I'm too hassled and busy at the moment to put together a bunch of posts, but there are a few things I wanted to comment on today. Rebecca, if you read this, I apologize for grouping you in such dubious company.

First, the China Daily Cartoon of the Week:

 

Japanese whaleburger. Subtle. Always nice to see China, ever the conservation mavens, admonishing Japan for their (admittedly shabbily justified) "research" whaling.

However, a leaf through yesterday's South China Morning Post (we get it a day late in Beijing - and its unlinkable) reveals the article “Top hotels feel the bite as Disney scraps shark's fin soup” in which a Mr. Harrison Lun, F&B Manager at the Hotel InterContinental in Hong Kong's Tsim Sha Tsui has this to say:

“[We] have for a long time been offering shark's fin at wedding banquets. The risk of [getting rid of it] will have a very big impact on our business.”

“Serving shark's fin soup is a Chinese tradition. It gives face to people and, unfortunately, I think to change that perception will definitely take some time.”

Yes, it sure will, especially with the splendid environmental leadership being displayed by Hong Kong's hospitality industry in its noble desire to support “Chinese tradition”. Of course, a Big McWhale and fries might be Japanese tradition too. Has anyone checked? (Certainly it yields dramatic possibilities for “supersizing”.)

Further illumination on the moral compass of hotels (not just in Hong Kong but throughout China) from the quote in the same article by the (non Chinese) house flack at the Hong Kong Mariott, Ms. Therese Necio-Ortega:

“We would have to explain to stakeholders why the [hotel's] revenue is going to be $100,000 less for the month. If we don't serve shark's fin, then the owners are going to say, 'where can you recoup that $100,000?' Beyond that, what would happen to the shark's fin trader? There must be alternative options before we just say, 'No, let's not serve it.' There must be positive solutions. We can't just leave some groups hanging. It is just not fair.”

Apparently its fair to leave one group hanging: sharks from fish hooks. I find it hard to believe that big hotel chains give a rat's ass for the suppliers that they no doubt grind ruthlessly for discounts and favorable trade terms. She continues:

“We try to present other dishes like abalone as an alternative. But if the client insists, we have to serve it because it is their wedding party. We have to work to persuade the public who still feel they will lose face if they have a wedding without shark's fin.”

Ms. Necio-Ortega's concern for the struggling operator of the corner sharkfin shop is laudable, but I rather reckon that $100,000 monthly revenue was closer to the truth. And here again is the old Disney “we really try to convince people to order something else”chestnut again. Do I write stuff like this when I craft statements for my clients? I hope I am better than this.

I know the above conflates mainland and Hong Kong attitudes, but I live in Beijing, so I have to adhere to a one-China policy lest I face censure.

Flipping through the same edition of the South China Morning Post, I was pleasantly surprised to find Rebecca MacKinnon's Yale Global column of two days ago, which discusses the complicity of US technology manufacturers in China's Internet censorship, reprinted in the op-eds, on page A17. But, try as I might, I can't seem to find it in the China Daily or the websites of Xinhua and People's Daily. Curious. Got that killer whale burger cartoon, though.

Another interesting piece from yesterday's SCMP. I am not sure if this has been picked up anywhere else. Page one has a story updating the Ching Cheong situation titled, “Journalist's wife ware of release rumors”. Apparently there have been some drifting rumors of his release. If so, Ms. Lau, Ching's wife, is probably right to be skeptical. The rumors apparently surfaced in the wake of a comment by Hong Kong SAR CEO Donald Tsang that the truth surrounding Ching Cheong's case would emerge “very soon”. One must wonder who's truth. The article further reports that Ching is being held in a two-star hotel in Beijing. Two stars? In Beijing? It's inhuman. The poor man must be freed at once. Or transferred to a proper jail.

Finally, last night CNN International gave three minutes to an interview with US Representative Richard Pombo (R Cal), who is opposed to CNOOC's bid for Unocal. The first words out of anchor Veronica Pedrosa's mouth were a question about whether Chevron was one of Pombo's campaign contributors (they are). I was amazed. You go, girl!

While I attribute the sudden interest in the financial backing of opponents to the bid more to clever PR by CNOOC than to a sudden increase in mainstream media thoroughness in the vetting of talking heads, it's nice to see the question being asked. Now, in fairness, the should be doing the same thing to people in favor of CNOOC's bid. I take a laisser-faire attitude towards the bid itself, but I feel the same journalistic standards should be applied to spokespeople for both sides.

For the record, Pombo admitted that Chevron is in his district and that they are a donor to his campaign, although he claimed that they have minimal influence, donated only a small amount of money, and have no bearing on his opposition. Pombo's campaign donor list is here. Decide for yourself.