China Imaginary 2008 Olympics
The Reception of China Imaginary in Beijing Olympics: an Audience Research
Introduction and Hypothesis
Although Olympics are characterized with universal participation, it also has been remembered by the diversity of cultures shown in host countries. This summer the Olympics came to Beijing, China. It is worthy to consider what message the ancient eastern country is sending to the world and how audiences respond to the message. By examining the message sent from the official organizer and mass media, I raise the question whether the message is a representation of ambiguous ideology. If taking the communication process into consideration, whether it can be judged as successful is another perspective in discussion. How does audience rely on mass media to form their attitudes toward Beijing Olympics and China? As the receiver of the communication process, audience’s responses to the China image in the global event are interesting facet to examine.
After assuming some unique China icons exist in Olympics I started to examine and answer these questions by doing an audience research. In the following sessions, I will discuss basic information of the questionnaire, and then give the analysis of the results as well as a conclusion that to what extent the China image in Olympics is received.
The Audience Research
Since the key questions to be discussed in the following focus on the communication process and how audiences understand the Chinese message, I designed the questionnaire, in which firstly general impression on the Beijing Olympics was asked, and then the usage of media, finally came to the more sophisticated questions about messages sent by media and reception about China in audiences.
This global event has drawn attention from media all over the world as well as audiences from all continents. According to the news from Xinhua News Agency the viewers of Beijing Olympics reached 4.7 billion. In order to make the research more close to cross-cultural viewers, I sent the questionnaire by email to about 150 exchange students in Lingnan University and 34 of them replied with qualified answers. Conditions are limited for me to reach a larger number of audiences and most of them who replied are Mainland Chinese students. I also asked some of Hong Kong students to finish the questionnaire, so in the end there are 41 qualified responses in total. Another problem of choosing them as audiences is that they are university students and someone may argue that to what extent they can represent the whole audience in the world. I have to admit there could be the problem, but it is also for that reason that they understand and express the a little bit abstract questions.
The Results of the Questionnaire
Except for the basic information, like name (optional to give or not), email, the first question whose results might have an impact on other answers is the gender question. As the chart indicates most of them are female students. Most of the students replying the questionnaire are from mainland China, Hong Kong and USA.
In the following questions, how much the audiences know about Beijing Olympics and their general attitudes to the event are the main topics. As for the later questions, the highest percentage occurs in the choice of “clearly know everyday events and critics” with 39 per cent. This result shows that the majority have a very high level of access to the event. It possibly ensures the effectiveness of discussing the following questions because they might have comparably broad background information about the critics on Beijing Olympics. The assessment from audiences is also very positive. Over seventy per cent students assess the event above average and thirty-seven per cent of total students describe it as greatest ever. This shows their level of inclination to Beijing Olympics and possibly they chose to finish the question because the topic appeals to them. It is interesting to observe that responses of moderate assessment (those who chose “3” in this question) are mostly from international students and Hong Kong students. Since the number of responses from Chinese students is large it shows a little bias result from the data. However, it doesn’t influence much, because responses can be analyzed by nationalities.
Next there is a question to ask their general impression on Beijing Olympics and they must choose three words from the list (covering a series of adjectives) or come up with three words by themselves to describe the characters of Beijing Olympics. The three most frequently cited words (including the expressions of the same meaning) are fantastic, rising power and harmonious. Some other words are also with a high rate of frequency of being cited though not as much as those three, such as modernity, dream and friendly. The notion of rising power is being cited by both Chinese and international students and I think the reason is that Chinese are proud to see the rising status in the international stage, while international students mention this word more often with the word of nationalism, patriotism and modernity. They seem to understand the rising power on the level of ideology. Another aspect that is largely ignored by Chinese students but mentioned by international students is that Beijing Olympics are very expensive. Some students from America and Taiwan didn’t expect the Beijing Olympics can be so much a success so they express it as surprising.
Then the question comes to the investigation of usage of media. It is noticeable that over seventy per cent students got information about Beijing Olympics by television and about ninety per cent chose local media. It somehow illustrates local television is still dominating the market of media and their information is mostly the sources for viewers to form their opinions. Most coverage of reports is the daily information of competition in everyday events as well as news related to Beijing Olympics. Most Chinese students relied on CCTV as the sources, and most of them tag the message sent by CCTV with positive, success, and great, while two or three students question the balance and repetition of the reports. Western media were also sending the message very positive with an attitude of surprising to see how much China has developed. Hong Kong media tend to address the aspect of international characters shown in Olympics and they are proud to be Chinese (all Chinese share one dream).
The last series of questions are designed to get the audiences’ views that how they understand Chinese message sent in Olympics and opinions on any events that might link up with China imaginary. Most of them mentioned the images reflecting traditional Chinese culture, such as the four Chinese inventions, the show of Tang Dynasty, the drum and the scroll on the ground, etc. Apart from Chinese history, culture and Confucius philosophy as unique Chinese characters, they also mentioned that the way to conduct the performance in the opening ceremony is also very Chinese. A response that clearly describes it is that “China generally emphasizes society more than the individual, and these performances required the cooperation of numerous people in order to work. The overall visual effect became more impressive than the individuals behind the work, and I think this illustrates a very Chinese philosophy.” Some other students expressed similar opinions that it showed the power of people, large population and cooperation, etc. Li Ning, the one who ignited the main torch in Bird Nest, was called as flying guy in many responses, and one response described him as Chinese dream because “Li Ning represents the Chinese combination of sports and economics and social welfare.” One response from USA mentioned Lin Miaoke’s lip sync singing uniquely Chinese. A Taiwan student had a deep impression on Chinese leader Wen Jiabao who was thought to be the Chinese icon.
As for the fake firework question, most of them didn’t know the exact information about it and their attitude is that it is acceptable though a little bit disappointed because of the limitation of the technology and desire for perfect effect. Conversely, one mainland student expressed his concern, “I don’t know that. I don’t like that. You know, Chinese governments always do things like this in the name of smoothness and safety. It’s like the principal of planning economics. The public were cheated. This also reflected the lack of democracy in china and lack of democratic concept and spirit in Chinese mind.” Certainly he linked the event with some ideology of democracy and some typical critics to China. An American students wrote, “I did know this, and it disappointed me. I had hoped the Chinese government and media had progressed beyond such tactics, but apparently they were more concerned with providing a flawless performance than with presenting reality. It opened my eyes to the manipulative power of media.” A concern with the manipulated media by Chinese government is expressed in this argument. In this question cross-cultural difference is not obvious. There are both Chinese and foreign students referring it to China image and democracy. Also students from all cultures came with the answer of understang.
The last question asked them what they thought of Liu Xiang’s quitting. I mentioned Chinese athletic icon in the question but in fact many students didn’t think the quitting has anything to do with the Chinese icon. The general answers were like that he is still the hero and we support him to come back when recovered. Only one answer said he should continue to compete instead of giving up. Two American students’ answers mentioned as the icon Liu Xiang’s pressure to compete representing China. Some Chinese students came up with the idea that it was the best choice to quit and if he couldn’t win he would be blamed. Another mainland Chinese girl wrote his choice was actually a result of a balance of all groups of interests and only when China becomes strong in athletics this problem will be solved. The level of understanding of this event comes to several layers, for the person, for interests groups and for China. What the message sent by the media about this event in mainstream media was almost close to the general responses to the question in this research, indicating the success of communication.
The Conclusion
After examining and comparing the results of the questionnaire, I came up with three points regarding of the process of communication and the reception of China imaginary in audience. Firstly, television is the dominating media in reporting Beijing Olympics and covers most of the audiences. Secondly, the main messages (containing ambiguous ideology) sent to the world from media about Beijing Olympics accord with audiences understanding of the Beijing Olympics. Thirdly, across-cultural audiences understand the China image variously partially associated with the long existing ideology.
As for the first point, it can be supported by the results of the question that in what way you mostly receive information about Beijing Olympics. Television far exceeds to other forms of media and especially the local media which directly reach the local people. It suggests high possibility that viewers can be influenced by the opinions appeared in the media because they rely on the media.
As for the second point, it is more sophisticated than the first point to explain. This can be proved by a comparison of the responses from question asking about their words to describe the Beijing Olympics and the messages sent by the media. The main messages sent by the media are that it was great and successful, that Chinese people have done a great job, and that it showed the advancement of mainland China in past decades. China emerges in Olympics as an ambiguous icon of nationalism and even patriotism. At the same time the three frequently appeared words in the results are fantastic, rising power and harmonious. The first two words match the messages clearly but I want to explain the word of harmonious of China understanding. The connotation of harmony in China doesn’t only refer to Confucius but also sometimes contains some political background since “build up a harmonious society” is the slogan from government in mainland China. When the Olympics come to China it is also essential to organize Olympics in harmonious way in order to show political correct. One aspect of understanding the harmony is that people really work together to achieve a certain goal and it is not the success of individual but it is the success of people. In short by comparing with those responses the main messages sent by media accord with audiences understanding of Beijing Olympics.
As for the last point that, cross-cultural audiences understand the China imaginary variously partially associated with the long existing ideology. It has been a clear recognition that Chinese media lack of freedom not only in the western audiences’ eyes but also become somehow evident in some Chinese audiences, which can be seen from the responses. Chinese media blame the western media for politicalizing the Olympics and western media hit back with the same blame. One response describes the Beijing Olympics as intense, I think, partially because it is time for the clash of different ideologies on the international level. Also in the case of fake firework, China wants it to be perfect to the world at the expense of truth, which cannot be understood by some other audiences especially from western counties. After all the Olympics is the chance for both sides to communicate and it is inevitable that some long existing ideology will affect the reception of China in cross-cultural audiences.