Let The Condescension Begin
As we lead up to the Beijing Games in August, keep your eye out for poorly written articles like this from Mark Magnier from the Tribune newspapers. On the surface, it's an article about how China is trying to change parts of its culture to look good on the world stage. At worst it's manipulative and condescending, at best it's intellectually lazy and misleading.
Out of all of the smokers in China, Magnier thinks a good, representative quote is from a 30 year old real estate salesman who says, "I'm not that addicted, but it's also not so easy to stop. The only answer would be if they stopped making cigarettes completely." This is the only first-person quote Magnier uses in the entire article.
Magnier then goes on to say, "Outside the Yuyang Hotel in central Beijing, dozens of migrant workers offered each other cigarettes on their lunch break Thursday, as waiting taxi drivers gossiped in a cloud of smoke near a businessman who stopped at the crosswalk to light up between cell phone conversations." Are we to believe that this scene couldn't be exactly the same in parts of America and Europe?
Probably the biggest issue I have with Magnier's article is his use of absolute smoking statistics, instead of smoking rates. He mentions the "350 million smokers" in China and the "1 million Chinese who die annually of smoking related diseases." Magnier is not lying, these statistics are correct. The issue is that using absolute statistics for almost anything in China is misleading. For example, China has almost two-times the number of cell phones than that of the United States (437 million v. 220 million). But this says very little about the relative usage in each country. Simply adjusting for population, one can estimate that about 70-75% of the people in the US have cell phones, whereas only 30-35% of the Chinese have cell phones. The rates on a per person basis tell a completely different story. Magnier chooses to ignore this simple use of data throughout his article.
The fact is that smoking is a problem in China, but it's actually only a problem for men. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 67% of adult Chinese men smoke, compared to that of 4% of adult Chinese women. On an overall basis, this is comparable with smoking rates in many European countries (30-40%). In America, 23% of men smoke, 18% of women smoke, and a deplorable 10% of pregnant women smoke. I realize the purpose of Magnier's article was not to compare smoking rates around the world, but by writing the article in the way that he did, he has misled the reader.
As it turns out, Mark Magnier has impeccable credentials as a journalist. While I can't say I'm familiar with his all of his work, I'd have to assume this is an isolated incident. Regardless, this is just another example of why it is dangerous to believe everything that is written in the newspaper. Everyone has their slant, especially "unbiased" journalists.
Out of all of the smokers in China, Magnier thinks a good, representative quote is from a 30 year old real estate salesman who says, "I'm not that addicted, but it's also not so easy to stop. The only answer would be if they stopped making cigarettes completely." This is the only first-person quote Magnier uses in the entire article.
Magnier then goes on to say, "Outside the Yuyang Hotel in central Beijing, dozens of migrant workers offered each other cigarettes on their lunch break Thursday, as waiting taxi drivers gossiped in a cloud of smoke near a businessman who stopped at the crosswalk to light up between cell phone conversations." Are we to believe that this scene couldn't be exactly the same in parts of America and Europe?
Probably the biggest issue I have with Magnier's article is his use of absolute smoking statistics, instead of smoking rates. He mentions the "350 million smokers" in China and the "1 million Chinese who die annually of smoking related diseases." Magnier is not lying, these statistics are correct. The issue is that using absolute statistics for almost anything in China is misleading. For example, China has almost two-times the number of cell phones than that of the United States (437 million v. 220 million). But this says very little about the relative usage in each country. Simply adjusting for population, one can estimate that about 70-75% of the people in the US have cell phones, whereas only 30-35% of the Chinese have cell phones. The rates on a per person basis tell a completely different story. Magnier chooses to ignore this simple use of data throughout his article.
The fact is that smoking is a problem in China, but it's actually only a problem for men. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 67% of adult Chinese men smoke, compared to that of 4% of adult Chinese women. On an overall basis, this is comparable with smoking rates in many European countries (30-40%). In America, 23% of men smoke, 18% of women smoke, and a deplorable 10% of pregnant women smoke. I realize the purpose of Magnier's article was not to compare smoking rates around the world, but by writing the article in the way that he did, he has misled the reader.
As it turns out, Mark Magnier has impeccable credentials as a journalist. While I can't say I'm familiar with his all of his work, I'd have to assume this is an isolated incident. Regardless, this is just another example of why it is dangerous to believe everything that is written in the newspaper. Everyone has their slant, especially "unbiased" journalists.
Good critique.
Reply to this