PLEASE NOTE VENUE CHANGE

In association with the annual Shorenstein Journalism Award for Asia, conferred this year on China's pioneering Caixin Media group, this panel will look at the current state and the future of the Chinese media. The Chinese state continues to play a powerful role in controlling the media and the free flow of information to the Chinese people. But China's media is undergoing rapid change, from the growing role of social media to the proliferation of new publications, some of which, like Caixin, are challenging the boundaries of state control. Which will win in China's changing media landscape—the forces of the market, state censorship, or quality journalism?

PANELISTS

Hu Shuli, editor-­in-chief of Caixin Media, and dean of the School of Communications and Design at Sun Yat-sen University, has a distinguished career that spans both print and broadcast journalism. Hu is a former Stanford Knight Journalism Fellow (1994) and a recipient of the Louis Lyons Award for Conscience and Integrity in Journalism (2007). She is frequently named on annual Who’s Who lists by publications such as Foreign Policy and Time Magazine.

Wang Shuo, managing editor of Caixin Media, was ranked among China’s top 10 young editors in 2011. He is a former international editor for People’s Daily, a Chinese government-run newspaper published nationally. Recognized as one of the brightest rising stars in his field, Wang was named as a Young Leader in 2007 and 2008 by the Boao Forum for Asia, and as a media leader by the World Economic Forum. He has led the investigative journalism teams at Caixin.

Orville Schell is the Arthur Ross Director at the Asia Society Center on U.S.-China Relations, and is also a former jury member for the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. He has written extensively on China, and was awarded the 1997 George Peabody Award for producing the groundbreaking documentary the Gate of Heavenly Peace. He received the Shorenstein Journalism Award in 2003.

Hu Ben, a journalist with Southern Weekend, is the current Lyle and Corrine Nelson International Knight Fellow at Stanford. He started his journalism career in 2005, when he joined a writer's network blogging about international affairs not covered by official media. At Southern Weekend, he has written about how Chinese government works, how public policies are made, and how information flows inside the government.

Daniel Sneider serves as the associate director for research at Shorenstein APARC and also as a research associate with the prestigious National Asia Research Program. He frequently contributes articles to publications such as Foreign Policy, Asia Policy, and Slate and had three decades of experience as a foreign correspondent and editor for publications including the Christian Science Monitor and the San Jose Mercury News. 

ABOUT THE AWARD

The Shorenstein Journalism Award was launched in 2002 to recognize the contributions of Western journalists in deepening our understanding of Asia. In 2011, the recipients of the award have been broadened to encompass Asian journalists who are at the forefront of the battle for press freedom in Asia and who have played a key role in constructing a new role for the media, including the growth of social media and Internet-based journalism. The award will also identify those Asian journalists who, from that side of the Pacific Ocean, have aided the growth of mutual understanding between Asia and the United States.

Carrying a cash prize of $10,000, the award was named after Walter H. Shorenstein, the philanthropist, activist, and businessman who endowed two institutions that are focused respectively on Asia and on the press: Shorenstein APARC in the Freeman Spogli Institute at Stanford University, and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy in the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

Read the 2011 Shorenstein Journalism Award press release for more details about Caixin and about the history of the award.

Edmund J. Malesky will argue that openness to foreign investment can have differential effects on corruption, even within the same country and under the same domestic institutions over time. Rather than interpreting bribes solely as a coercive “tax” imposed on business activities, he allows for the possibility that firms may themselves be complicit in using bribes to enter protected sectors or gain access to lucrative procurement contracts.  The propensity to bribe across sectors should vary with expected profitability related to investment restrictions. Thus, the linkage of foreign investment to corruption should increase dramatically as firms seek to enter restricted and uncompetitive sectors that offer higher rents. Malesky demonstrates this effect using a nationally representative survey of 10,000 foreign and domestic businesses in Vietnam. He also shows how the impact of domestic reforms and economic openness is affected by policies that restrict competition by limiting entry into a given sector.

Edmund Malesky is an associate professor of political science at the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at the University of California, San Diego. He has published in leading political science and economic journals, including the American Political Science Review and the Journal of Politics, and has been awarded the Harvard Academy Fellowship and Gabriel Almond Award for best dissertation in comparative politics. Malesky serves as the lead researcher for the Vietnam Provincial Competitiveness Index and Cambodian Business Environment Scorecard.

For more information please see the event web page.

The 11^th Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam was significant in several respects. It placed diplomacy in the forefront of Vietnam’s efforts to maintain peace, stability, and national security, including naming more diplomats as full members of the Central Standing Committee. For the first time, the Party officially identified protecting national interest as the top priority of Vietnam’s foreign policy. The Party continued to push for broader horizons in policymaking to facilitate Vietnam’s integration in the larger world. The Party also agreed that Vietnam should anchor itself to ASEAN and promote its relations with China and the United States. Prof. Tuan will discuss these and other aspects and implications of Vietnam’s foreign policy.

Ta Minh Tuan is a member of Vietnam’s Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP Vietnam), CSCAP’s Study Group on Countering the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Asia Pacific, and Pacific Forum CSIS’s Young Leaders Program. He has been a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and the University of South Carolina. His degrees are from the Polish Academy of Sciences’s Institute of Political Studies (PhD), Mahatma Gandhi University’s School of International Relations (MA), and the Hanoi University of Foreign Studies (BA).

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has challenged itself is to become a single integrated community by 2015.  The prospect has raised high hopes inside the region.  Will they be met?  Efforts to build the community have intensified, yet the clock ticks and the deadline looms.  Although the result will not match what local enthusiasts of regional unification want to see, but it will likely exceed the expectations of skeptical outsiders.  ASEAN is the linchpin of East Asian regionalism, by design and by default.  What happens to the Association over the next several years has far-reaching implications for the United States, China, and not least for the states and peoples of Southeast Asia.  In his talk, Prof. Pongsudhirak will tease out these dynamics, assess their significance, and explore possible futures beyond 2015.

Thitinan Pongsudhirak heads the Institute of Security and International Studies and teaches international political economy at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok.  In 2010 he was an FSI-Humanities Center International Visitor at Stanford and, in spring 2011, a visiting professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.  He has written many articles, chapters, and books on ASEAN and East Asian affairs, and on Thai politics, political economy, and foreign policy.  He has worked for The Nation newspaper (Bangkok), The Economist Intelligence Unit, and Independent Economic Analysis (London).  He currently serves on the editorial boards of Asian Politics & Policy, Contemporary Southeast Asia, the Journal of Current Southeast Asian Studies, and South East Asia Research.  His degrees are from the London School of Economics (PhD), Johns Hopkins University (School of Advanced International Studies, MA), and the University of California, Santa Barbara (BA). 

A police “encounter killing,” or simply “encounter,” is a term with no legal validity but which has seeped via the media into Indian English so surely that it has acquired a life of its own. It refers to a face-to-face interaction between the police and suspects leading to the killing of the suspects. While intended to convey serendipity, encounter killings in reality are often pre-planned executions by police or security agencies. First used against Maoists in the 1970s, and counterinsurgents in the Northeast and Kashmir, executions as unstated state policy were perfected in dealing with Sikh militant groups in the 80s and 90s. The ‘Punjab solution’, as it came to be known, became the model for the internal security establishment. Mumbai’s underworld was reined in through a series of high profile encounter killings—much celebrated in the popular media for imposing order into the urban anarchy that the gang-wars were breeding. Indeed, this became the preferred quick-fix method of dealing with a range of ‘undesirables’, from petty criminals to gangsters, to alleged terrorists and separatists. But more often than not, those lumped together as ‘encounterables’ were simultaneously marked out through their caste, ethnic and religious affiliations. The talk will discuss the history of fake encounters in India and the role of the media and judiciary in dealing with them.

Manisha Sethi is Assistant Professor at the Centre for the Study of Comparative Religions and Civilizations, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. Her research interests are in the area of gender and religion, communalism, and law and terrorism. She has published extensively on these themes in academic as well as popular publications. She is currently Associate Editor, Biblio: A Review of Books, India’s premier book review journal, with which she has been associated for over a decade. Sethi is the President of the Jamia Teachers' Solidarity Association, which has been closely involved in a campaign against extra judicial killings. Her book, Escaping the World: Chastity, Power and Women’s Renunciation among Jains, Routledge India, is due later this year.

This event is co-sponsored with the Stanford Center for South Asia and

The Indian American Muslim Council

A series of events over the last few years, including attempts to deny non-Muslim rights to use the term "Allah," arson attacks on Christian churches, curbs on conversions of Muslims, and confiscation of bibles, alert us to disconcerting trends that have emerged in Muslim-Christian relations in multicultural Malaysia.  The purpose of this presentation is to analyze the underlying drivers behind these events, and to understand how and why the Christian community has mobilized in recent years in the face of perceived constriction of religious space.

Joseph Chinyong Liow is Associate Dean and Professor of Comparative and International Politics at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.  He was a visiting scholar at Stanford in 2007.  Among his forthcoming publications are “Malaysia’s 2008 General Election: Understanding the New Media Factor,” Pacific Review; “Creating Cadres:  Mobilization, Activism, and the Youth Wing of the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party,” Pacific Affairs; and “Islamist Ambitions, Political Change, and the Price of Power:  Recent Successes and Challenges for the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party,” Journal of Islamic Studies.  Earlier works include Islam, Education, and Reform in Southern Thailand: Tradition and Transformation (2009); Piety and Politics:  Islamism in Contemporary Malaysia (2009); and Islam in Southeast Asia (co-ed., 4 vols, 2009).  His PhD is from the London School of Economics.