自改革開放後,中國國力日益增長,聚積的經濟實力也展現在國際影響力上,這也成為2009年起大外宣計畫的源起。透過源源不絕的銀彈優勢,滴水穿石地吸引被網路取代的傳統媒體,形成恩庇侍從的組織結構。雖然美國先賢傑弗遜曾說:「與其擁有沒有報紙的政府,寧可擁抱沒有政府的報紙」,強調新聞自由的可貴。但相較於言論受到管制的極權國家,民主國家堅持的出版、傳播自由容易受到惡意操弄,破壞社會團結、國家安定。
這本《紅色滲透:中國媒體全球擴張的真相》,正是揭露源遠流長的中共外宣史,完整、全面地讓讀者瞭解中國如何持續不懈地對外輸出有利於自身的新聞資訊,時刻呼應中國當下的政治目標。早期中國對外的宣傳手法,也只做到出口轉內銷的效果,但隨著執行手法更加熟練,進行外宣期刊/媒體本土化、重金吸引洋人雇傭軍團加盟大外宣……等策略。拿人錢財替人消災,這些外國人也確實抱著宣傳高於真相的信念,努力撰寫出當地國人接受度高的新聞內容,逐步增強宣傳組織的影響力,但也讓美國政府警惕而重啟外國人代理登記法。在1980年代全球中文媒體的政治版圖中,政治取向是相當多元化的。媒體經營者來自大陸背景、港台新聞背景和美國華人投資三大塊。然而時過境遷,在傳統媒體經營困難的大環境下,不計損益的中共官方傳媒演變成一家獨大的局勢,又成立許多海外中文媒體的研究中心、研修班,定期舉辦各項大型國際會議,據以不斷吸收、影響中文新聞圈內的各方人士。掛著國外媒體招牌的傳播筒,成為中共對外傳播除了國內媒體、境外媒體以外的第三陣營。
在香港,更能看出中共對傳播環境不遺餘力的管制與破壞。在港英時代,受惠於英國統治,逐漸呈現媒體自由化的局面;然而在九七回歸後,媒體開始受控、自律。加上所謂的愛國富商積極討好中共當局,投入資金收購媒體,進而影響新聞報導內容。在以商逼政的策略下,媒體報導不親中共者,就斷絕其廣告收入,一步步讓香港媒體喉舌化。暗地又收買黑社會勢力,動輒以暴力威脅不配合的媒體人,形成風聲鶴唳的言論環境,終於達成一言堂般的歌功頌德局面。
台灣面對的操作手法如出一轍,藉由在大陸有巨額投資的富商,以民間投資的身分,不計成本地收購經營困難的媒體,最顯著的例子就是旺旺集團入主中天、中時和中視集團。紅頂商人成功入主媒體後,新聞報導的內容就開始一面倒地宣揚中國政府的高大上,無法堅守必須平衡報導的新聞原則。更惡質者,在關鍵時刻配合中共當局影響台灣社會輿論,成為境外勢力操弄民情的共犯。而中資轉外資洗白後,被買下大量持股的TVBS,則是以另一種報喜不報憂的方法參與中國大外宣。對歐美各國的報導取材十有八九挑選負面議題,反之,中國新聞皆是正面主題,潛移默化地扭曲、影響閱聽眾對世界局勢的觀感,最明顯的例子就是《文茜的世界周報》。
其實,一個國家的國際形象取決於該國內政的社會狀態,極權國家投入再多資源、努力地擦脂抹粉,一樣無法讓眾人真心相信那個地方是流著奶與蜜的樂土。相對地,美國用它自身的民主自由,以及其他領先全球的制度與成就,讓它成為全世界人民心目中移民、置產的首選之地。落實了,嘴裡說的是一套,真的用腳投票才是真相。然而,在AI時代,從更遠的格局來看,大外宣能達成的實質效果可能更加深遠。在大語言模型是以網路文本為原始資料,作為人工智慧基礎的情況下,大外宣計畫無窮盡地散發正面的報導內容,描述中國;反之,受制於西方媒體平衡報導的原則,會對自身國家多所批評而產生負面報導。此消彼長之下,AI將會被誤導而認為中國的一切都優於西方諸國。如果未來的民眾過於依賴AI工具,這種AI幻覺將會對世界局勢產生不良的影響,必須格外留意。
After China began its reform and opening-up, its national power grew rapidly. Its growing economic strength was also reflected in its increasing influence around the world. This became one of the reasons behind the “Great External Propaganda Campaign,” which began in 2009. With an endless supply of financial resources, China gradually attracted traditional media organizations that were struggling because of the rise of the Internet. Over time, this created an organizational structure based on a system of patronage and loyalty. The American founding father Thomas Jefferson once said, “I would rather have newspapers without a government than a government without newspapers,” emphasizing the value of freedom of the press. However, compared with authoritarian countries where speech is strictly controlled, the freedom of publishing and communication enjoyed by democratic countries can also be deliberately manipulated. When this happens, it can damage social unity and national stability.
The book *Red Infiltration: The Truth Behind China’s Global Expansion of the Media* reveals the long history of the Chinese Communist Party’s external propaganda. It gives readers a complete picture of how China has continuously worked to spread news and information that serves its own interests, while constantly supporting China’s current political goals. In the early days, China’s overseas propaganda was mostly limited to what could be described as “exporting something overseas and then selling it back at home.” But as its methods became more sophisticated, China began localizing overseas propaganda publications and media outlets, offering large amounts of money to recruit foreigners to join its propaganda efforts, and using many other strategies. These foreigners were, in effect, paid to do the job. They also genuinely followed the belief that “propaganda is more important than the truth.” They worked hard to produce news content that would be more acceptable to local audiences, gradually increasing the influence of these propaganda organizations. However, this also raised concerns within the U.S. government and led to renewed attention to the Foreign Agents Registration Act. In the political landscape of Chinese-language media around the world during the 1980s, political views were quite diverse. Media owners mainly came from three groups: people with backgrounds in mainland China, people with journalism backgrounds from Hong Kong and Taiwan, and Chinese Americans who invested in the media. However, times have changed. As traditional media have struggled financially, Chinese state-run media, which do not need to worry about profits and losses, have gradually gained a dominant position. China has also established research centers and training programs for overseas Chinese-language media and regularly organized large international conferences. Through these activities, China has continuously attracted and influenced people from different parts of the Chinese-language media industry. These media outlets, which operate under the name of foreign media organizations, have become a third force in China’s overseas communication efforts, alongside domestic media and foreign media operating outside China.
Hong Kong provides an even clearer example of how the Chinese Communist Party has worked relentlessly to control and damage the media environment. During the British colonial period, Hong Kong gradually developed a relatively free media environment. However, after the handover in 1997, the media gradually came under greater control and began to practice self-censorship. At the same time, so-called “patriotic businessmen” actively sought to please the Chinese government. They invested large amounts of money to acquire media companies and, in doing so, gained influence over their news coverage. Under the strategy of using business interests to influence politics, media outlets that did not support the Chinese Communist Party could lose their advertising revenue. Step by step, Hong Kong’s media became more like a mouthpiece for the government. Behind the scenes, criminal organizations were also allegedly used to threaten journalists and media workers who refused to cooperate. This created an atmosphere of fear in which people became afraid to speak freely. Eventually, Hong Kong developed something close to a one-sided media environment, filled with praise for the Chinese government.
Taiwan has faced very similar methods. Wealthy businessmen with huge investments in mainland China have used the appearance of private investment to acquire media companies that were struggling financially, sometimes without much concern about profitability. One of the most obvious examples is the Want Want Group taking control of CTi, China Times, and CTV. After these businesspeople successfully took control of the media, the news coverage began to increasingly praise the Chinese government, making it difficult to maintain the journalistic principle of balanced reporting. Even worse, at critical moments, some media outlets may cooperate with the Chinese Communist Party to influence public opinion in Taiwan, becoming part of efforts by foreign forces to manipulate public sentiment. Meanwhile, after Chinese investment was transferred through foreign companies to make its origins less obvious, large amounts of shares in TVBS were acquired. This became another way of participating in China’s external propaganda efforts—by “reporting the good news while ignoring the bad.” When reporting on the United States and European countries, negative issues are often selected. In contrast, news about China is often presented in a positive way. Over time, this can subtly distort the audience’s view of world affairs. One of the most obvious examples is *Sisy’s World News*.
In fact, a country’s international image depends largely on the social conditions inside the country. No matter how many resources an authoritarian government spends trying to improve its image, it cannot truly convince everyone that its country is a paradise flowing with milk and honey. By contrast, the United States has used its democracy and freedom, as well as its institutions and achievements in many areas, to become one of the top destinations in the world for people who want to immigrate or buy property. In the end, what people say is one thing, but where they actually choose to live and invest is the real answer. However, in the age of AI, the potential impact of China’s external propaganda may be much greater when viewed from a broader perspective. Large language models are built partly on massive amounts of text from the Internet. If China’s propaganda campaign continuously produces huge amounts of positive content about China, while Western media, following the principle of balanced reporting, also produces criticism and negative reports about their own countries, the two sides may create an imbalance in the information available online. Over time, AI systems could be influenced by this imbalance and develop a distorted view, potentially making China appear better than Western countries in certain areas. If people in the future become too dependent on AI tools for information, this kind of AI-generated distortion could have a negative impact on world affairs. It is therefore something we need to pay close attention to.