Media Expulsions Don't Help US Journalists in China - Foreign Policy | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Media

Media Expulsions Don't Help US Journalists in China – Foreign Policy

Published

 on


It’s very tempting to applaud the measures that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced yesterday—that the visas issued to five Chinese media organizations would be capped at 100, likely forcing them to send home dozens of Chinese employees—journalists, managers, or whomever the organizations select. After all, these bloated operations—Xinhua News Agency, CGTN, China Radio International, China Daily, and People’s Daily—really are propaganda outfits that do the bidding of the Communist Party of China. That’s not supposition or a big secret. That’s what China’s own leadership says about the role of Chinese news organizations. Of course, that’s not healthy, at least not for press freedom. So sure, send them home.

And what could be more fitting in view of the miserable way that China treats foreign reporters on its own soil? Monday’s report from the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China described in the great detail the sort of intimidation and threats foreign correspondents face day in and out: threats to revoke their visas when they report news that China doesn’t like, threats that are carried out often enough to scare everyone; threats and intimidation of locally hired Chinese staff who are asked to spy on their employers, including threats to their families; surveillance and interference with what are supposed to be legally authorized reporting activities around the country. A majority of correspondents in China reported on the FCCC survey that working conditions had deteriorated. For the second year in a row, not one said conditions had improved.

But as I write this, enjoying a kind of smug feel-good vibe as I watch Chinese media workers in the United States get the boot, I have to keep reminding myself that what may feel good isn’t necessarily good for you.

The State Department wasn’t technically wrong to designate these organizations last month as foreign missions, akin to foreign embassies or consulates. It’s not that they never report actual news. That’s just not their purpose, and they have free rein to broadcast or circulate, even in the United States, distorted or highly one-sided accounts, for example, of the Hong Kong protests that read more like press releases from China than a news report. Under President Xi Jinping, controls over the Chinese media have grown progressively stricter. So, yes, it’s fair to question whether they are really journalism operations. Indeed, the organizations are believed to act as cover for espionage operations as well, sending exclusive reports back to China’s spy agencies. All the more reason to get a handle on their operations.

But just one day after the United States designated these media groups as “foreign missions,” China decided to expel three reporters for the Wall Street Journal, citing an allegedly racist headline in an opinion piece the previous week that had nothing to do with the reporters. True, some Chinese undoubtedly found the headline “China Is the Real Sick Man of Asiato be offensive. But, honestly, so what? China can’t live with a few offensive words thrown its way? (And the Journal made a reasonable case for why they were not offensive.) The timing of the move made it obvious what the real reason was; the reporters simply happened to be in the crosshairs. That brings to nine the number of journalists expelled since 2013, including those denied visa renewal—often for exposing corruption or human-rights abuses in Xinjiang.

The expulsions were a stark reminder about the need for caution, especially today. One of the Journal reporters, an American named Chao Deng, has been unable to leave China by the deadline because she is stuck in Wuhan under quarantine. She had been sending excellent dispatches on what was happening at the epicenter of the epidemic, and now that voice is silenced. She’s been permitted to remain, but not allowed to continue her reporting.

It’s true that the visa imbalance is extreme. Last year, according to the State Department, 425 visas were issued to Chinese media workers and immediate family, while U.S. journalists working in China number about 100 (not including families). Now that the U.S. government has decided to prohibit the five designated organizations from employing more than 100 Chinese nationals, forcing up to 60 to lose their jobs and visa sponsorship, just how many foreign correspondents will China decide to expel in retaliation? And how will that affect the vitally important work of reporting on the unfolding global health crisis?

Sure, Pompeo spoke about creating a level playing field, and hoping that Beijing would, in response to U.S. moves, “adopt a more fair and reciprocal approach to U.S. and other foreign press in China.”

Really? Is there some precedent that no one else knows about suggesting that China will respond in a positive, cooperative, way after the United States gives it a thrashing by expelling up to 60 of its nationals? And it won’t simply turn the screws tighter on the Beijing foreign press corps.  China took just one day to vow retaliation. “Now the US kicked off the game, let’s play,” said foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying on Twitter.

I appreciate Pompeo’s intent, but we’ve been suckered into playing China’s game, and they are just better at it than we are. We might have real leverage on trade issues; not so much on media visas. And the timing—when the world needs a free flow of accurate information in the midst of a global crisis—that could not be worse. There’s no easy solution. What hasn’t been tried is a global coordinated and principled push for China to behave, executed by governments that understand the critical importance of press freedom. For that to happen, the U.S. president would have to show some so-far absent leadership.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Trump could cash out his DJT stock within weeks. Here’s what happens if he sells

Published

 on

Former President Donald Trump is on the brink of a significant financial decision that could have far-reaching implications for both his personal wealth and the future of his fledgling social media company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). As the lockup period on his shares in TMTG, which owns Truth Social, nears its end, Trump could soon be free to sell his substantial stake in the company. However, the potential payday, which makes up a large portion of his net worth, comes with considerable risks for Trump and his supporters.

Trump’s stake in TMTG comprises nearly 59% of the company, amounting to 114,750,000 shares. As of now, this holding is valued at approximately $2.6 billion. These shares are currently under a lockup agreement, a common feature of initial public offerings (IPOs), designed to prevent company insiders from immediately selling their shares and potentially destabilizing the stock. The lockup, which began after TMTG’s merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), is set to expire on September 25, though it could end earlier if certain conditions are met.

Should Trump decide to sell his shares after the lockup expires, the market could respond in unpredictable ways. The sale of a substantial number of shares by a major stakeholder like Trump could flood the market, potentially driving down the stock price. Daniel Bradley, a finance professor at the University of South Florida, suggests that the market might react negatively to such a large sale, particularly if there aren’t enough buyers to absorb the supply. This could lead to a sharp decline in the stock’s value, impacting both Trump’s personal wealth and the company’s market standing.

Moreover, Trump’s involvement in Truth Social has been a key driver of investor interest. The platform, marketed as a free speech alternative to mainstream social media, has attracted a loyal user base largely due to Trump’s presence. If Trump were to sell his stake, it might signal a lack of confidence in the company, potentially shaking investor confidence and further depressing the stock price.

Trump’s decision is also influenced by his ongoing legal battles, which have already cost him over $100 million in legal fees. Selling his shares could provide a significant financial boost, helping him cover these mounting expenses. However, this move could also have political ramifications, especially as he continues his bid for the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential race.

Trump Media’s success is closely tied to Trump’s political fortunes. The company’s stock has shown volatility in response to developments in the presidential race, with Trump’s chances of winning having a direct impact on the stock’s value. If Trump sells his stake, it could be interpreted as a lack of confidence in his own political future, potentially undermining both his campaign and the company’s prospects.

Truth Social, the flagship product of TMTG, has faced challenges in generating traffic and advertising revenue, especially compared to established social media giants like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook. Despite this, the company’s valuation has remained high, fueled by investor speculation on Trump’s political future. If Trump remains in the race and manages to secure the presidency, the value of his shares could increase. Conversely, any missteps on the campaign trail could have the opposite effect, further destabilizing the stock.

As the lockup period comes to an end, Trump faces a critical decision that could shape the future of both his personal finances and Truth Social. Whether he chooses to hold onto his shares or cash out, the outcome will likely have significant consequences for the company, its investors, and Trump’s political aspirations.

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Arizona man accused of social media threats to Trump is arrested

Published

 on

Cochise County, AZ — Law enforcement officials in Arizona have apprehended Ronald Lee Syvrud, a 66-year-old resident of Cochise County, after a manhunt was launched following alleged death threats he made against former President Donald Trump. The threats reportedly surfaced in social media posts over the past two weeks, as Trump visited the US-Mexico border in Cochise County on Thursday.

Syvrud, who hails from Benson, Arizona, located about 50 miles southeast of Tucson, was captured by the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday afternoon. The Sheriff’s Office confirmed his arrest, stating, “This subject has been taken into custody without incident.”

In addition to the alleged threats against Trump, Syvrud is wanted for multiple offences, including failure to register as a sex offender. He also faces several warrants in both Wisconsin and Arizona, including charges for driving under the influence and a felony hit-and-run.

The timing of the arrest coincided with Trump’s visit to Cochise County, where he toured the US-Mexico border. During his visit, Trump addressed the ongoing border issues and criticized his political rival, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, for what he described as lax immigration policies. When asked by reporters about the ongoing manhunt for Syvrud, Trump responded, “No, I have not heard that, but I am not that surprised and the reason is because I want to do things that are very bad for the bad guys.”

This incident marks the latest in a series of threats against political figures during the current election cycle. Just earlier this month, a 66-year-old Virginia man was arrested on suspicion of making death threats against Vice President Kamala Harris and other public officials.

Continue Reading

Media

Trump Media & Technology Group Faces Declining Stock Amid Financial Struggles and Increased Competition

Published

 on

Trump Media & Technology Group’s stock has taken a significant hit, dropping more than 11% this week following a disappointing earnings report and the return of former U.S. President Donald Trump to the rival social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. This decline is part of a broader downward trend for the parent company of Truth Social, with the stock plummeting nearly 43% since mid-July. Despite the sharp decline, some investors remain unfazed, expressing continued optimism for the company’s financial future or standing by their investment as a show of political support for Trump.

One such investor, Todd Schlanger, an interior designer from West Palm Beach, explained his commitment to the stock, stating, “I’m a Republican, so I supported him. When I found out about the stock, I got involved because I support the company and believe in free speech.” Schlanger, who owns around 1,000 shares, is a regular user of Truth Social and is excited about the company’s future, particularly its plans to expand its streaming services. He believes Truth Social has the potential to be as strong as Facebook or X, despite the stock’s recent struggles.

However, Truth Social’s stock performance is deeply tied to Trump’s political influence and the company’s ability to generate sustainable revenue, which has proven challenging. An earnings report released last Friday showed the company lost over $16 million in the three-month period ending in June. Revenue dropped by 30%, down to approximately $836,000 compared to $1.2 million during the same period last year.

In response to the earnings report, Truth Social CEO Devin Nunes emphasized the company’s strong cash position, highlighting $344 million in cash reserves and no debt. He also reiterated the company’s commitment to free speech, stating, “From the beginning, it was our intention to make Truth Social an impenetrable beachhead of free speech, and by taking extraordinary steps to minimize our reliance on Big Tech, that is exactly what we are doing.”

Despite these assurances, investors reacted negatively to the quarterly report, leading to a steep drop in stock price. The situation was further complicated by Trump’s return to X, where he posted for the first time in a year. Trump’s exclusivity agreement with Trump Media & Technology Group mandates that he posts personal content first on Truth Social. However, he is allowed to make politically related posts on other social media platforms, which he did earlier this week, potentially drawing users away from Truth Social.

For investors like Teri Lynn Roberson, who purchased shares near the company’s peak after it went public in March, the decline in stock value has been disheartening. However, Roberson remains unbothered by the poor performance, saying her investment was more about supporting Trump than making money. “I’m way at a loss, but I am OK with that. I am just watching it for fun,” Roberson said, adding that she sees Trump’s return to X as a positive move that could expand his reach beyond Truth Social’s “echo chamber.”

The stock’s performance holds significant financial implications for Trump himself, as he owns a 65% stake in Trump Media & Technology Group. According to Fortune, this stake represents a substantial portion of his net worth, which could be vulnerable if the company continues to struggle financially.

Analysts have described Truth Social as a “meme stock,” similar to companies like GameStop and AMC that saw their stock prices driven by ideological investments rather than business fundamentals. Tyler Richey, an analyst at Sevens Report Research, noted that the stock has ebbed and flowed based on sentiment toward Trump. He pointed out that the recent decline coincided with the rise of U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential nominee, which may have dampened perceptions of Trump’s 2024 election prospects.

Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida, offered a grim long-term outlook for Truth Social, suggesting that the stock would likely remain volatile, but with an overall downward trend. “What’s lacking for the true believer in the company story is, ‘OK, where is the business strategy that will be generating revenue?'” Ritter said, highlighting the company’s struggle to produce a sustainable business model.

Still, for some investors, like Michael Rogers, a masonry company owner in North Carolina, their support for Trump Media & Technology Group is unwavering. Rogers, who owns over 10,000 shares, said he invested in the company both as a show of support for Trump and because of his belief in the company’s financial future. Despite concerns about the company’s revenue challenges, Rogers expressed confidence in the business, stating, “I’m in it for the long haul.”

Not all investors are as confident. Mitchell Standley, who made a significant return on his investment earlier this year by capitalizing on the hype surrounding Trump Media’s planned merger with Digital World Acquisition Corporation, has since moved on. “It was basically just a pump and dump,” Standley told ABC News. “I knew that once they merged, all of his supporters were going to dump a bunch of money into it and buy it up.” Now, Standley is staying away from the company, citing the lack of business fundamentals as the reason for his exit.

Truth Social’s future remains uncertain as it continues to struggle with financial losses and faces stiff competition from established social media platforms. While its user base and investor sentiment are bolstered by Trump’s political following, the company’s long-term viability will depend on its ability to create a sustainable revenue stream and maintain relevance in a crowded digital landscape.

As the company seeks to stabilize, the question remains whether its appeal to Trump’s supporters can translate into financial success or whether it will remain a volatile stock driven more by ideology than business fundamentals.

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version