You are here

Nicholas Cull on the Range and Impact of Chinese Public Diplomacy Efforts

Nicholas Cull, Director of the USC Master of Public Diplomacy Program, participated in a US-China Economic and Security Review Commission hearing.

May 20, 2009
Below is Prof. Cull's testimony before an April 30, 2009 hearing of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Prof. Cull is a fellow of the USC Center on Public Diplomacy and is the author of many works, most recently The Cold War and the United States Information Agency: American Propaganda and Public Diplomacy, 1945-1989 (Cambridge, 2008).
China’s Propaganda and Influence Operations,
its Intelligence Activities that Target the United States
and its Resulting Impacts on US National Security


The Frame: Public Diplomacy and Soft Power
The phrase ‘Public Diplomacy’ means simply the process by which an international actor conducts foreign policy by engaging a foreign public. Though the term in its present use dates only from 1965, the five core elements of Public Diplomacy each have much greater antiquity. The foundational element of Public Diplomacy is Listening: engaging a foreign public by collecting and analyzing its opinions and feeding that into both the formation and explanation of policy. The second is Advocacy: the direct presentation of policy and information. The third is Cultural Diplomacy: the facilitated export of or participation in culture, including sports. The fourth is Exchange Diplomacy, mutual exchange of personnel, especially students, with a foreign partner. The fifth is International Broadcasting: engaging foreign publics through direct broadcasting of news particularly. While these forms overlap the basic elements of Public Diplomacy cohere around distinct infrastructures, time-frames of operation, sources of credibility and even working practices.   The entire structure of Public Diplomacy works with the policies, culture and values of the society conducting it – the factors which Joseph Nye has famously labeled the Soft Power of an actor. These Soft Power factors must also be considered in any assessment of an actor’s Public Diplomacy: the best Public Diplomacy structures in the world can not sell a bad policy, but an effective Public Diplomacy structure not only can make good policies known, it can feed international opinion back into the policy process and make good policies even better. [1] 
The Origins of Contemporary Chinese Public DiplomacyC
There are three basic points of origin for contemporary Chinese Public Diplomacy. First, is a traditional Chinese concern with issues of image in all relationships. Second, is the history of external propaganda practiced by the Communist regime. Third, is the recent realization of the central role that Public Diplomacy and communication must take in the new world. This last point is the immediate cause of the policies that writer Joshua Kurlantzick has dubbed China’s Charm Offensive. [2]  
Chinese culture places great value on personal image, through the concepts which the west translates as ‘face’ (Lian, a concept of personal honor and moral worth, and Mianzi, a concept of social prestige). [3] Public Diplomacy reflects an extension of these concerns to the international sphere. Centuries before Joseph Nye, Confucius himself spoke of ‘attracting by virtue’ (yide laizhi) and argued that an image of virtue and morality was the foundation of a stable state. [4]  Successive Chinese governments, as well as Taiwan and Singapore, have deployed foreign policies to the same ends. 
The revolutionary government of Mao – tutored in the international propaganda of the Soviet Union – was swift to extend its own use of propaganda abroad. The traditional term for such work is ‘dui wai xuan chuan’ or ‘wai xuan’ meaning ‘external propaganda.’ [5] Mao’s ‘xuan chuan’ was based on a tightly controlled message. The regime carefully selected those aspects of China that would be seen abroad, and censored much of the rest.  Favored journalists were allowed glimpses of the nation, while state journals like Beijing Review showcased achievements. Radio Beijing harangued the world about the Chairman’s monopoly on virtue.   The regime sought to export its revolution by sponsoring Communist Parties in East Asia and later in Africa and Latin America. [6]
The post-Mao reforms launched in 1978 by Deng Xiao Ping included the opening of China to international exchange and tourism. In 1983 the Ministry of Foreign Affairs opened an Information Department. Then, in 1989 the house of cards that was China’s international reputation came crashing down as the world witnessed images of the repression of the protests in Tiananmen Square. In the aftermath of the crisis Beijing engaged the international public relations firm Hill and Knowlton to begin the process of rebuilding China’s image abroad. The parallel process of consolidation followed included the reconfiguration of domestic and international information work under a single State Council Information Office (SCIO), founded in 1991. Its declared purpose was to ‘promote China as a stable country in the process of reform, a China that takes good care of its population, including minorities, and works hard to reduce poverty.’ It was a foundation for future work. [7]
As the 1990s progressed, Beijing placed renewed emphasis on its international image. SCIO flourished under the dynamic leadership of the former vice major of Shanghai, Minister Zhao Qizheng, who led the office from 1998 to 2005. [8] Wary of the negative spin that the west gave to ‘propaganda,’ his innovations including dropping the term ‘xuan chuan’ in favour of the more benign ‘shuo ming’ or ‘explaining’. [9] He had an uncharacteristic charisma and was prepared to take risks including conceding error and sharing the stage with potential critics, as when in 2005 he engaged in a sustained dialogue on religion with the American evangelist Luis Palau. [10] Zhao’s determination to present China to the world was supported at the highest level and in February 1999 President Jiang Zemin called for China to ‘establish a publicity capacity to exert an influence on world opinion that is as strong as China’s international standing.’ [11] This led directly to a number of parallel policies, coordinated through the duel structure of the Communist Party and SCIO. Zhao was double-hatted as both director of SCIO and of the International Communication Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party. [12] 
In 2005 Zhao Qizheng moved to his present role as dean of the Communication School at Remin University and a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), where he is vice chair of its foreign affairs committee. Since his departure, the most prominent figure in Chinese Public Diplomacy has been the director of the Publicity Department of the Central Committee, Lui Yushan.   Director of the Publicity Department since 2002 and a member of the Politburo since 2007, Lui is a regular source of edicts on matters of propaganda and international image at home and abroad and has personally taken part in China’s charm offensive by conducting international visits such as a trip to Egypt in November 2008. [13] The present director of SCIO is Wang Cheng, who is integrated into the party system through his duel role as deputy to Lui Yushan in the Party Publicity Department.
During the course of 2007 the Chinese government began to focus explicitly on Soft Power as a dimension of foreign policy. In February 2007 Soft Power was the subject of the annual conferences of both the National People’s Congress (China’s parliament) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. Participants acknowledged the scale of the challenge that lay ahead. [14] The year culminated in October with a formal call by President Hu Jintao at the 17th National Congress of the Communist Party to enhance the ‘Soft Power’ of Chinese culture though methods including management of the internet and investment in cultural institutions at home. ‘The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation’ he argued ‘will definitely be accomplished by the thriving of Chinese culture.’ [15] The theme has been widely underlined. Typical explications include an un-attributed article on the Xinhua site of 28 December 2007 with the title ‘Raise National Culture’s Soft Strength.’ The piece echoed Hu Jintao with a call for ‘raising our cultural propaganda abilities and continuously expanding China’s cultural influence,’ continuing:
The influence of a country’s culture depends on whether it possesses unique charm but also depends on whether it possesses advanced propaganda methods and strong propaganda capabilities. Especially in today’s informatized society every country that has advanced propaganda methods and strong propaganda capabilities can widely spread its cultural ideals and value concepts, and it can grasp the speaking power to influence the world and popular feeling. Cultural propaganda capabilities have already become a decisive factor for a national culture’s soft strength. [16]
The Message
The central message of Chinese Public Diplomacy is that China is back as a world power after a two hundred year hiatus; that Chinese culture is admirable and that China’s intentions are benign. This last is variously expressed as a ‘peaceful rise’ [17] and, from 2007, an intent to ‘build a harmonious world.’ [18] The message comes directly from Premiere Hu Jintao and flows outwards from the party ideological apparatus.  
The Audience
The audience for China’s Public Diplomacy is two fold. The primary audience is global and seems to include both masses and elites. School children are increasingly targeted. While all nations are approached, the campaign plainly has special resonance with the Chinese Diaspora.   This said, Chinese Public Diplomacy is also conducted with a domestic audience in mind. The Chinese government wishes above all to give the Chinese people the gift of the admiration of the world, to buttress their own legitimacy and counter any doubt that the CCP might not be the best stewards of China’s destiny. Such sentiments may readily be detected in set-piece speeches by Lui Yushan, with their emphasis on western admiration for Chinese achievement in both its economic success and management of adversity. [19] 
The Mechanisms of Public Diplomacy
i. Listening.
China is certainly listening to the world. We know from official statements that China is tracking both the course of anti-Chinese sentiment around the world, and international opinion about China. Negative opinion was a major driver of the rebuilding of Chinese Public Diplomacy. Positive foreign statements about China are fed back to the Chinese people as evidence that foreigners admire the accomplishments of ‘Socialism with Chinese Characteristics’ and accept China as a world power of the first rank.  
China uses opinion polls to track its relationships. Recent innovations include a poll from 2005 jointly designed and administered with Japanese counterparts to survey the state of mutual opinion. [20] Other examples of Chinese listening include the flurry of activity in 2007 to ensure that celebrations of the Year of the Pig did not offend Islamic nations. More significantly, in the spring of 2007 international anger over China’s support for the regime in Khartoum in the face of the Darfur genocide brought a reversal of Chinese foreign policy in East Africa. [21]
The chief mechanism for listening is the growing network of embassies and consulates across the world. China is investing heavily in developing regional expertise within its diplomatic corps, sending thousands of its best students overseas to study their target state and society first hand. [22] Unlike the western penchant for the generalist, the Chinese Foreign Service encourages officers to work entire careers in their specialist geographical area. The rising generation of diplomats will be well placed to learn from their experience and to inject local knowledge into the making of Chinese foreign policy for years to come.
ii. Advocacy.
China’s international advocacy includes both the traditional CCP techniques of leader speeches and articles in the state Xinhua news agency and increasingly western-style press conferences. Zhao Qizeng’s institutional reforms included an upgrading of China’s ability to address the foreign media. The wake-up call seems to have been the SARS outbreak of 2002. As Anne-Marie Brady has noted, in the wake of the clumsy SARS cover-up China began studying spin as practiced in the west, taking the Blair government in Britain as one model of how to do it. [23] Moves towards openness and interactivity were part of this process and hence, in December 2004, Zhao astonished a gathering of journalists at Beijing’s Kunlun hotel by presenting them with the names and phone numbers of the seventy-five spokespersons of every ministry and commission under the State Council. This, he promised, would be an annual event. [24] Other advocacy initiatives included the launch of an overseas edition of the People’s Daily and a number of English language websites. [25]  The domestic and international handling of the news of the Sichuan earthquake in the spring of 2008 revealed much greater skill. [26]  
iii. Cultural Diplomacy.
Beginning with the tenure of Zhao Qizheng at SCIO, China has devoted increasing energy to the field of cultural diplomacy. The CCP leadership seems particularly concerned to see that Chinese culture receives the admiration that it deserves around the world. Both the Beijing Olympics of 2008 and forthcoming Shanghai Expo reflect this. Other initiatives include major exhibitions such as the visit of the Terracotta Army to London, ‘China Weeks,’ and tours for artists.  
The central project of Chinese cultural diplomacy is the rapidly growing network of Confucius Institutes around the world. Their title reassuringly emphasizes the glories of the classical Chinese past rather than the vibrant present (or controversial Communist history) but the Institutes activities typically emphasize opportunities to get to know contemporary China rather than its historical abstract.   These institutes are (officially) enterprises shared between the Chinese government’s language teaching agency, known as Hanban, and local institutional hosts (usually universities). The hosts receive a start-up subsidy from Hanban and provide a home to language teachers supplied by that agency. In 2006 the government set a goal of establishing more than one hundred institutes within five years. This target has already been realized and the number seems likely to break 200 by the end of 2010. [27]  
iv. Exchange Diplomacy.
Some nations – Japan most prominently – couch their Public Diplomacy in terms of exchange, seeking to build reciprocity into as many activities as possible. China is not limited by such a priority. China certainly participates in mutual educational exchanges, though one might suspect that the mutuality is seen as a price of access to foreign institutions and audiences. Recent years have seen a flurry of new bilateral agreements with partners around the world from Austria to Zimbabwe. Institutions which manage people-to-people exchanges, such as the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries, have flourished. China also expanded its recruitment of international students, bringing twenty percent more with every passing year. The Ministry of Education expected rolls to top 120,000 by 2008. [28]   
Exchanges have been used to promote international study of the Chinese language, lately targeting younger groups of students, providing a steam of foreign language teachers for overseas service and wooing foreign school principals though trips to China, as priorities shift from the university to secondary and even primary school sector. In June 2007 the Office of the Chinese Language Council declared that 30 million people around the world were now learning Chinese and predicted that this figure would hit 100 million by 2010.29 In February 2007 the Premiere of the State Council, Wen Jiabao paid tribute to the value of exchanges in presenting China’s best face to the world, noting that they have: ‘fostered an image of China as a country that is committed to reform and opening-up, a country of unity and dynamism, a country that upholds equality and values friendship, and a country that is sincere and responsible.’ [30] 
One example of exchange is the agreement between China and Russia to designate 2009 Russian year in China and 2010 China year in Russia, with corresponding language teaching initiatives. The occasion for the celebration is the sixtieth anniversary of the Soviet recognition of and friendship treaty with the People’s Republic. [31]
v. International Broadcasting. 
China has a long history of international broadcasting through Radio Beijing. Its lead agency in the 21st century is Chinese Central Television, whose channel 9 – launched in September 2000 – broadcasts in English and is intended for foreign audiences. [32]   The channel is carried internationally on a variety of platforms: Rupert Murdoch’s Sky satellite to the UK and Fox services in the USA, and Vanuatu in the mid-Pacific. [33]   China has paid particular attention to distribution, seeking out contracts for local rebroadcast of their media feeds. CCTV 9 has displaced CNN as the prime foreign feed in several African markets, including Kenya, and Radio Beijing is rapidly accumulating local affiliates to rebroadcast Radio Beijing on the FM wave band as Africa moves finally away from shortwave. [34]   
CCTV has diversified into other languages. 2004 saw the launch of CCTV E&F, a bilingual French/Spanish feed which split into single language services in Spanish (CCTV E) and French (CCTV F) in 2007. CCTV is presently hiring staff to launch both Arabic and Russian language channels towards the end of 2009. [35]   While these channels are fairly easy to view – CCTV 9 and CCTV E are both on the Dish satellite within the United States – audiences are reportedly small. CCTV 9 has 90% of its viewers in China, of which 80% are Chinese wishing to improve their English. The channels, however, operate as badges of prestige as much as an actual ideological delivery apparatus, and are not subject to the same market pressures as commercial channels. [36]
The content of CCTV 9 has reflected a need to present something close to real journalism rather than just the litany of achievements and cultural events that once typified broadcasts. Since 2003 a new openness has been detectible, with CCTV 9 presenting stories about China’s pollution problems and its energy crisis which would have previously been swept under the carpet. In the spring of 2004 CCTV 9 announced a major re-launch to include the employment of foreign anchors and a consultant from the Murdoch stable, John Terenzio. With disarming honesty the station’s controller Jiang Heping told the South China Morning Post that: ‘We are taking great efforts to minimize the tone of propaganda, to balance our reports and to be objective. But we definitely won’t be reporting as much negative domestic news as the Western media.’ [37] 
Chinese Public Diplomacy hence seems poised to face the same issues of the boundary between news and advocacy that have loomed so large in the history of western international broadcasting, similarly, it now must consider how domestic negatives should be treated in Public Diplomacy. In February 2007 an article in The People’s Daily under the byline of Wen Jiabao, declared: ‘We should conduct Public Diplomacy in a more effective way. We should inform the outside world of the achievements we have made in reform, opening-up and modernization in a comprehensive, accurate and timely manner. At the same time, we should be frank about the problems we have.’ [38]
vi. Diplomacy of Deeds
In parallel with the informational engagement with international audiences, China pays close attention to the diplomacy of deeds, seeking to win friends around the world by programs of aid and ‘good works’: these activities range from aid and development work to targeted investment. China makes a particular point of not requiring any political concessions of the sort expected by western donor nations, famously going so far as to court pariahs like the regime in Sudan or Zimbabwe. [39]   Chinese aid sometimes includes assistance with media development. In Venezuela China has assisted the development of Hugo Chavez’s satellite TV channel Telesur. In Zimbabwe China provided the equipment to enable radio jamming by the Mugabe regime. [40]   
A sub-field of China’s diplomacy of the deed is the entry of Chinese public figures into the realm of Celebrity diplomacy. Venturing where westerners including Princess Diana and Angelina Jolie have gone before, Chinese celebrities are now identifying themselves and China with international aid work around the world. The pianist Lang Lang is now a UNICEF goodwill ambassador and basketball-player Yao Ming and actress Zhang Ziyi are both goodwill ambassadors for the Special Olympics. [41]
The Professionals
The history of Public Diplomacy bureaucracies around the world is typically the history of turf wars and clashing approaches to the business of communication. This was the case in the old Soviet Union and it has been true in the United States also. While there are differences in approach between the various elements of Chinese Public Diplomacy – the most obvious being the element of self criticism allowed on occasion at CCTV 9 – no turf war has yet broken into the open, instead, China’s Public Diplomacy displays remarkable cohesiveness. One of the more interesting features of Chinese Public Diplomacy is its ability to rally support among the ordinary citizens and the international Diaspora, as seen during set-piece confrontations like international criticism attending the route of the Olympic torch in the spring of 2009. While a certain uniformity of placards and pro-China rallies suggested official coordination, the scale of participation among overseas Chinese revealed a popular embracing of the cause.   China’s presence on the World Wide Web seems to be based on enthusiastic individuals rather than a state cyber-corps, though the effect is the same.
The Domestic Audience
The indirect domestic audience remains a prime driver of Chinese Public Diplomacy. This is not surprising. Winning opinion in Kansas will help the Chinese economy in a round about way, no doubt, but it is the fear of loosing opinion at home that keeps members of the Politburo awake at night. China is not unique in this. The Soviet Union ran much of its foreign propaganda to convince the home audience that their nation was the envy of the world, and U.S. Public Diplomacy also often has its eye on the domestic market and four year electoral cycle.  
The Next Phase
China’s declared objective is to further expand its cultural and media presence overseas. Speeches by leaders reveal a belief both that an international media is a badge of prestige and that further influence flows from the possession of such organs.  As propaganda minister Liu Yushan put it in an essay published in January 2009:
It has become an urgent strategic task for us to make our communication capability match our international status. In this modern era, who gains the advanced communication skills, the powerful communication capability and whose culture and value is more widely spread is able to more effectively influence the world. [42]
China’s expansion of the Xinhua agency – adding bureaus – and its plans for a 24 hour news channel and the projected launch of a global English language newspaper are significant. [43] It is unlikely that the paper will win a wide print readership in the USA, but an increased flow of Xinhua stories circulating on the world wide web is inevitable and, with the crisis in western international newsgathering, stories from a Chinese perspective could easily move to plug gaps, especially in spaces like Latin America and Africa where not being made in the USA is a palpable asset.  
China is doing nothing wrong in its Public Diplomacy drive. It is wise policy from China’s point of view. What would be wrong would be for the west to ignore it. The appropriate response of the west should be to meet the overtures for exchange in the spirit in which they are intended and to accept opportunities to know China better and facilitate China’s knowing more of the west. Equally, where China is challenging the western presence, and displacing western voices, as in its drive to accumulate FM radio affiliates in Africa, the west, and the United States specifically, needs to raise its game.   I will not argue that the United States needs to expand its Public Diplomacy solely to keep pace with China, any more than it should do so solely to prevail over radical Islam. I believe that the United States needs to expand its Public Diplomacy because it has become an essential element of foreign policy in the twenty first century. In an age when power increasingly rests on public opinion, success requires effectively engaging with the people. Anything that this committee can do to encourage the rebuilding of American Public Diplomacy would be a wise investment in the future of this country and the ideals on which it is built.

1 For further discussion see Nicholas J. Cull, ‘Public Diplomacy: Taxonomies and Histories’ ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 616, March 2008, (special issue ‘Public Diplomacy in a changing world,’) pp. 31-54 and Joseph Nye, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, PublicAffairs: New York, 2004.

2 Joshua Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive: How China’s Soft Power is Transforming the World. Yale: New Haven, 2007.
3 For a classic exploration of the concepts see David Yau-Fai Ho, ‘On the Concept of Face,’ American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 81 (4), 1976, pp. 867–84.
4 Qing Cao, ‘Selling Culture: ancient Chinese conceptions of the other in legends,’ in Stephen Chan, Peter Mandaville, and Rolan Bleiker (eds), The Zen of International Relations: IR theories from East to West. Palgrave: New York, 2001, pp. 178-202.
5 For discussion and survey of contemporary work see Wang Yiwei, ‘Public Diplomacy and the Rise of Chinese Soft Power,’ ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 616, March 2008, (special issue ‘Public Diplomacy in a changing world,’) pp. 257-290.
6 For a survey of the evolution of Chinese PD see Hongying Wang, ‘National Image-Building and Chinese foreign policy,’ China: An International Journal, vol. 1, no. 1, March 2003, pp. 46-72.
7 Ingrid d’Hooghe, ‘Public Diplomacy in the People’s Republic of China,’ in Jan Melissen (ed.) The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations, Palgrave, London, 2005, pp. 92, 98-99.
8 Erik Eckholm, ‘China admits ecological sins played role in flood disaster,’ New York Times, 26 August 1998, p. A1.
9 Todd Crowell and David Hsieh, ‘Beijing’s spin doctor,’ Asia Week, 22 September 2000. In 2005 an anthology of Zhao Qizheng’s speeches appeared with the title Xiang Shijie Shuoming Zhongguo (Explain China to the World). See also ‘Hong Kong daily analyses official’s role in improving China’s public image,’ BBC Monitoring International Reports, 7 June 2005.
10 Luis Palau and Zhao Qizheng, A Friendly Dialogue Between an Atheist and a Christian, Zondervan: Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2008.
11 ‘President calls for further propaganda work to enhance China’s image abroad,’ Xinhua, 28 February 1999 as cited in Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, p. 39.
12 The structure may be readily constructed from biographical entries on the Chinavitae website.
14 Li Baojie, Cheng Yifeng and Wang Mian,‘Soft Power a new focus at China’s Two Sessions.’ Xinhua, 14 March 2007.  
15 ‘Hu Jintao stressed enhancing Soft Power of Chinese culture,’ Xinhua, 15 October 2007,
16 ‘Raise National Culture’s Soft Strength,’ Xinhua, 28 December 2007 as translated by BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific as ‘China urges ‘cultural soft strength’ ethnic unity in light of party congress, 6 January 2008, p. 1.
17 Joshua Cooper Ramo, Brand China, Foreign Policy Center, London 2007 p. 8-9, online at see also Zheng Bijian, Peaceful Rise: Speeches of Zheng Bijian, 1997-2005, Brookings Institution Press, Washington DC, 2005.
18 Li Baojie, Cheng Yifeng and Wang Mian,‘Soft Power a new focus at China’s Two Sessions.’ Xinhua, 14 March 2007.
19 For a sample text see Liu Yunshan, ‘Lessons, thoughts…’ a speech of 31 July 2008, published on the Qiushi website in October and translated by BBC Monitoring Asia-Pacific, 23 October 2008 as ‘Chinese propaganda chief views problems, achievements in 2008.’
20 ‘Chinese, Japanese NGOs release poll on bilateral relations,’ Xinhua, 24 August 2005.
21 ‘Shaming China on Darfur,’ Boston Globe, 31 May 2007.
22 Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, p. 65-66.
23 Brady as quoted in Tania Branigan, ‘China looks to Labour to learn secrets of spin,’ The Guardian (London), 21 March 2009, p. 23.
24 ‘China makes public names of government spokespersons for the first time,’ Xinhua, 28 December 2004, also ‘Hong Kong daily analyses official’s role in improving China’s public image,’ BBC Monitoring International Reports, 7 June 2005.
25 ‘English web platform opens,’ China Daily, 17 September 2004 on the English site at – a state-private partnership of the China Daily and the private search engine company 
26 For Liu Yunshan and coverage of the media response to the earthquake see ‘Senior leader hails media worker covering quake,’ Xinhua, 17 May 2008.
27 ‘Confucius Institute: promoting language, culture and friendliness,’ Xinhua, 2 October 2006. In some poorer countries Chinese aid ensures that it is cheaper to be educated at a Chinese-funded school than within the national system. Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, pp. 67-69.
28 ‘Number of foreign students in China rises 20 percent annually,’ Xinhua, 19 January 2006 as cited in Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, p. 118.
29 ‘Overseas craze for Chinese spreads from universities to schools,’ Xinhua,26 June 2007 see also ‘Foreign headmasters follow Chinese language teaching trail,’ Xinhua, 20 June 2007 and ‘110 British headmasters visit China for language teaching co-op.’ Xinhua, 27 May 2007.
30 Wen Jiabao, ‘Our Historical Tasks at the Primary Stage of Socialism and Several Issues Concerning China's Foreign Policy.’ People’s Daily, 27 February 2007 (translation Xinhua, 5 March 2007).
32 ‘China to launch all-English channel tomorrow,’ Xinhua, 24 September 2000.
33 On the Murdoch deals see ‘Danny Gittings and Julian Borger, ‘Homer and Bart realize Murdoch’s dream of China coup,’ The Guardian, 6 September 2001, p. 3 and ‘Murdoch gets approval for Chinese TV service,’ The Australian Financial Review, 7 March 2003, p. 63;‘China’s English international channel to air in Vanuatu,’ Xinhua, 10 August 2005.     
34 On China in Africa see Adam Clayton Powell III, ‘Chinese TV extends its reach into Africa,’ 19 December 2005, USC Center on Public Diplomacy web site at
35 For the recruitment process see  
36 For discussion of audience see Gary D. Rawnsley, ‘China talks back: Public Diplomacy and Soft Power for the Chinese Century,’ in Nancy Snow and Philip M. Taylor (ed’s), Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy, Routledge: London, 2008, p. 286.
37 ‘CCTV international to re-launch, add new languages,’ BBC Monitoring International Reports, 6 April 2005, and author’s own viewing.
38 Wen Jiabao, ‘Our Historical Tasks at the Primary Stage of Socialism and Several Issues Concerning China's Foreign Policy.’ People’s Daily, 27 February 2007 (translation Xinhua, 5 March 2007).
39 Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, p. 44.
40 ‘Zimbabwe uses “Chinese Technology” to disrupt VOA radio signal,’ BBC Monitoring, 5 July 2006.
41 David Patrick Stearns, ‘Chinese pianist Lang Lang strikes the right keys,’ Philadelphia Enquirer, 18 April 2006; ‘Chinese Sensation Ziyi Zhang Joins Special Olympics as Newest Global Ambassador,’ PR Newswire, 16 November 2006; ‘Yao Ming appears as Ambassador to the Special Olympics,’ Xinhua, 22 July 2006.
42 Quoted in David Barboza, ‘China aims to create a global news empire,’ International Herald Tribune, 15 January 2009, p. 1.
43 For coverage of these plans see Vivian Wu and Adam Chen, ‘Beijing in 45 b Yuan global media drive,’ South China Morning Post, 13 January 2009, web edition; Peter Ford, ‘Beijing launching a Chinese CNN to burnish image abroad,’ Christian Science Monitor, 5 February 2009, p. 1.