Based on interviews with 25 investigative journalists in Beijing, China, this study suggests digital journalists may be increasingly challenged by a sense of "information overload" as they navigate social media and online environments crowded with dis-and mis-information, fake profiles and sources, and massive amounts of opinion journalism that is presented as professional journalism. This overload has reinforced Chinese investigative journalists' dedication to a conventional form of verification: meeting face-to-face with sources. This study contributes to scholarship on Chinese journalism by expanding knowledge about investigative journalists in the country and by complicating understandings of how journalists there work in an age of social media, disinformation, and increased interests in verification.
How can the government and the public connect during a crisis? While tough in the age of traditional media, this has become more practical in the age of social media. Weibo has been integrated into crisis communication as the main social media platform in China since 2010. After a decade, the Chinese government and the public have changed their ways of engaging in Weibo‐based crisis communication. Employing mixed methods to analyse 5358 Weibo posts and 41 interviews, we found the government to have become an approachable participant in crisis communication rather than projecting a rigid, aloof image; members of the public have also become more skilled, experienced participants. Our findings indicate an innovative mechanism of ‘informative cooperation’ constructed by the government and the public, underlying a collaborative relationship between them. We suggest that such a relationship should be maintained to promote better cooperation between the government and the public in future social‐media‐based crisis communication.
Governments hiding facts and truth from the public seems to have become a common phenomenon, especially during the social crisis in China. The practice of the public using various media to express dissent and opinions, to overcome government censorship, appears to contribute to freedom of speech. Inspired by widespread online articles during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, this paper argues that the flaws in this logic are the dualism, which digital media created (pro-democracy vs authoritarian; freedom vs control), in understanding media in China. By borrowing the discussion of the de-westernization of media and communication studies, the paper argues that the introduction of digital media makes de-westernized studies in China harder because it prompts us to think “digitally.”
Short-video-based social media platforms (short-video-based [SVB] platforms) are becoming a common tool for an increasing number of consumers to safeguard their legitimate interests in China. This article examines how Chinese consumers practice video activism by using short videos on Weibo to construct a consumer sphere for themselves to protect their legal demands. By interviewing 56 interviewees including consumers, media practitioners, public relations department (PR) officials, and relevant government officials in China, we find that short videos are more than a visible vehicle on SVB platforms which makes the voices of consumers being heard, but significantly, these platforms create a "consumer sphere" for the consumers who experienced right infringement to defend their rights. The discussion and sharing of these videos unite the consumers to bring the individual issue to the spotlight of the public. We conclude that as more consumers join the queue to share their encounters, a sphere is constructed by the use of mediated tactics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.