Despite the party-market corporatism, Lee et al. (2007) explained that significant multiplicity continues to exist in the developmental path of local media because of differences in power structure and market maturity. Guangzhou media represent the ‘market competition within party-state ideological limits’ pattern. For example, three press groups in Guangzhou compete fiercely with separate content strategies, while Guangzhou Daily and Yangchen Evening Daily cater primarily to daily life relevance and avoid ‘grand narratives’, Nanfang City Daily and Nanfang Weekend often expose official wrongdoings and advocate liberal ideas. Beijing media that are hierarchically structured in parallel to national, ministerial and municipal levels of administrative authorities compete both horizontally and vertically for power and market on behalf of their patrons and constituencies, thus represent the ‘managed diversity through a precarious of the emerging interest politics among counterbalancing power bases’ pattern. For example, as the authors put it, the supreme leader Mao had to turn to the Shanghai press to wage wars against the Beijing Daily on the eve of the period of the Cultural Revolution because his influence at that point could not fully reach the constituency of the Beijing Daily (Lee et al., 2007).
As national policy is further loosened, the Chinese media have begun exploring diversified modes of business operation. In 1996, the Guangzhou Daily Newspaper Group announced its foundation, thereby unfolding the prelude of conglomeration of Chinese media. However, the process of conglomeration accelerated significantly only during the turn of the millennium, which has also benefited from the promulgation of a series of polices.
Over the past two decades, China’s media convergence has undergone three stages (Li, 2017; Yu, 2015). Stage I lasted from the mid-1990s to the late 1990s, during which the content of traditional media was transplanted onto the new media platform. Stage II began in the early years of the 21st century, during which traditional media co-produced content with new media. Stage III started in 2006 and continues to the present, during which traditional media collaborated with new media in many aspects. All the stages of media convergence concur with the conglomeration and capitalisation of Chinese media industries. China’s media reform has constituted the basic context of domestic media convergence. For the past 40 years, the main drive of China’s media reform is the state. Each critical time point of media reform cannot proceed without the propulsion of the national policy from top to bottom.
Nevertheless, the resistance from journalists makes no difference to the convergence path of China’s local press industry. The tendency for senior journalists to be more devoted to converging news production compared with junior ones and the tendency for journalists from party organs to show a higher positivity towards contributing compared with those from metropolis newspapers both highlight the impact of institutional and organisational factors on the journalists’ intention and behaviour in collaboration.
Lā Qiáolā (La Jolla), Jiālìfúníyàzhōu -- Wénlín Yánjiūsuǒ, Zhōngwén Xuéxí Ruǎnjiàn Wénlín hé CDL zìtǐ jìshù kāifāshāng, xuānbù tuīchū ABC Hàn-Yīng Yànyǔ Cídiǎn de ruǎnjiàn bǎnběn, yóu Yuēhàn Luósēnnuò (John S. Rohsenow) biānjí. Xiàndài Yǔyán qīkān duì Luósēnnuò (Rohsenow) cídiǎn de píngjià shì “dàigěi rén yúkuài tǐyàn, yìyú shǐyòng ... wèi pǔtōng Yīngyǔ dúzhě kāiqǐ le Zhōngguó mínjiān zhìhuì de bǎokù... duì rènhé jíbié de yǔyán xuéshēng hé rènhé xūyào jīngpì géyán de rén dōu shì jí jù xīyǐnlì qiě shífēn shòuyì de.” (89, 2005). Yóu Wénlín Yánjiūsuǒ (zhǐzhìbǎn de biānzhìzhě) kāifā de xīnbǎn ruǎnjiàn wèi xuéxí yànyǔ zhè yī bǎoguì zīyuán zēngtiān le xīn de wéidù. Gāi ruǎnjiàn bǎnběn yīng yǔ Wénlín Hànyǔ Xuéxí Ruǎnjiàn 4.1 huò gèng gāo bǎnběn jiéhé shǐyòng. Yōngyǒu Wénlín qiángdà de ABC diànzǐ cídiǎn de quánbù jíhé, yìwèizhe jiǎntǐ hé fántǐ Zhōngwén de dúzhě kěyǐ shíshí fǎngwèn gèzhǒnggèyàng de cítiáo yǐ tànqiú Luósēnnuò jiàoshòu jīngliáng fānyì de wēimiào zhī chù, bìng lǐjiě Zhōngwén yànyǔ gēng shēnkè de hányì. Shìyòng yú suǒyǒu liúlǎnqì de bǎnběn zhèngzài jījí kāifā zhōng. Zhè yī xīn diànzǐbǎn de shòuzhòng wéi pǔtōng Yīngyǔ hé Hànyǔ dúzhě, yǐjí rénlèixué, yǔyánxué, wénxué, shèhuìxué, xīnlǐxué, lìshǐxué zài nèi de gèzhǒng lǐngyù de zhuānjiā. Xīnbǎn Wénlín 4.1 huò gèng gāo bǎnběn de ruǎnjiàn kě zài wǎngshàng www.wenlinshangdian.com yǐ 19.99 Měiyuán huòdé.
In the early stages after the foundation of China, domestic journalists assumed the primary role of ‘propagators’. From the 1980s to the 1990s, China’s journalists have started to undertake other roles, such as ‘information providers’, ‘information interpreters’, ‘advocators’ and ‘profit makers’. Evidently, their professional roles have become increasingly diversified. In recent years, domestic journalists have gradually ‘returned to the essence of journalism’ in their selection of professional roles (Chen and Jiang, 2008). Most professional journalists have identified with the objective and neutral role of an ‘information provider’ (Zhang and Wu, 2014).
Lā Qiáolā (La Jolla), Jiālìfúníyàzhōu -- Wénlín Yánjiūsuǒ xuānbù Wénlín Hànyǔ Xuéxí Ruǎnjiàn 4.2 bǎn yǔ gōngsī wǎngzhàn (wenlin.com) tóngbù lóngzhòng tuīchū. Wénlín 4.2 de xīn gōngnéng bāokuò kuòzhǎn de zìdiǎn, cídiǎn, Yīng-Hàn, Shuōwén Jiězì (Zhōngguó gǔdài Hànyǔ zìdiǎn) Yǐjí Wénlín zhuānyòng de CDL zìtǐ (wenlin.com/cdl) de zhòngduō gǎijìn, zìtǐ mùqián yǒu chāoguò 96000 ge CDL miáoshù. Qítā zēngqiáng gōngnéng, bāokuò gǎijìn sōusuǒ wénjiàn gōngnéng de jièmiàn, zhòngyào de jièmiàn xīn gōngnéng, yǐjí yīxiē xīn de hé gǎijìnle de gāojí xuǎnxiàng. Duìyú Mac OS X (10.7 huò gèng gāo bǎnběn), zhěnggè yìngyòng chéngxù yǐjīng chóngjiàn wéi 64 wèi Cocoa yìngyòng chéngxù, zhīchí gāo fēnbiànlǜ de Retina gāoqīng xiǎnshìpíng.
On the event of the shipwreck in the Yangtze River last year, I sent (passengers’ identity numbers) to the editor-on-duty of the website. He said, ‘Tell me the number of (Fuzhou) people’. I told him he could roughly estimate the number by counting those identity numbers starting with ‘35’. He said, ‘You might as well help me count’. I was being busy on the spot. And I was expected to be the one managing such trivial matters! (Interviewee No. 14)
These findings provide an empirical foundation to organise the interview outline and the type of interviewees that should be recruited in the following interviews. More importantly, the results mentioned above indicate that journalists in Fujian do embrace new technologies. In this case, the journalists are not resisting media convergence because they have negative attitudes towards new technologies but due to institutional, organisational and value reasons, which will be discussed thoroughly in the next section.
Specifically, information released in new media outlets emphasise timeliness. The irreconcilable conflict between such requirement and the principle of accuracy in news reportage concerns many journalists. In China, the common rule of thumb in terms of news production is that ‘the writer is responsible for the consequences of this article’. Journalists are obliged to take full responsibility for all issues engendered by the news under their name. The risk of ‘more mistakes with more releases’ is a shadow that follows news production as a by-product of the censorship system. Thus, the journalists in Fujian’s press groups disregard the new system of censorship as a ‘buffer’ that could protect them from various risks, particularly political ones. When journalists believe that the risk they may undertake outweighs the financial return they will attain, they choose not to cooperate.
The effects of the dominant path of media convergence on the mid-size press industry are the focus of this study. The path chosen by the press industry in other regions of China may differ from the dominant one in Fujian due to the nuances of power structure, level of economic development, size of press group and other factors. For example, the Nanfang Media Group’s choice of the fully transformed path has a bearing on its pioneering spirit and remarkable investment, which are derived from its distance from the centre of political power, the prosperity of the market economy in Guangdong and the surrounding areas, and the considerable assets from accumulation within the media group in the past decades (Yin and Liu, 2013). Nevertheless, Fujian’s case discloses the common challenges that the Chinese press industry will face as they further advance the convergence regardless of which path they choose. This study also develops an analytical framework based on the interplay amongst the state, media and journalists to be used in future research on China’s media convergence.