image copyrightGetty Images
In recent weeks, three controversies that have been labeled as "insulting China" have emerged in China's public opinion field: Taiwanese artist Tsai Kang-yong, Japanese TV series "VIVANT" and French football star Kylian Mbappe. The three incidents appear to be similar in nature, but official responses, official media involvement, and public opinion are not consistent.
Tsai Kang-yong's remarks were interpreted by some Chinese netizens as involving Taiwan's sovereignty position, but the official response was limited and no high-profile pursuit was continued; "VIVANT" triggered successive responses from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of National Defense and official media; in addition to online criticism, the Mbappe incident also spread to brand cooperation and commercial levels.
The three incidents involved Taiwan, Japan and Western countries respectively, but they were all discussed under the framework of "insulting China". Many interviewed scholars believe that Beijing’s handling method does not simply depend on which country or region the target is from, but rather depends on whether the incident touches core political issues such as sovereignty and historical memory, as well as current bilateral relations and domestic and foreign policy considerations.
They pointed out that on the one hand, Chinese officials continue to rely on nationalism to build domestic consensus, and on the other hand, they also try to control the intensity of mobilization to avoid affecting foreign relations, economic interests, and other policy goals. The three cases of turmoil just show this kind of trade-offs and trade-offs.
Chinese official: Is it right for the cause but not for the person?
The Cai Kangyong incident initially spread on social media. Some Chinese netizens interpreted his remarks as involving Taiwan's position on sovereignty and demanded that he be blocked and asked to express his position, but the government and mainstream official media did not continue to pursue it. The popularity and market influence that Tsai Kangyong has accumulated in China over the years also prevented the incident from escalating into a large-scale political disturbance.
In contrast, the controversy caused by "VIVANT" is more lasting. In the play, Chinese intelligence agents tortured Japanese spies. After the incident was exposed, official agencies such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of National Defense of China responded successively, and state media also published comments for days. Related topics dominated the hot searches on the Chinese Internet for a long time.
Lu Qiu Luwei, an associate professor at the School of Communication at Hong Kong Baptist University, told BBC Chinese that she and her colleagues have conducted a systematic study of the speeches of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, and the results show that the official attitude first depends on the nature of the issue. Issues involving core interests such as territory, sovereignty, and history usually have the harshest words; if Japan is involved, the response is expected to be tougher.
She pointed out that the second is objects and bilateral relations. Taiwan is regarded by Beijing as a sovereignty issue, and officials have no room to make concessions. Regarding Japan, historical memory and domestic public opinion make it difficult for officials to soften their attitude. Regarding Europe and the United States, officials have to weigh economic, trade and diplomatic relations at the same time, so their response is relatively restrained.
End of Hot Reading
Huang Zhaonian, an associate professor at the National Chengchi University’s Institute of Development, believes that the degree of official involvement, response level and duration mainly depend on two factors: the extent to which the incident itself is related to national dignity and national sentiments, and whether there are other major concerns during the incident.
He pointed out that for multiple disputes that arise at the same time, the authorities will conduct a cost-benefit assessment. Regarding the Tsai Kang-yong incident, Beijing must consider the fact that Taiwan is in the midst of an election, and will also worry that its tough stance will affect the reunification campaign.
Market pressure becomes a common bargaining chip
In the past few years, the public opinion pressure of such disturbances has often not only stayed on social media, but has rapidly spread to the business field. From brand apologies and the removal of spokespersons to companies revising official website statements, China's huge consumer market has become part of the transmission of political signals.
Another controversy surrounds Mbappe. He was accused of making negative remarks about Mao Zedong, which triggered criticism from Chinese online public opinion.
As the incident heated up, many brands that cooperated with Mbappe came under pressure from Chinese netizens to take a stand. Some Chinese brands quickly terminated contracts and stopped broadcasting. Official media have repeatedly emphasized that Chinese advertising revenue is an important source of income for Mbappe, describing him as "shooting himself in the foot" and warning of losing the Chinese market.
After "VIVANT" was characterized by Xinhua News Agency as "maliciously smearing China and concocting false historical narratives," Chinese public opinion began to trace which companies had placed advertisements in the show and demanded an apology from the relevant companies. Sanrio, a Japanese company that collaborated with the show, later issued a public apology, further expanding the incident to a commercial level.
Luqiu Luwei believes that this approach is not new. "As long as the other party cares about the Chinese market, this approach often yields quick results, such as brand apologies and the removal of spokespersons." She said that this has become one of China's common tools for external pressure and may continue to be used in the future.
However, the effectiveness of this approach depends on the other party's dependence on the Chinese market. For countries or companies that are less dependent, the effect will be limited; in the long run, it may also encourage them to diversify their markets and reduce their dependence on China.
June Teufel Dreyer, a professor of political science at the University of Miami, said that Beijing has a long history of using market size to influence external behavior, and has indeed achieved results in many cases. "If a company believes that losing the Chinese market will be costly, it will usually choose to apologize or make concessions."
But she also pointed out that in recent years, some countries and companies have begun to reassess risks. When companies find that the Chinese market is accompanied by political and regulatory uncertainty, they may seek to reduce dependence.
Huang Yunqi, a senior researcher at the American Enterprise Institute, believes that it is difficult to completely separate nationalist mobilization from market pressure. "The Chinese government does not necessarily need to issue direct administrative orders. As long as the market and public opinion believe that a company has touched a political red line, companies will often take the initiative to make adjustments."
Huang Zhaonian pointed out that compared with ten years ago, the Chinese market is still important to global companies, but its relative attractiveness is not as good as in the past. Amid rising geopolitical risks, supply chain restructuring and China's economic slowdown, companies' calculations are changing. For Beijing, market size remains an important bargaining chip, but it may not be as overwhelming a deterrent as it was in the past.
Nationalism becomes a tool of internal governance
Scholars interviewed believe that to understand the "insulting China" incidents that have occurred frequently in recent years, we must not only observe them from the perspective of diplomacy or external relations, but also put them into the context of China's domestic politics.
Luqiu Luwei pointed out that the nationalist narrative centered on "a century of humiliation" did not appear in recent years, but was systematically promoted in textbooks, media and cultural products through patriotic education after 1989. She believes that this type of mobilization first serves domestic affairs, and its core function is to consolidate the legitimacy of governance and build social consensus; transmitting political signals to the outside world is a secondary function.
Huang Zhaonian believes that in a context where rapid economic growth is no longer taken for granted, the importance of nationalism to the CCP is rising. The authorities need to continue to show the public that they are the defenders of national interests and national dignity, and external conflicts and "insulting China" controversies provide just such opportunities.
Huang Yunqi also said that Chinese official responses to related incidents are often not only directed at the incident itself, but also to show the domestic audience that the government is defending core interests and national dignity. She believes that nationalism has become an important political resource for the Chinese government.
However, the interviewed scholars also pointed out that nationalism cannot be mobilized without restrictions. Huang Yunqi warned that once nationalist sentiment is fully aroused, it may not always develop in the direction expected by the official. She described nationalism as sometimes being like an opened "Pandora's box". It can be a tool to mobilize society, but it can also bring consequences that are difficult to fully control.
Is the mobilization effect diminishing?
In recent years, more and more "insulting China" incidents have triggered huge discussions on the Internet, but they may not have the same strong impact on real society. In the Mbappe incident, many Chinese netizens did not even know which statement the controversy originated from; the plot controversy of "VIVANT" is relatively distant to many people; Tsai Kangyong's popularity and audience popularity accumulated over the years also prevented some users from fully responding to the boycott call.
Luqiu Luwei partially agrees with the statement that nationalist mobilization is fatigued, but believes that "fatigue" may not be the most accurate description. "I think it's more like the Internet and reality have become two parallel worlds." She said that algorithms can determine what people see on their mobile phones and can also ignite strong emotions in a short period of time, but these emotions often come and go quickly.
In her view, this more reflects the declining marginal effects of nationalist mobilization. "Similar incidents are becoming more and more frequent, and the issues are often far away from ordinary people's lives. The influence of each mobilization naturally weakens."
A user on Douyin also left a message saying: "You work so hard with a monthly salary of 3,000, and you find that your national sentiment has been hurt?" Such voices reflect that some netizens are more concerned about the pressure of real life than distant political controversies.
Huang Zhaonian believes that nationalist mobilization has existed in China for a long time, but ordinary people also calculate when to express their stance and to what extent they should express their stance. Not every official launch requires the public to respond with the same enthusiasm.
He pointed out that today's Chinese people are not so much "brainwashed" as "mouthwashed": people are wary of expressing true opinions, but when and to what extent they respond to the central government is a matter of calculation, not true belief.
Explore more
More short films
More short films end
