Beijing Authorities to Ban Blacks and Mongolians from Bars During Olympics

Apparently there is no conspiracy to ban black people from Chinese bars....


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

More on the Beijing bar ban confusion

by Dedric Lam

More on the Beijing bar ban confusionTom Miller of the SCMP has been the center of many heated online discussions of late as a result of his article last Friday on bar owners in Sanlitun being asked to deny service to black patrons. What looked like an attempt to add credibility to his anonymous claims, he followed up with an article on Saturday claiming another anonymous source, this time a police officer, who denied that bars were instructed to deny service to patrons of African descent. His article though, still maintained that:

...another bar owner had been verbally warned by Public Security Bureau officers not to serve customers of Mongolian and African descent, while other bars had been ordered to sign chopped pledges to keep to curfews, not allow the illegal sale of drugs, and refuse certain customers.

According to Beijing Boyce, who has reported his independent findings about the SCMP claims on his blog, this might be just a case of miscommunication. Through his investigations, his sources tell him that bar owners were indeed asked to:

monitor black patrons. He [the bar owner] said the police told the reps that drug dealers are predominantly black in the area. He said the police did not ask bar owners to ban blacks.

As you can imagine, the story has spread like wildfire across blogs as well as more established media outlets. Even Shanghaiist's story was echoed verbatim on a Chinese blog. Not surprisingly though, while news outlets like The Age and Financial Times picked up the story in the context of the Beijing Olympics being "no-fun", latter commentary was less about the likelihood of Africans and Mongolians being turned away from bars but more about the SCMP's journalism.

Jeremy Goldkorn of Danwei comments:

...it seems highly unlikely that anyone with any real authority would "secretly" plan "to ban black people" from the city's bars.

The sources of the South China Morning Post are anonymous, and the paper does not seem to have any physical evidence to support the article.

Liam Fitspatrick from Time (in association with CNN) also recognises that:

The story, by Tom Miller and Peter Simpson, quotes an anonymous bar owner as saying that security officers forced him to sign a pledge that required him to prevent black people from entering his premises. A nameless “black British national” is also quoted, expressing his shock and disappointment.

The anonymity of the sources is also noticed by veteran blogger and China watcher Fons Tuinstra in the China Herald:

The proof of this was pretty flimsy: one anonymous bar-owner at Sanlitun.
I found the article remarkable for two reasons. First, because of its firm anti-China tone, while the South China Morning Post had adopted (as far as I could read them) since 1997 a pro-China tone that would even be considered nauseating by the editors of the China Daily.
Second, it fitted nicely into their old tradition in coming with firm allegations, based on nothing, so they could sell the next day their paper again with a firm denial of a false rumor they had created themselves in the first place.

Fons then continues to post his FriendFeed conversations with other China netizens who also find the SCMP report a little hard to swallow.

The most convincing debunking of this story has been the hard work of Beijing nightlife blogger Beijing Boyce who actually went bar to bar to to speak to bar owners about this potential ban. Boyce suggests that the "black" referred to may not actually be about skin color but "bad elements". The Chinese term for organized crime syndicates or the triads is 黑社会 (literally black society).

In his latest entry Boyce also comments on the SCMP's lack of transparency in reporting:

Apparently the policy [to ban patrons of African descent] is so secret that the police are keeping it from all but a few bar owners who can be trusted to reveal it to foreign journalists.

Unlike the Hong Kong daily newspaper, Boyce manages to name the bars that helped him debunk the SCMP report.

http://shanghaiist.com/2008/07/21/lost_in_translation_more_on_the_bei.php#more

 

I am honestly amazed that so many dumb people in this thread actually believe this story. There are so many holes in it that it is not even funny.

Just take a look at what this fool said:

Oh, they are trying to keep it a secret to force the bar owners to sign a pledge....so they can use the signed pledge to take it to public to sue them if they break it? LOL, if you still can't see what's wrong with this statement, there is not much I can help you.

This story is one of the most laughable and fake 'news' that I have ever read. But there are so many fools in this thread who actually believe it. You people must be kidding me.

 

I read some internet discussion about this story. And this one has really cracked me up.

I actually rolled on the floor laughing after I read this. Brilliant!!!

 

Apparently, the bar owner could be threatened not to serve the black customers by forcing him to sign something. But that same bar owner was also brave enough to share the breathtaking story with a foreign journalist.

Split personality?

 

I knew it was too deep for you. Let me spell it out for you again, New Yorker.

I never thought this was made up propaganda by the West. You know why? You are not India, you are not USA, and you are NOT the West. Tom Miller is NOT the west. It was a shady "report" by one single "reporter" "citing" an unnamed single bar owner, without any following up reports, without ANY other backing up reports from ANY news source.

Whether that Mr Miller made it up or not, I do not know, and I am not interested. All I know is, breaking news like this needs more concrete evidence and more supporting materials from OTHER sources. I said many times before, I am only interested in the actions and the results of the actions, and I don't care about others intentions, because that's all spin. So, an unnamed bar owner, claimed by Tom Miller, is NOT evidence enough for any sane person, but got you and your buddies all worked up. That's fine. You are living in a free country, and you can believe you found WMD in Iraq and Obama is Muslim, similarly, for whatever reason, it's your choice. I am not a bit interested why you want to do that. But, don't pretend you represent the "West".

Once again, you were booted because of you are who you are, not because you are an Indian, and you can't blame Clutch for targeting Indians. For the same reason, arresting drug dealers, while some of them are blacks, does not make Chinese racist, no matter how you and your buddies spin.

If you have an opinion, say it, and spin it with logical argument with your own standard, although that's pretty low already, but don't try to hide yourself behind "we", "Americans", or "the West". I am sorry, you are NOT. You are still that New Yorker who has incredible reputation of credibility on this site.

 

Do you recognize that many times newspapers report stories based on annoymous sources and it's considered credible?

A reporter will protect their source, I could only imagine what would happen to that poor bartender if the authorities learned of his or her identity. Probably their entire family would be arrested and jailed.

Much of what else you wrote is ridiculous, if not comical. Not only that, it's personally offensive to me to suggest that everyone in America thinks Obama is Muslim (only 10% - probably more people in China think Obama deals drugs because he is black), and that we found WMD's in Iraq (probably more people in China think there are WMD's in taiwan).

Here's another question for you - how do think that Americans are less informed than the Chinese when we have a free press and you do not? DOn't you think that has an impact on the reliability of information that you can trust from your news sources?

 

Sigh, how typical from New Yorker - generalize every single thing with his own agenda.

If 10% trustworthy news sources are based on unnamed sources, it doesn't mean everything anonymous is creditable. Besides, those unnamed sources will normally be confirmed by follow up stories by other sources from other agencies. Blogs copying and pasting is not reporting. I can't believe you are still hanging on that single Miller-unnamed-bartender straw, while everyone else in your camp has realized how ridiculous to jump the gun on a rumor. Yeah, probably this and probably that, that's the only argument you can come up with. It's all the same old New Yorker "debating style" - no substance/facts, just wishful thinking.

Did I suggest everyone in US believe that WMD and Obama being Muslim thing? Please quote me. It's from YOUR news source, there ARE people, ignorant ones, believing in lots of nonsense. By the way, it's more than 10% believed that crap, according to YOUR sources. Your assumption on the other hand, that more Chinese believe Obama dealing drugs, please cite your sources - the number and percentage, EVEN UNNAMED SOURCE. You see the difference between you and me or any sane people, you just pull stuff out without any backup. You know what probably means, right? It's not a remote possibility, but rather a high chance with some supporting evidence.

I never said Americans are less informed than Chinese. However, some Americans are much less informed on issues in China than lots of posters here with Chinese background. If you want to dispute, go ahead with your argument, please save your "probably".

What do you mean I don't have free press. I live in a country with free press, and I am a citizen of a country with free press. My primary news source are from US, UK, Germany, and Singapore, and HK. Are they reliable? The difference between you and me? I have a brain and use it when I read stories. I don't know about you.

 

Except when the story is so ridiculous that only dumb fools like you would buy it. I have pointed out hole after hole of this "only idiots would buy it" story". The story has been debunked. Instead of hiding behind the excuse of anonymity, why didn't you make an attempt to 'debunk' the 'debunk' of the story? Know what? The fake story had been built around the excuse of anonymity to fool a simple-minded like you in the first place.

You are right. I guess the scare of having his entire family arrested and jailed gave the courage to the bar owner to reveal the highly confidential story to a journalist.

He must be very worried for his wife and his children if he would be found to reveal the story. So he told himself that he better revealed the whole story to a journalist before him, his wife and his children all got jailed. Right? I know this is absolutely stupid but I have no doubt it's the reasoning in your mind.

When will you start using your brain?

 

I spoke to my father who is actually in Beijing right now and he believes this story is a pure fabrication.

NO - he is NOT a Chinese citizen. He is a US citizen and is not brainwashed by the PRC media machine.

NO - he is not black but is of Mongolian descent. Actually not quite sure about this one but the Manchu tribes did include Mongolians too and he is Manchurian.

Any further support of this article would probably be of questionable motive. The PRC is a easy target and there are a lot of more legitimate topics to debate (ie. Sudan/Tibet).

We another Tibet thread. I haven't seen one in weeks!!

 

How does he know that he is not brainwashed ?

 

Do you do this as a means to get a rise out of me? Because it won't work. But if it makes you feel better go for it.

There's a lot of vitrol in yours (and a few others) way of "discussing" things here. If in the past I have insulted you or in any way belittled you - I have already apologized and can do no more.

But it is your right i suppose to question my motives or interpret/read into anything anyone rights. That's unfortunate, because it means we can't have a productive conversation.

Personally, I think the story has legitimacy - doesn't seem like the kind of thing someone would make-up and doesn't seem like the writer or newspaper is anti-Chinese. The motive just isn't there.

But there is a motive in attacking this writer and all who seem to lead credence into the story. What disappoints me most is that instead of recognizing the possibility of truth, the jump to the conclusion that it must be a lie is pretty sad. I'd at least hope that there'd be come kind of horrified reaction and some talk about what can be done to eliminate racism or at least address it - as opposed to sweeping it under a rug.

But please, if this is going to turn into a discussion about me because we can't stick to what this is really about - than let's just drop it. I have no desire to be a distraction or disrespect Clutch by having a mud-flinging contest with you.

 

Maybe just similar to how you know, as your bold part emphasizing - US citizen and not black? Oh wait, maybe you don't know whether you are brainwashed. Maybe, you know you are, but you are still loving the feeling.

 

lol

seriously though - he is not brainwashed.

maybe our yellow skin just makes us bad people?

 

Come on guys, NewYorker is now only looking for a ladder to exit. He has backpedaled from talking like the fake news is 100% real to it is just a "possibility of truth" now. He has shifted from using the fake news to throw an all-out attack on the other posters to making himself like a champion of the elimination of racism now. How great.

NewYorker, know what? Don't try to flatter yourself. No one care about what you thinks. But the problem is that you keep trying to make every issue about China in the D&D become a confrontation between the posters here. And then you are shameless enough to call this respect to Clutch? Clutch has made this great website for intelligent discussion of sports and political issues. It's people like you who try to turn every China thread to a poo-flirting contest. Some posters have just mentioned not long ago that the D&D has started improving lately. I guess the return of you will once again make it chaotic and hostile. Why would you want to cause the tension among posters from different countries? What can you benefit from it? I just don't understand.

 

wow, I have to give you the benefit of doubt that you are just being sarcastic.

If not, you are really low. Are you aware that you are talking about the father of the other poster?

 

Did you not read Langel's response? Obviously it's a joke, but thanks for sharing your deep thought of the day.

 

I apologize. Sometimes it's hard to tell whether someone is serious or just being sarcastic. Obviously langel could sense your sarcasm but I couldn't.

 

No big deal.

 

Unless corroborating evidence emerges, this story is dead. While I wouldn't be surprised if it were true, the testimony of a single anonymous source is simply too unreliable to make a judgment either way.

/thread