Posted on 06/22/2002 1:37:44 PM PDT by maui_hawaii
BEIJING (Reuters) - China has pulled from newstands the latest issue of The Economist magazine which features an 18-page survey arguing for broad political reform in the country, a magazine executive said on Friday.
Some 2,500 subscription copies were delivered as usual, but another 600 issues that usually grace up-market hotel news racks and Chinese stores frequented by foreigners were halted by the authorities.
The latest issue features a cover with colourful birds in an ornate Chinese cage and the text "Set China's politics free".
"They say it's the sensitivity of the survey, and to be honest we did expect that to a certain extent," Asia-Pacific circulation director Peter Bakker said from Hong Kong.
China National Publications (CNP) Import and Export Corp, the state-run distributor of The Economist, told Bakker of the decision. CNP could not be reached for comment.
State censors tear out or blacken China-related articles from the magazine and other foreign periodicals from time to time.
The government, deeply suspicious of foreign media, also routinely blocks foreign Web sites in China, although a ban on several sites was lifted in May without explanation.
This year is particularly sensitive due to a pending leadership reshuffle.
James Miles, The Economist's correspondent in Beijing and author of the survey, said the move appeared mainly symbolic since the number of copies was small and the magazine at 55 yuan ($6.65) is expensive for most Chinese.
"Beyond making a symbolic point, it's hard to see how it would have any impact whatsoever in terms of the spread of information within China itself," he said.
Foreign news organisations are not the only ones to face censorship. A Chinese state publisher last year censored parts of the memoirs of Singapore Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew -- a friend and adviser to the country's Communist leaders.
The whole China debate thing going on is not split up into Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other...
This issue cuts sideways across the grain of both parties...
That is probably why it is never addressed...
There are bona fide Republican panda huggers as well as bona fide Democrat panda huggers..
Likewise, there are those in both parties who see things much more objectively, and will say so...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.