A front-page story entitled SASAC Blocks Chinese Soccer
published in the Jan. 7 issue of Soccer has meant trouble
for this Guangzhou-based newspaper for it has found itself on the
receiving end of a hard tackle from the Chinese Football
Association (CFA).
The Soccer which began publication in Jan. 1980 is the
oldest and most popular soccer newspaper in China. Citing the
examples of the Yunnan Hongta and Shanghai Zhongyuan Group, which
have recently withdrawn from investment in professional soccer, the
controversial article reported that the State-owned Assets
Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC) had graded the
Chinese soccer industry as a bad asset and advised state-owned
enterprises to steer clear of it.
The SASAC refuted the story and denounced the report as
"irresponsible." Angered by the article which had been labeled as a
"gross misrepresentation of the truth" the Chinese Football
Association reacted strongly on Jan. 9 with two censures on the
newspaper:
1. the CFA urged the Soccer newspaper to offer a formal
apology and clarify the facts to redress the harmful effects of the
"untrue story";
2. the CFA rescinded Soccer's news-gathering rights at
all sports events and activities hosted by the CFA and reserved its
right to take the matter further.
Meanwhile, the CFA has said it hopes that "other media and
reporters will be realistic, truthful, objective and fair in their
reporting in a spirit of responsibility towards Chinese soccer and
avoid similar incidents happening again."
The All-China Sports Federation, a semi-official national
sports' organization, hailed the CFA's move in a commentary
entitled Sticking to a Right Orientation in the Media posted Jan.
12 on its web site.
CFA press official Dong Hua then categorically denied that the
newspaper had been banned from covering all soccer matches. "Of
course Soccer is still able to report World Cup, European
Cup and other games not connected with the CFA. Soccer
reporters are also not banned from watching matches sponsored by
the CFA. However, the CFA won't agree to interviews with the
paper," Dong said, "What's more, it's out of the question for the
CFA to annul its censures as Soccer has requested."
In the light of the CFA's ban, all three national teams; the
National Men's Soccer Team which is in training in Hainan, the
Chinese Olympics Team training in Spain and the National Women's
Soccer Team training in Guangdong are now not supposed to give
interviews to the newspaper.
The Soccer had its own say in the dispute, which has
already attracted attention nationwide. Xie Yi, editor-in-chief of
the paper, has denied that the Jan. 7 report was without
foundation. "The story was based on investigative reporting and
interviews with experts in the field. Furthermore what the article
did was to discuss issues that revolved around Chinese soccer. We
did not rush into any conclusions," Xie said.
In terms of the CFA censures Xie said, "This is an unlawful act
which infringes our rights. We ask the CFA to immediately annul its
flawed decision and apologize. Right now we will be keeping in
touch with the CFA but we may start legal proceedings at any
time."
On Jan. 10 Xie provided a detailed statement of his position as
follows:
1. Soccer reporting is not irresponsible and the CFA
has no right to brand the report as "irresponsible." We obtained
our information on the situation from a reliable source. Our report
touches on the problems of Chinese soccer and does not actually say
specifically that the Chinese soccer industry as a bad asset. I'm
amazed that the CFA, as a non-governmental organization, could seek
to impose such a punishment.
2. During a crucial period of reform for China's soccer systems
we have been reporting on and discussing such questions as "whether
or not Chinese soccer is a bad asset" and "whether or not
state-owned enterprises should steer clear of the soccer industry."
We are motivated by a desire to promote the healthy development of
Chinese soccer. The Chinese Constitution confers powers and
freedoms on the media and the public to discuss these issues. The
CFA would also be free to choose to consider Chinese soccer as
representing a high quality asset operating in an orderly manner in
a healthy atmosphere.
3. The censures that the CFA has imposed on Soccer
violate the Constitution and the law. They restrict the freedom of
the press. The CFA may have the right to choose not to be
interviewed by Soccer itself but it has no right to
deprive reporters of their news-gathering rights. If the CFA
refuses to withdraw its decision, Soccer will sue.
4. Chinese soccer and the Chinese soccer industry do not just
belong to the CFA. They belong to the soccer fans and to society as
a whole. Soccer will continue to report on what is
happening in both Chinese and world soccer matches in order to
serve the needs of the fans who really care about the development
of Chinese soccer.
On Jan. 12 the newspaper carried the following statement by its
lawyers asking the CFA to apologize:
1. The article SASAC Blocks Chinese Soccer is a special news
investigation by Soccer reporters on the Chinese soccer
industry. It forecasts policy trends in the Chinese soccer industry
based on comprehensive investigation and research. It analyzes not
only the issue that some state-owned enterprises have recently been
steering clear of the soccer industry but also the new problems
associated with other types of enterprises becoming involved in the
soccer industry. The discussion is constructive and responsible
from the point of view of society. It is not harmful; rather it is
helpful to the healthy development of Chinese soccer. The article
did not set out to denigrate either Chinese soccer or the CFA.
2. Soccer is the country's longest established soccer
industry newspaper. It enjoys a good reputation and wide influence
in society. The newspaper cares about the healthy development of
Chinese soccer. It pays close attention to both the fundamental
issues and to the image which is presented when state-owned
enterprises either invest in or withdraw from involvement in
soccer. It welcomes soccer industry investors, soccer fans and
institutions to join in the discussion. We are willing to organize
events to promote debate on the issues in cooperation with the CFA
and to publish all the views and opinions contributed by the CFA in
a timely manner. Soccer believes that such discussion
would contribute to the healthy development of Chinese soccer.
3. Soccer is a professional sports newspaper operating
in accordance with the Regulations on Publishing Management of the
People's Republic of China and holding the necessary permissions
required by law. It does not lie within the authority of an
organization, which is not a press publication management
department, to cancel the paper's news-gathering rights.
4. Soccer reporters hold Reporter Permits issued by the
State Press and Publication Administration and so are legally
accredited to engage in news-gathering. Events undertaken or
sponsored by the CFA are public sports activities and
Soccer and its reporters have legal rights to engage in
the conduct of interviews. The CFA has a legal responsibility to
allow itself to be interviewed and to facilitate the work of the
various representatives of the media in an even handed manner. If
the CFA were to discriminate against any particular media
organization its actions would contravene the law and it will have
left itself open to civil action for recovery of losses incurred.
The CFA's own regulations stipulate that the legal basis of the
establishment of the CFA is the Civil Code of the People's Republic
of China. The CFA is not free to operate outside the law or
impunity to cause other organizations to suffer losses.
5. The "decision" made by the CFA on Jan. 9 concerning the
Soccer newspaper has seriously violated the paper's legal
rights and has led to actual losses being incurred by
Soccer. The "decision" not only deprives Soccer
of its legal rights but also defames the paper's good reputation in
the soccer industry. Soccer has urged the CFA to withdraw
its "decision" and to publish an apology to the newspaper.
Soccer reserves its right to pursue the matter
further.
6. Chinese soccer is currently going through a crucial stage in
which many problems are exerting a considerable influence on the
way the game will be operated in the future. For example, many
large state-owned enterprises are steering clear of Chinese soccer,
shareholders involved in the forthcoming Chinese premier league may
be closely interrelated and the prestige of Chinese league football
is not what it should be. Such difficulties merit attention and
discussion by the media and the CFA which has a role to bring
forward proposals to address the problems and to engage in an
exchange of ideas. We deeply regret the CFA's attitude and its
method of settling problems as adopted on January 9, 2004.
7. The Soccer newspaper and industry insiders share a
common set of goals. That is to work together to develop Chinese
league soccer and the Chinese soccer industry and to meet the needs
of the soccer fans. As for the aforementioned issues, the
Soccer newspaper is willing to exchange ideas with the
CFA. Even though a divergence of views does exist, the CFA cannot
block the newspaper in its timely and in-depth reporting of Chinese
soccer.
According to an on-online survey, some 80 percent of those
responding said that the CFA should not impose a ban on the paper's
news-gathering rights.
"In the first place it is self-evident that the CFA has no right
to forbid a newspaper to gather news," said a lawyer on condition
of anonymity. "However it is clear that the statement issued by the
CFA has been carefully worded. For instance it's well within the
CFA's authority not to issue reporting permits and certificates
even if it could not go as far as declining to respond properly in
the case of press interviews."
According to Yu Guoming, head of the Public Opinion Research
Center at Renmin University of China, in keeping with usual
practice, whether or not a media report is accurate is supposed to
be judged by a third party. The CFA as a semi-official organization
should in any case adopt an open attitude towards scrutiny by
public opinion.
"It is impossible for the mass media to be totally correct at
all times," said Yu citing the example of a local statute aimed at
strengthening supervision by public opinion. This is a regulation
recently implemented in south China's Shenzhen City. It allows for
the media not to be held responsible when they report unproven
suspicions about government officials as long as the views are
reasonable and there are obvious indications to support the
suspicions.
"And what's more, there are no legal grounds for the CFA, a
corporate body, to punish the media," pointed out Zhou Qiang, a
lawyer from the Beijing-based Zhongye Law Firm and deputy director
of the Civil Law Commission of the Beijing Lawyers' Association.
"The CFA has overstepped its authority in issuing a public
statement to cancel Soccer's news-gathering rights," Zhou
said.
(China.org.cn by Li Jingrong and Shao Da, January 21, 2004)