China suppressing coverage of deadly attacks. Some people complaining online
Beijing, Jul 27 (AP) Late last month, a car struck children near an elementary school in an outlying district of Beijing, according to a Chinese news report.
A four-sentence police statement said a 35-year-old male driver hit pedestrians due to 'improper operation" of the car. It didn't mention the school or that the victims included children. Photos of the aftermath, which showed a half-dozen people lying in the street, were scrubbed from China's closely controlled internet.
'We need the truth," said one post on Weibo, a leading social media platform similar to X.
The ruling Communist Party has expanded information control since leader Xi Jinping came to power in 2012, seeing it as a way to prevent unrest. More and more topics, from negative news about the economy to LGBTQ+ identity, have become subject to some form of censorship. In the past half year, mass attacks — in which a person kills or injures multiple people with a vehicle or knife — appear to have been added to the list.
Some people in China are pushing back, complaining online in at least two cases in recent months after drivers hit pedestrians.
The government may be trying to prevent copycat crimes, experts have said. Another motivation could be local authorities wanting to cover up when they fail to do so.
A deadly case in November sparked a government reaction There was a spate of attacks last fall, but it's difficult to gauge whether they are increasing, given the dearth of information.
The attacks weren't always a taboo topic. In the past, authorities released the basic details. Typically, the assailant was described as taking out their anger on society, often over financial losses.
That appears to have changed following a particularly horrific case in November that killed 35 people in Zhuhai in southern China. Authorities said the driver was upset about a divorce settlement. Orders came from the very top — from Xi — to take steps to prevent similar attacks.
Eight days later, an SUV hit students arriving at an elementary school in Hunan province. The number of injured — 30 children and adults — wasn't made public until nearly a month later when the driver was sentenced.
The clampdown on information has tightened further since. In April, reports circulated online that a car had run into people outside a primary school in Jinhua city. At least three provincial state media outlets posted stories — but they were quickly taken down. To date, authorities haven't released any information.
Censorship makes some people hungry for information Twelve days later, a fast-moving car veered off a street and into people at a bus stop in the city of Tengzhou in eastern China.
Authorities said nothing. Videos of the May 4 crash were taken down from social media. The next day, online criticism of the silence began to appear. People said the police should release basic information such as the driver's identity and the number of casualties. A few defended the police, saying it happened on a holiday.
'If a few such precedents are set, and more local governments follow this way in the future, the rules of information disclosure may not be upheld and may be compromised," Hu Xijin, the former editor of a state-owned newspaper, warned in a social media post.
Local governments want to cover up news that reflects badly on them or their polices, said Jennifer Pan, a Stanford University professor who researches how political censorship and information manipulation work in the digital age. The central government sometimes has other priorities.
'When the issue gains attention despite local censorship efforts, the center has an incentive to preserve the legitimacy of the overall system through responsiveness and acknowledgement of the event and underlying issues," she said in an email response.
The details came out 48 hours after the crash. Six people had died, and it had not been an intentional attack: The driver was drunk, a state media report said.
Police respond with quick statements that are short on details Since then, local authorities, at least in two cases in Beijing, seem to be taking a new approach: Issue a report quickly but with scant details.
Eleven days after the drunk driving case, a car hit people outside an elementary school in Beijing on May 15. The Beijing Traffic Police issued a report within a few hours but left out that the location was near a school. It said only that four people had been injured when a car sideswiped pedestrians on Jian'an West Road, and that the driver had been detained.
Authorities appeared to impose an information shutdown that evening. Police were stationed along the stretch of road and a person who appeared to be a neighborhood watch volunteer cautioned people in a nearby residential compound not to speak to strangers.
Six weeks later, posts appeared online on June 26 saying a car had hit children in Miyun, about 60 kilometers (40 miles) northwest of central Beijing. One well-reputed media outlet, Caixin, reached area shop owners who said that children had been hit, and a hospital that confirmed it was treating some child victims. Whether it was an intentional act remains unclear. (AP) NSA NSA
view comments
First Published:
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Uncertainty around US tariffs will not be over after August 1, even with signed trade deals
The US tariff saga has gone through many twists and turns. And many more are likely left. The ratcheting up of tariffs last month is broader and higher than expected. In late May, the view was that while the extant US average tariff rate was around 13-14 per cent, it was headed towards 18-20 per cent. Much of the increase was expected to be focused on ASEAN, where the tariff rate would be raised to that of China's to eliminate transshipment of Chinese exports to the US via the region. While those on Vietnam and Indonesia were in line with expectations, the additional tariffs on Brazil, Canada, and Mexico were not. Nor was the higher 50 per cent rate on copper. However, negotiations are ongoing, including with India, the EU, and Korea. If this week's Japan deal is any guide, tariffs on these economies will likely be half of the threatened levels. But, even at the reduced rate, if these, along with those on EU and the likely extensions of global sectoral tariffs to semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, are realised, then the effective tariff rate could well exceed 20 per cent. All eyes are therefore on August 1, which is the new deadline set by the administration for countries to finalise trade deals. But there is an upcoming and surprisingly overlooked event that could easily make these trade deals moot and plunge the tariff discussions into more uncertainty. On May 28, the US Court of International Trade (USCIT) ruled that tariffs imposed using the provisions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) overstepped the authority granted by the Act. The ruling did not consider the current conditions in the US to be a 'state of emergency,' which is needed to invoke IEEPA, to be convincing nor the use of tariffs to address it. Tariffs could be imposed, if the government so desired, but via the other options at its disposal. Not IEEPA. A federal appeals court granted the government a stay on the order and is slated to begin hearing arguments on the appeal on July 31. All the universal, reciprocal, and fentanyl-related tariffs are based on IEEPA. The tariffs unaffected are the Section 301 tariffs on China imposed under Trump 1.0 and extended by the Biden administration, and the global sectoral tariffs on aluminum, autos and auto parts, copper, and steel that were imposed under Section 232. It is unclear how the appeals court will rule. But regardless of the decision, either party is likely to move the case to the Supreme Court. If the tariffs under IEEPA are eventually disallowed by the US Supreme Court, the government will shift to other options. Tariffs are central to this administration's economic agenda and will thus be pursued. Unlike those under IEEPA, the tariffs under the other options are more cumbersome, limited in scope, and significantly more resource intensive. But they can be implemented in a compressed time frame if the administration so desires. A potential sequence of such actions could be the following. Use Section 122 to impose tariffs of 15 per cent for 150 days on all countries (justified to address balance of payments needs or to prevent a significant depreciation of the dollar). At the same time, ratchet up the tariffs on China that were imposed under Section 301 in Trade War 1.0 by both the Trump and Biden administrations. Keep tariffs on steel and aluminum at 50 per cent (as on copper) and raise that on autos from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. Hasten the ongoing Section 232 (sector specific on grounds on national economic security) investigations into semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and lumber to bring these under the tariff net of 25 per cent – 50 per cent. Use Section 338 to impose tariffs on countries that are deemed to discriminate specifically against US commercial interests (such as digital services taxes by Australia, the EU, Canada, India, and others, although the taxes are imposed on other countries too). Complete Section 301 investigations on large trading partners (some are ongoing, for example, on the EU and Brazil). These investigations are resource intensive as they need to first identify the specific policy of a trading partner that is the basis of 'unfair competition 'and then quantify the 'harm' that such policies impose on US consumers for each product and for each country. The tariff rate needs to be commensurate with the harm caused and, thus, differ, from product to product for each country. Finally, roll all tariffs under Sections 301 and 232. As one can imagine, this is an arduous and uncertain process. However, the direction of travel is more certain — the average effective tariff rate is likely to settle close to 20 per cent. Needless to say, the country- and product-specific impact of Sections 301 and 232 tariffs could be vastly different than under IEEPA. Markets so far have largely shrugged off the announced new tariffs. This is understandable given the quick deescalation after the strong market and corporate reaction to the Liberation Day tariffs; the possibility that the August 1 deadline is postponed; and the eventual negotiated tariff rates could be different from those announced. However, a court ruling on IEEPA could well turn both the August 1 deadline and the trade deals moot, including potentially that with India. If the basis of these deals, that is, IEEPA, is no longer admissible, then we are headed for renegotiations with tariffs under sections 301 and 232. These could be starkly different than those that are being negotiated now. The uncertainty around US tariffs will not be over after August 1, even with signed trade deals. US courts might well upset the best laid plans of mice and men. Continued uncertainty is the only certainty. The writer is Chief Emerging Markets Economist, J P Morgan. Views are personal
Economic Times
15 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Euro rises after US, EU agree to tariff deal
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The euro gained on Monday following the announcement of a framework trade agreement between the United States and the European Union, the latest in a flurry of deals to avert a global trade war Meeting in Scotland on Sunday, U.S. President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the deal, which will result in a 15% tariff on EU goods, half what Trump had threatened to impose from August U.S. and Chinese negotiators are due to meet in Stockholm on Monday with an aim to extend a trade truce and prevent steep tariff hikes. Meanwhile, investor attention is shifting towards corporate earnings and central bank meetings in the U.S. and Japan."It could be a positive week, just purely from the fact that now we know the rules of the game, if you like," said Rodrigo Catril, senior currency strategist at National Australia Bank."Now that there is more clarity, you would think that not only in the U.S., but around the globe, there will be a little bit more willingness to look at investment, to look at expansions, and to look at where the opportunities are," he said on a NAB euro stood at $1.1763, up 0.2% so far in Asia. The common currency rose 0.2% to 173.78 said the EU plans to invest some $600 billion in the U.S. and dramatically increase its purchases of American energy and military equipment. The pact is similar to one forged with Tokyo negotiators last week that will see Japan investing some $550 billion in the U.S. and a 15% tariff imposed on its cars and other baseline 15% tariff will still be seen by many in Europe as too high, compared with Europe's initial hopes to secure a zero-for-zero tariff is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable trade pact with the U.S. No breakthrough is expected in the U.S. and China talks in Stockholm, but analysts said another 90-day extension of a trade truce struck in mid-May was U.S. dollar advanced on Friday, bolstered by solid economic data that suggested the Federal Reserve could take its time in resuming interest rate cuts. Both the Fed and the Bank of Japan are expected to hold rates steady at this week's policy meetings, but traders are focusing on the subsequent comments to gauge the timing of the next dollar was little changed at 147.68 yen. The dollar index, which tracks the greenback against major peers, fell 0.1% to traded at $1.34385, down almost 0.1%. The Australian dollar fetched $0.6576, up 0.2%, while New Zealand's kiwi dollar was flat at $0.6019.
News18
23 minutes ago
- News18
Sudans paramilitaries announce parallel government, deepening countrys crisis
Agency: PTI Last Updated: Cairo, Jul 28 (AP) A notorious paramilitary group and its allies in Sudan have formed a parallel government in areas under the group's control, which are mainly in the western region of Darfur where allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity are being investigated. The move, which was announced Saturday, was likely to deepen the crisis in Sudan, which plunged into chaos when tensions between the country's military and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, or RSF, exploded into fighting in 2023 in the capital, Khartoum and elsewhere in the country. The RSF-led Tasis Alliance appointed Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, the commander of the paramilitary group, as head of the sovereign council in the new administration. The 15-member council serves as head of the state. The RSF grew out of the notorious Janjaweed militias, mobilized two decades ago by then-President Omar al-Bashir against populations that identify as Central or East African in Darfur. The Janjaweed were accused of mass killings, rapes and other atrocities. In the current war, the RSF has been accused of numerous atrocities. The Biden administration slapped Dagalo with sanctions, saying the RSF and its proxies were committing genocide. The RSF has denied committing genocide. The alliance spokesman Alaa al-Din Naqd announced the new administration in a video statement from the Darfur city of Nyala, which is controlled by the RFF and its allied Janjaweed. Rebel leader Abdelaziz al-Hilu, who commands the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N) which is active in the southern Kodrofan region, was appointed as Dagalo's deputy in the council. The SPLM-N is a breakaway faction of the SPLM, the ruling party of neighbouring South Sudan. The announcement came five months after the RSF and its allies signed a charter in February in Kenya's capital, Nairobi, with the aim of establishing a parallel government in RSF-controlled areas. At the time, many countries, including the U.S., rejected the RSF efforts and condemned the signing by the paramilitary group and its allies of what they called 'transitional constitution" in the Kenya-hosted conference. The foreign ministry of the internationally recognized government in Khartoum condemned the announcement in a statement. It called it a 'fake government" and urged the international community to not engage with the RSF-led administration. The RSF-led move was likely to deepen the division in Sudan. Yasir Arman, a rebel leader, said the move is likely to prolong the conflict and divide Sudan between two rival administrations — similar to neighbouring Libya. (AP) NSD NSD view comments First Published: July 28, 2025, 07:45 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
