Why America’s growing antagonism towards China can be traced to the US media
- The shift in sentiment towards China is partly rooted in ideological polarisation, which has impeded US leaders’ ability to govern effectively
- Back when voters shared the same facts, politicians could appeal to the ‘median voter’. But the fragmenting of the US media landscape has changed the picture
The act purports to highlight China’s supposed “malign behaviour”, to attain an “unfair economic advantage” and the “deference” of other countries to “its political and strategic objectives”. In truth, the bill says a lot more about the US itself – little of it flattering – than it does about China.
The US used to take a sanguine view of China’s economic development, recognising the lucrative opportunities that it represented. Even after China’s emergence as a political and economic powerhouse, successive US administrations generally regarded China as a strategic partner, rather than a competitor.
The anti-China narrative has thus restored some common ground to American politics. Unfortunately, Americans are agreeing on an idea that will do them far more harm than good.
What the US should be focusing on is how to benefit from globalisation and technological progress, and manage the risks arising from the associated structural disruptions. To that end, effective cooperation with China – together with a broader embrace of free trade and economic openness – would be enormously helpful.
In his remarks, Kissinger acknowledged just how difficult it will be to build the Sino-American relationship the world needs, noting that the different cultures and histories of these two “great societies” naturally lead to differences of opinion. Modern technology, global communication and economic globalisation further complicate the ability to reach a consensus.
Kissinger was right to highlight modern technology as a key challenge. In the past, when dominant media organisations largely shaped the popular narrative, remaining relatively neutral was the most effective way to compete. With voters all sharing roughly the same facts, politicians’ best bet was to appeal to the “median voter”, rather than those on the extremes.
World leaders pledge to cut greenhouse emissions at virtual Earth Day summit
This has fuelled a growing preference for “personalised” information – and transformed the media’s competitive strategies. In this environment, neutral reporting doesn’t attract as much attention as inflammatory or ideologically driven reporting, especially if the latter is algorithmically targeted at those who are primed to embrace it.
The media’s role in establishing a common factual basis has thus increasingly gone by the wayside – and, with it, the strategy of appealing to the median voter.
As the US media embraced increasingly biased, targeted strategies, deep polarisation became all but inevitable. This, together with US politicians’ new incentives to appeal to the ideological extremes, has torn at the fabric of American society, fuelling instability and conflict, hampering leaders’ ability to address urgent challenges, and undermining America’s position of global leadership.
As Kissinger made clear, the difficulty of restoring Sino-American relations should not deter leaders from trying. On the contrary, it demands that both sides make “ever more intensive efforts” to work together. For the US, however, that work must begin at home. The real threat to the US is not from rising China, but from its inability to meet the challenges of modern technology.
Zhang Jun is dean of the School of Economics at Fudan University and director of the China Centre for Economic Studies, a Shanghai-based think tank. Copyright: Project Syndicate