評論
打印
Online nationalism
網絡民族主義
Running dog eat dog
狗咬狗一嘴毛
Nationalists, united against Western media bias, are divided over money
愛國主義者聯合起來反對西方媒體偏見，但是金錢將他們區分開來
Oct 19th 2013 | BEIJING |From the print edition
NATIONALIST displays attacking Western media bias have generated plenty of attention and fame on the Chinese internet for “patriotic youths” and made a media darling of one website in particular: Anti-CNN.com. But turning online patriotism into a business has proved trickier and, for some of the young idealists involved, rather disillusioning.
愛國主義者將攻擊西方媒體偏見在網上展示引起了大量愛國青年的關注并且變得小有名氣，其中一個網站反CNN網尤其受到關注。但是將網上的愛國主義變成一項業務運營并非易事，有一群年輕的理想主義者發起的這項業務令他們大失所望。
In recent weeks a bitter row at Anti-CNN.com (now known formally as April Media) has exposed a rift between the site’s founder, Rao Jin, and others who joined his cause. Former staff describe a business in trouble, with disappointing web traffic and little revenue. They claim that a big investor has pulled his support and that the site has run out of cash (though it remains online). Ten employees settled pay disputes in September. A company that once boasted more than two dozen workers and thousands of square feet of office space in Beijing is, they say, down to one office worker: the accountant. Mr Rao disputes this.
近幾周反CNN網站（官方稱作四月傳媒）遭遇困境，暴露了該網站的創始人饒謹與其他合伙人出現裂痕。前員工表示經營陷入困境，網絡流量不理想，收入也不多。他們稱一個大的投資者已經撤資，且該網站現金流已經枯竭（盡管還在線運營）。十個雇員在9月產生結算支付糾紛。曾經是在北京超過24名員工，擁有數千平方辦公室的公司現在已經只有一個會計了。饒先生予以否認。
It is quite a comedown. Mr Rao’s first prominent scalp was CNN, an American news network, in March 2008 after ethnic riots erupted in Tibet. His website seized on what he considered bias in the coverage by CNN and other outlets. In February 2011 April Media posted footage of Jon Huntsman, then the American ambassador to China, at the site of a planned anti-government protest. The demonstration did not materialise, but Mr Huntsman was attacked online for appearing to support it. He said he was there by coincidence.
這是一個悲劇。饒先生第一次突出的戰利品是美國媒體CNN，2008年3月西藏爆發民族騷亂。他的網站抓住了所謂的CNN以及其他網站報道的偏見。2011年2月，四月傳媒發表了時任美駐華大使洪博培出現在一起有計劃的反政府抗議中的鏡頭。這次示威沒有實現，但是洪博培先生還是在網上受到攻擊。他說他只是恰巧出現在那里而已。
The popularity of such videos has not translated into profits. Former staff say the most advertising revenue that April Media collected in one month was 17,000 yuan ($2,800) in August. Mr Rao declined to discuss April Media’s finances in any detail but says the business is operating normally and is financially sound. He says the former employees are just disgruntled, adding: “As any start-up company, we have our share of challenges.”
上述視頻的流行并沒有變成利潤。前員工說四月傳媒單月最大廣告收益是8月份的1萬7千元（2800美元）。饒先生拒絕透露四月傳媒財務細節，但是表示業務運營正常，金融狀況平穩。他表示前雇員只是心懷不滿，并且說：“跟其他任何創業公司一樣，我們也面臨很多挑戰?！?/p>
Indeed, April Media sounds like any start-up with money to burn (reportedly an initial investment of $1.6m) and a doubtful business model. But some of the company’s early zealots question the direction their experience has taken them. Tang Jie, who posted the Huntsman video, left to start his own site. Some say he regarded Mr Rao, who had accepted invitations to events at the American embassy in Beijing, as having gone too soft on Mr Huntsman. Mr Tang did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment.
事實上，四月傳媒跟其他創業公司一樣在燒錢（報道稱首次投資達到160萬美元），并且創業模式令人質疑。但是一些該公司的早期狂熱者質疑他們根據經驗選擇的方向是否正確。發布洪博培視頻的唐杰離開該公司并且創立了自己的網站。一些人表示，他認為饒先生對洪博培太軟弱，因為后者接受了美大使館的邀請。唐先生沒有回復我們的詢問郵件。
Hu Yinan, a former editor-in-chief of April Media, says he now questions both “patriotic” and “liberal” voices on the Chinese web. “Genuine beliefs and cries for attention are radically different,” he says. In any case, he adds, there is no proven business model for ideologically guided websites, and he doubts there ever will be. “Most, if not all, traditional media outlets will at some point rely on donors.”
四月傳媒的前首席主編胡一南表示他現在質疑中國網上愛國和自由的聲音。他說：“真正的引起注意的信念和呼聲是完全不同的。”他補充道，在任何情況下，意識形態引導網站都沒有一個成熟的商業模式，他甚至不相信會有?！按蠖鄶登闆r下，傳統媒體會在某些時候依賴捐助。”
