumblings. Despite many scholars and opinion leaders outside of China fixating on the ways recent technol- ogies, including the internet and mobile communications have strengthened media control, surveillance and censorship, a point could be made however that researchers are only now beginning to explore the ways in which these newer technologies have empowered individuals and communities through the creation of reimagined social spaces.2 One such optimistic study would be Yang Guobing’s The Power of the Internet in China, in which the author argues that the internet provides spaces for ‘unofficial democracy,’ whereby websites provide openings for continual negotiations based on the lived experiences of millions of online users in China.3 This chapter investigates the wave of Cantonese digital activism that can be conceived of as another application of social media and formation of moving image culture that is worth interrogating. My aim is to inquire beyond the techno-utopia/- dystopia binary by locating Cantonese digital activism in its historical, social and industrial contexts against the backdrop of the explosion of various moving image cultures in the new millennium. The present study explores the particularities of Cantonese digital activism by deploying the notion of the provincial. I borrow this term from the post-colonial scholar Dipesh Chakravarty who asserts that we can ‘provincialize Europe’ through deconstructing the myth of ‘the West’ as an originary site of modernity by revealing the constitutive positions of the colonies in the modernization process. Chakravarty has criticized the developmental logic of many third world countries that subscribe to the linear narrative of modernity. Rather than 9781623565954_txt_print.indd 197 14/04/2014 09:12 198 China’s iGeneration provincializing a centre, the present study instead centralizes a province in order to explore the theoretical potential of ‘the provincial’ and reconfigure debates on globali- zation and transnationalism, particularly in the fields of cultural and media studies specific to the Chinese online moving image culture. This study invokes the term provincial in two ways. First, it employs the province as an analytical framework for examining the central–provincial structure in the Chinese media industry. Second, it explores the possibilities and problematics of Cantonese media activism, in the sense that the term functions as a nuanced way of thinking beyond the constraints of cultural dominance versus cultural resistance. In other words, I will argue that Cantonese digital activism seeks to uncover how new communication technologies, e.g. mobile devices and the internet, in conjunction with other mass media such as television, have facilitated new cultural articulations. While some of these articulations have been critical of the state’s monolingual policy and developmental logic, others run the risk of reproducing existing social hierar- chies such as class-based discrimination. The progressive and reactionary attributes in the same digital activism urges us to move from the question of whether certain technologies are revolutionary to the question of how technologies are embedded in social relations. In my chapter, I aim to use the provincial to demonstrate a more contextual understanding of the relationship between technology and culture beyond the techno-utopia/-dystopia binary. Cantonese activism and its discontents On 1 August 2010, thousands of people gathered in and around the People’s Park in the city of Guangzhou in southern China. The crowd was disbanded when hundreds of police marched in and dragged away protesters, filing them away on large municipal buses. In front of the confrontational scene between the protesters and the police, nearly every protester held either digital cameras, camcorders, or cellular phones to document that event. Some of these pictures were immediately posted online via telecom networks on Chinese micro-blogs such aso Sina Weib.4 Videos and pictures would soon be uploaded to the internet, a place to disseminate opinions and organize the street demonstrations, which made the fast mobilization of protesters possible in the first place. What were the protestors rallying for or against? They had not gathered to voice their discontent over environmental pollution, labour disputes, or land confiscation, all prevalent social problems and popular topics online in China today. Instead, this protest was triggered by a government proposal that the local Guangzhou TV station replace Cantonese primetime shows with Mandarin programming during the Asian Games in 2010. The protests can now be seen as climactic moments where a series of ‘flash mob’ gatherings, street demonstrations and civil disobediences exploded in metropolitan Guangzhou, all demanding the preservation of Cantonese language and culture.5 9781623565954_txt_print.indd 198 14/04/2014 09:12 Provincializing the Chinese Mediascape 199 Cantonese is widely used throughout southern China, Hong Kong and across the diverse Chinese diaspora worldwide. Yet, despite its linguistic importance throughout greater China, Cantonese has been relegated to the status of a Chinese dialect, soon to be expunged in the PRC via a national campaign to promote Putonghua, or Mandarin.6 Article 19 of the Constitution of the PRC proclaims the use of Putonghua nationwide. We can trace the promotion of Mandarin in the educational sector back to the mid-1950s, as the Communist Party had an interest in creating a standardized national language. Since that period, the state has championed Simplified Chinese, Mandarin and the pinyin system in its educational institutions. Furthermore, dialects are highly circumscribed within the Chinese mass media. In January 2001, the Law of the Standard Spoken and Written Chinese Language established Chinese as the standard language – officially enforcing Mandarin across the vast public sector, including the broadcasting industry. Netizens have dubbed such monolingual language policy the ‘Mandarin Promotion Machine,’ or more crudely ‘Language Slaughter.’7 To express concern over this promotion of Mandarin, netizens organized many street gatherings through social media, gatherings that were accompanied by debates, netizen-made videos, songs and images of dissent online. Such shows of activism have been tactically combined with criticism of urban planning and redevelopment policy, as well as calls for freedom of expression in the country. The activism soon received support from Cantonese speakers in Hong Kong, Macau and throughout cyberspace, as well as in physical spaces within the mainland and beyond. For example, at the same time as the August 1 demonstration in Guangzhou, hundreds of protesters in Hong Kong joined the demon- strations as part of the ‘Guangdong-HK Support Cantonese Action,’ working in unison from two different Chinese territories connected by digital activists. The banner term ‘Cantonese digital activism’ is used here to describe the partici- patory use of the internet and electronic devices for the articulation of shared language and cultural experiences, as suggested by the name of this activism: ‘Support Cantonese language.’ Despite the political agency and possibilities fulfilled in this wave of activism from user-generated content online to street demonstrations, such bottom-up cultural expressions also have limitations – chiefly, they have the potential to reproduce social hierarchies. A widely circulated netizen-reproduced propaganda poster points to the discriminatory side of Cantonese digital activism. The caption reads: ‘Canton people speak Cantonese. Go back to the countryside if you don’t understand Cantonese.’ This slogan may be a reference to the millions of migrant workers in China who come from the countryside and work in the city. According to the population census of 2010, more than four million people living in Guangzhou are non-locals, a figure representing more than one-third of the city’s total population. Many of these non-Cantonese-speaking, non-locals