“So here comes the other shoe. We let hundreds of thousands of them into here in the belief that this would draw the two countries closer, and perhaps make China more like us and help change China in positive ways and show China the value of our values. The other shoe is, let’s send hundreds of thousands of our students there. So far it’s been a one-way street, though one thing that we have definitely gotten out of this arrangement, and it is no small thing, is an influx of brainpower of academically ambitious Chinese students who have remained in this country in large numbers after studying here. But most Chinese students came here and were exposed to really good education in things that—and I don’t begrudge this—helped China become more competitive and accelerate its economic progress. China benefitted hugely by sending this generation to the United States. They were really smart. So let’s do that with them. Let’s send hundreds of thousands of American students to China.
“What does that do for us? It may in fact achieve another piece of that original idealist vision—it’ll draw the two countries together, will expose them more to our ideas and ideals. But if you’ve accepted the notion that China is a nation very much on the rise, and it’s going to be our major competitor in the world and perhaps the dominant power in the foreseeable future, we have a real interest in understanding China—deeply. So let’s do that. How do you do that best? Not by having a few hundred or a few thousand weirdos like me go and become China-philes at some point in their life and are then are squirreled away in some faculty, but send wave after wave of Americans over there. And understand in a deep sense what makes this place tick. How is it put together, where do the fault lines lie, what’s the cast of characters here, to build relationships, to embed themselves in the economy.
“This strikes me as being a brilliant idea, and I don’t know whose idea it was — Obama announced it — but to the extent that he embraces it and makes it real, this is really a genius stroke. All the other stuff, you can see any administration talking about the same things. ‘Yeah, we have some human rights stuff, we have some trade stuff, we have some dollar stuff, some environmental stuff.’ This is the one meaningful innovation I see in the whole spectrum of issues that was discussed. And I think twenty years from now, if it is implemented, people will look back and they will say this was an important moment. ‘This happened then.’
“You see none of that in the press. Not even asking the question, and saying, so could this be important? Or what could this mean? Or how does it work or what is the history of this, or will it be real? It was just kind of dropped in the list like; here are the various talking points. . Some enterprising reporter somewhere in that world of Obama coverage in China should have jumped on this with both hands and said, ‘this is important’ or ‘this looks like it could be important or this is new and different. We knew all those other issues; we didn’t know this one before. What’s really behind this?’ The first question is, ‘So it sounds great—is it real? What kind of flesh are you going to put on those bones?’ Didn’t hear any of that.”

A bunch of the 100,000 should be our journalism students. Even though we will never let China become the dominant power one of the best ways to stay ahead of the competition is to know them well.
#1 Posted by kevin, CJR on Tue 24 Nov 2009 at 12:29 AM
James Fallows had an impressive series on the horrible, disastrous White House press coverage of this Asian trip as well. His latest, with links to his prior posts, is here: Manufactured failure #6: the wrapup - James Fallows
I guess Chuck Todd was feeling the heat on his abysmal performance and started with the typical cry-baby whining over twitter this weekend. "Waaaa! You "bloggers" don't understand how HARD it is!!!" As if Ms. Fenwick and Mr Fallows were some obscure "bloggers."
You have done a great service in your interviews and your analysis, Ms. Fenwick, as Mr. Fallows has, in your very open and very specific criticism of the abysmal performance of the American press. We really need more of this. I'm a harsh press critic, but of course I'm a nobody and therefore my opinions are easy to dismiss. It's different coming so eloquently and specifically and in such detail from professional peers. If these excellent criticisms have an incremental impact on how the American press reports on important foreign policy issues, then we all come out ahead. Again, thanks for your work here.
#2 Posted by James, CJR on Tue 24 Nov 2009 at 02:23 AM
People (bloggers/reporters whatever) keep commenting about how the students in the "town hall meeting" were prepared or prearranged by the Chinese gov't. Uhhh duhhh...this is China. Does anyone really find that a shocker?
#3 Posted by dave, CJR on Tue 24 Nov 2009 at 08:28 PM
I guess that the Australian Prime Minister who spent 5 years in China as a diplomat may have had some input?
#4 Posted by Peter, CJR on Wed 25 Nov 2009 at 06:12 AM