Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of “China Bashing” on Sino-American Relations

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Chinese Political Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many scholars argue that a sizable share of the news about China published in U.S. newspapers engages in “China Bashing.” This paper quantifies the extent of the bashing and examines its effect on Sino-American relations. To measure bashing, I develop an index based on the count of articles in major U.S. newspapers that are related to China and also touch on one or more of the following issues: human rights, Tibet, democracy, child labor, and repression. I repeat this process for newspapers from Australia and New Zealand to net out “fundamental” news. To examine the effect of the bashing on Sino-American relations, I use the China-US relations score of Yan et al. (Zhongwai guanxi dingliang yuce, [中外关系定量预测; Quantitative Forecasts of China’s Foreign Relations]. Beijing, China: Shijie heshi chubanshe, 2009, Zhongwai guanxi jianlan 1950-2005—Zhongguo yu daguo guanxi dingliang hengliang [中外关系鉴览1950-2005—中国大国关系定量衡量; China’s Foreign Relations with Major Powers by the Numbers 1950-2005]. Beijing: Gaodeng jiaoyu chubanshe, 2010) and estimate a dynamic transfer model with the constructed bashing index, as well as other control variables. The results indicate that a one-standard-deviation shock in bashing leads to a 0.038 point decline in Yan’s Sino-American index after about four months. The results further imply that the cumulative long-run effect of persistent China bashing is equivalent to about 50 % of the decline in Sino-American relations that followed the U.S. bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade on May 7, 1999, the worst shock to Sino-American relations during the sample period, 1990 to 2010.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See, for example, Garver [11]; Grunfield [14]; Hanson [15]; Mattimore [19]; Mufson [21]; Peng [23]; Sutter [26], and Tatom [27].

  2. Sutter ([26], p. 95) writes: “The U.S. media switched coverage and opinion of China, portraying the policies and practices of the Chinese administration in a much more critical light than in the years leading up to Tiananmen. Twenty years later, American and Chinese specialists continued to see U.S. and Western media remaining focused on the negative in reporting and commentary dealing with the Chinese administration.” Peng [23] arrives at a similar conclusion after tracking articles about China published in 1992 and 2001 in both the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times.

  3. See, for example, Li and Liu [18]; Song et al. [25], and Beijing Review [1]. A debate on this issue, entitled 中美传媒在相互“妖魔化”吗? (Do the U.S. and Chinese media “demonize” each other?), can be found at: http://chat.eastday.com/epublish/gb/paper159/3/class015900002/hwz323140.htm.

  4. A partial list includes Grunfield [14]; Hufbauer and Wong [16]; McKinnon [20]; Bown and McCulloch [2]; Tatom [27], and Ramirez and Rong [24].

  5. A more detailed description of how the series is constructed, including a justification for the use of Australia and New Zealand as controls, is presented in Section II, further below.

  6. Yan et al. [30], p. 208.

  7. For example, on March 28, 2008, the Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire news reported that the then Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, “reiterated her position Friday that it was a mistake to choose Beijing as the site of the 2008 summer games but stopped short of calling for a U.S. boycott.” http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/03/28/pelosi-china-olympic-protests-yes-boycott-no/ (Accessed August 26, 2010). A few days later, on April 2, 2008, the New York Times reported that Pelosi had recommended that President Bush skip the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games in Beijing in response to the Chinese reaction to the protests in Tibet as well as because of China’s record on human rights and its trade practices. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/02/washington/02pelosi.html?pagewanted=print (Accessed August 10, 2010.)

  8. On April 3, 2008, Xinhuanet.com, the Chinese news agency, reported that China was “strongly discontent” with Pelosi’s statements against the Beijing Olympic Games. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-04/03/content_7911584.htm (Accessed August 10, 2010.)

  9. The CHR_US time series data is available upon request.

  10. One could argue that other keywords, such as “lead,” “toys,” “pet food,” or “currency manipulation,” could have been selected as alternative grievance keywords. However, one of the main requirements in the selection of keywords is that they be recurrent in the media during the entire sample period. Keywords such as “lead,” “toys,” “currency manipulation,” and so forth did not start to show up systematically until 2005.

  11. See for example, Sutter [26], Ch. 7.

  12. http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu.

  13. No surveys were reported for 1992 or 1995.

  14. The fact that the elasticities for March or April are also statistically significant may suggest that there is a moderate amount of persistence of negative news about China. This issue is addressed in more detail below.

  15. Between 1998 and 2010, the ratio of the U.K.-China deficit to total bilateral trade averaged nearly 61 percent; for Canada, the same ratio was 55 percent (for the 2000 to 2007 period); for the United States, it was 68 percent (1998 to 2010). By contrast, the average for New Zealand was 36 %, and Australia had a trade surplus with China. Sources: UK: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/uktrade/uk-trade/october-2011/trade-in-goods-mrets.html; Canada:http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/65-508-x/2007001/tf/4129848-eng.htm; US: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html; New Zealand: http://www.chinafta.govt.nz/3-Progressing-the-FTA/1-Why-China/Key-economic-statistics/0-table-comparison.php.

  16. For a review of the dynamic transfer model, see Enders [10] and Chatfield [6].

  17. Despite the formidable effort behind the coding of events, Yan et al. [30, 31] series is not without challenges. Johnston ([17], p. 15), for example, has raised some criticisms in its construction. Some, such as the possibility that the coding of events in a particular period may be influenced by preceding events, can be dealt with by the inclusion of a lagged dependent variable in the regression. Nonetheless, it is important to acknowledge that this study may inherit any remaining drawbacks from Yan’s series.

  18. Augmented Dickey-Fuller tests as well as the Elliott et al. [9] GLS unit root test indicate that the differentiated series is stationary.

  19. Both the Akaike Information Criterion and the final prediction error suggest using 4 lags, while the Bayesian information criterion and the Hannan and Quinn information criterion suggest using 3 or 2 lags, depending on the specification. To comprehensively capture the model dynamics, I selected 4 lags. It should be noted, however, that the results are similar when the model is estimated with fewer lags.

  20. Scholars in China make a similar observation. See, for example, Cai and Chen [3].

  21. An unexpected change in the trade deficit (i.e., a trade deficit shock, or ε t in the equation below) is the residual from a second order autoregressive regression with seasonal effects of the change in the log of US-China trade deficit. The estimated second order autoregressive regression is \( \Delta \left( {t{d_t}} \right) = {\alpha_0} + {\alpha_1}\Delta \left( {t{d_{t - 1}}} \right) + {\alpha_2}\Delta \left( {t{d_{t - 2}}} \right) + \beta \left( {seasonal\_ effects} \right) + {\varepsilon_t} \) where \( t{d_t} = \log \left( {import{s_t}} \right) - \log \left( {{\text{export}}{{\text{s}}_t}} \right) \).

  22. The point estimate of the dynamic impact of the bashing variable on the Sino-American relations index can be ascertained by the implied impulse response function, which is presented and discussed below.

  23. A correlation matrix reveals that the independent variables included in the model are not collinear with each other. Hence, the regression coefficients are efficiently estimated.

  24. Note that according to the figure, a one-unit increase in the China bashing index leads to a 1.22 point decline in the Sino-American relations index after 4 months. Since the standard deviation of the “aggressive” China bashing index is 0.031, the 1.22 point decline needs to be multiplied by this standard deviation in order to arrive at the magnitude of 0.038. The long-run effects are similarly computed.

References

  1. Beijing Review. 1997. Misguidance in vain. Beijing Review 40(7–8): 7–31.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bown, Chad P., and Rachel McCulloch. 2007. US trade policy towards China: Discrimination and its implications. In Challenges to the global trading system: Adjustment to globalization in the Asia-Pacific region, ed. Peter A. Petri and Sumner J. La Croix, 58–82. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Cai, Jie, and Junya Chen. 2011. Zhong mei maoyi fazhan dui liang guo zhengzhi guanxi de yingxiang, [中美贸易发展对两国政治关系的影响, The effect of Sino-American trade developments on bilateral political relations]. Jingji Pinglun [经济评论, Economic Review] No. 3: 117–123.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chang, Tsan-Kuo. 1988. The news and U.S./China policy: Symbols in newspapers and documents. Journalism Quarterly 65(2): 320–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chang, Tsan-Kuo. 1989. The impact of presidential statements on press editorials regarding U.S./China Policy, 1950-1984. Communication Research 16(4): 486–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chatfield, Chris. 2000. Time-series forecasting. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Cutrone, Ellen A., and Benjamin O. Fordham. 2010. Commerce and imagination: The sources of concern about international human rights in the US Congress. International Studies Quarterly 54(3): 633–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dorogi, Thomas Lazlo. 2001. Tainted perceptions: Liberal-democracy and American popular images of China. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Elliott, G., T.J. Rothenberg, and J.H. Stock. 1996. Efficient tests for an autoregressive unit root. Econometrica 64(4): 813–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Enders, Walter. 1995. Applied Econometric Time Series. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Garver, John W. 2005. China’s U.S. policies. In China rising: Power and motivation in chinese foreign policy, ed. Yong Deng and Fei-ling Wang, 201–243. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gentzkow, Matthew, and Jesse M. Shapiro. 2006. Media bias and reputation. Journal of Political Economy 114(2): 280–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gentzkow, Matthew, and Jesse M. Shapiro. 2010. What drives media slant? Evidence from U.S. daily newspapers. Econometrica 78(1): 35–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Grunfield, A.Tom. 2001. Human rights and the People's Republic of China. Touro International Law Review 9: 71–86.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hanson, Robin. 2010. China Bashing. http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/01/china-bashing.html.

  16. Hufbauer, Gary Clyde, and Yee Wong. 2004. China Bashing 2004, International Economics Policy Briefs (September). Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Johnston, Alastair Iain. 2011. Stability and instability in Sino-American relations: A response to Yan’s superficial friendship theory. The Chinese Journal of International Politics 4(1): 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li, Xiguang, and Kang Liu. 1996. Yaomohua Zhongguo de beihou [妖魔化中国的背后, Behind the Scene of Demonizing China]. Beijing, China: Zhongguo she hui ke xue chu ban she: Xin hua shu dian jing xiao.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mattimore, Patrick. 2010. US newspapers should stop bashing China, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2010-04/16/content_9739535.htm.

  20. McKinnon, Ronald. 2007. Why China should keep its dollar peg. International Finance 10(1): 43–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mufson, Steven. 2003. Coverage of China in the American press. In China in the American Political Imagination, ed. Carola McGiffert. Washington, DC: CSIS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Niu, Jun. 2010. Relations in need of better management: Reflections on Sino-American relations during the past three decades. In Sino-American Relations: Challenges Ahead, ed. Yufan Hao, 13–22. Farnham, Surrey, UK and Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Peng, Zengjun. 2004. Representation of China: An across time analysis of coverage in the New York Times and Los Angeles Times. Asian Journal of Communication 14(1): 53–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ramirez, Carlos D., and Rong Rong. 2012. China bashing: Does trade drive the “Bad” news about China in the USA? Review of International Economics 20(2): 350–363.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Song, Qiang, Zhang Zangzang, Qiao Bian, Tang Zhengyu, and Gu Qiangsheng. 1996. Zhongguo ke yi shuo bu: leng zhan hou shi dai de zheng zhi yu qing gan jue ze [中国可以说不:冷战后时代的政治与情感抉择, China Can Say No: Political and Emotional Choices in the post-Cold War Era]. Beijing, China: Zhonghua gong shang lian he chu ban she.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sutter, Robert G. 2010. U.S.-Chinese relations: Perilous past, pragmatic present. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tatom, John A. 2007. The US–China currency dispute: Is a rise in the Yuan necessary, inevitable or desirable? Global Economy Journal 7(3), Article 2. Available online: http://www.bepress.com/gej/vol7/iss3/2.

  28. White, Halbert. 1980. A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 48(4): 817–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yan, Xuetong. 2010. The instability of China-U.S. relations. The Chinese Journal of International Politics 3(3): 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yan, Xuetong, Zhuo Fangyin, Qi Haixia, Xu Jin, Mei Zhaijiu, and Yan Liangzhu. 2010. Zhongwai guanxi jianlan 1950-2005—Zhongguo yu daguo guanxi dingliang hengliang [中外关系鉴览1950-2005—中国大国关系定量衡量; China’s Foreign Relations with Major Powers by the Numbers 1950-2005]. Beijing: Gaodeng jiaoyu chubanshe.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Yan, Xuetong, and Haixia Qi. 2009. Zhongwai guanxi dingliang yuce, [中外关系定量预测;Quantitative Forecasts of China’s Foreign Relations]. Beijing, China: Shijie heshi chubanshe.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Yu, Yanmin. 2007. China: U.S. partner, competitor, or threat—What do the Americans think?”. In Challenges facing Chinese political development, ed. Sujian Guo and Baogang Guo, 92–111. Plymouth, U.K: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, 22030-4444, USA

    Carlos D. Ramirez

Authors
  1. Carlos D. Ramirez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos D. Ramirez.

Additional information

Carlos D. Ramirez would like to thank two anonymous referees for very helpful comments and suggestions. They are not responsible for any errors or omissions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ramirez, C.D. The Effect of “China Bashing” on Sino-American Relations. J OF CHIN POLIT SCI 17, 291–311 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-012-9203-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-012-9203-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation