Legitimacy on Air: How Chinese Local Television News Performs Governance
In authoritarian systems, the media is often seen as a tool of propaganda, designed to suppress dissent and reinforce state control. While this perception captures a significant aspect of such regimes, it oversimplifies the dynamic ways in which the media functions in these contexts. In China, local television news, particularly the genre known as minsheng xinwen (民生新闻, literally, ‘news about people’s livelihood’), provides a nuanced case study. These programs highlight citizen grievances and bureaucratic failures, framing them within a narrative of governmental accountability and responsiveness.
This practice of ‘controlled criticism’ allows limited critiques of governance to flourish within carefully delineated boundaries. Minsheng xinwen programs use investigative reporting to expose problems such as delayed services, poor infrastructure, and bureaucratic inefficiencies. Yet, far from threatening the regime, this critical reporting reinforces its legitimacy by positioning the state as both responsive to citizen concerns and capable of delivering solutions.
This essay explores the evolution and impact of local television news in China as a mechanism of controlled criticism. By examining the development of minsheng xinwen, the strategic roles played by journalists, and specific cases such as parking violations and unfinished housing, it argues that local television news exemplifies the adaptive strategies that the Chinese State employs to sustain its rule.
The Evolution of Minsheng Xinwen
The rise of minsheng xinwen in the late 1990s coincided with sweeping changes in China’s media landscape. As the state moved towards market-oriented reforms, local television stations faced increasing pressure to attract audiences and generate advertising revenue. To remain competitive, many stations adopted a populist approach, focusing on stories that resonated with the daily lives of ordinary citizens.
At the same time, the principle of ‘supervision by public opinion’ (舆论监督) was gaining traction as a governance tool (Chen 2017; Repnikova 2017a). This policy encouraged media outlets to monitor and report on local governance issues, particularly instances of corruption and inefficiency at the grassroots level. While the central government used this policy to discipline local officials and improve governance, it also allowed media outlets to carve out a space for investigative reporting within tightly controlled boundaries.
The narrative strategies of minsheng xinwen are carefully calibrated to achieve two objectives: to engage audiences with relatable stories and to maintain the legitimacy of the state. A typical segment begins with a citizen grievance, such as delayed pension payments, uncollected garbage, or inadequate public facilities. The report identifies specific bureaucratic failures, often attributing them to individual officials or departments.
Crucially, systemic issues—such as insufficient funding, structural corruption, or top-down inefficiencies—are rarely addressed. Instead, the narrative frames problems as isolated incidents that can be resolved through the intervention of responsible authorities. Follow-up reports frequently highlight the resolution of these grievances, showcasing newly paved roads, repaired homes, or satisfied citizens thanking the government for its responsiveness.
One of the most illustrative examples of controlled criticism in minsheng xinwen is a 2017 case investigated by the program Zero Distance (零距离), which aired on Jiangsu Television City Channel (江苏电视城市频道) (Chen 2020: Ch. 5). It began when a forklift driver, Mr Wang, was fined 10,000 yuan for parking his vehicle on a road in Gaoxin District, Nanjing. The fine was unusually high compared with the standard penalties for such infractions in China, which typically range between 1,000 and 10,000 yuan under Article 42 of the Nanjing Urban Management Regulation.
Feeling the penalty was unjustified, Mr Wang contacted Zero Distance on 3 March 2017 to seek assistance. The investigation revealed troubling irregularities. The officers involved admitted that the maximum fine was issued because their superiors were inspecting the bureau on the day of the infraction. The rationale—that the fine was influenced by an officer’s ‘stressed mood’—outraged both Mr Wang and the journalists investigating the case.
Journalists played a crucial role in advocating for Mr Wang, who lacked the legal knowledge to challenge the fine effectively. By framing questions and arguments, they helped him articulate why the penalty was unreasonable. The story aired with these details, spotlighting the arbitrary nature of the fine and its lack of transparency.
The story took a deeper turn when Mr Wang secretly recorded a conversation with an officer, who suggested he could reduce the fine by ‘looking for someone’ (找人)—a euphemism for paying a bribe. Further investigation by journalists uncovered that other forklift drivers had faced similar penalties, some of which had been reduced after bribes were paid. It then emerged—revealing another layer of corruption—that the road where Mr Wang parked was not even within the jurisdiction of the Gaoxin District Government; it was privately owned by a factory.
This sequence of revelations culminated in significant outcomes. The Zero Distance follow-up reports prompted the city management bureau to fire the officer who had solicited bribes and conduct an internal investigation. The fines for affected forklift drivers were reduced to nominal amounts. Moreover, the local government publicly thanked Zero Distance for its role in supervising and exposing the issue. While this resolution demonstrated the power of media oversight, it also showcased the broader dynamics of controlled criticism.
Controlled Criticism as a Governance Tool
Controlled criticism serves as a mechanism for managing public dissatisfaction while maintaining the regime’s authority. By exposing and addressing low-level bureaucratic failures, minsheng xinwen programs provide citizens with a sense of justice and recognition. At the same time, they deflect attention from broader systemic problems, preserving the legitimacy of higher-level authorities and the political system as a whole.
This dynamic is particularly evident in the selective framing of grievances. Issues are presented as technical or administrative errors that can be corrected through proper oversight, rather than as symptoms of deeper structural flaws. This framing reinforces the narrative of a competent and responsive government while avoiding critiques of the policies or institutions that underpin these failures.
Local leaders use controlled criticism as a tool for bureaucratic discipline. Reports exposing street-level misconduct provide a public platform for holding officials accountable, sending a clear message to other bureaucrats about the consequences of negligence or corruption.
One of the recurring issues reported by minsheng xinwen is the phenomenon of ‘rotten-tail buildings’ (烂尾楼), referring to residential projects abandoned midway through construction. This issue is widespread in China, fuelled by lax regulatory oversight, illegal financing practices, and mismanagement by developers. In 2017, the Xi’an Zero Distance (西安零距离) program covered a particularly striking case involving a group of citizens who had prepaid for homes nearly a decade earlier, only to find themselves stuck with skeletal, half-built structures on the construction site (Chen 2020: Ch. 5).
The report aired on 9 April 2017 and began with an emotional account from a senior citizen, who had purchased a unit in 2008. She explained that she had hoped the apartment would allow her son, then 18, to start a family, but by the time of the report, her son was 27 and still unmarried. She attributed his misfortune to the lack of stable housing. Other residents shared similar grievances. A six-year-old girl, born after her parents purchased an unfinished unit, remarked that the home remained incomplete six years later. One young woman described borrowing large sums from family and friends to prepay for her unit, only to end up without a house and deeply in debt.
The report painted a stark picture of consumer vulnerability, juxtaposed with visuals of the abandoned high-rise skeletons. It also underscored the failures of local governance, as residents revealed that street-level officials had repeatedly promised a resolution but failed to act. However, the program avoided directly naming the government departments responsible for supervising the project. Instead, it vaguely appealed to ‘relevant government bureaus’ to intervene and help resolve the issue.
Although the initial report lacked resolution, the broader media supervision initiative in Xi’an enabled subsequent developments. By July 2017, the municipal government launched new radio programs and online platforms for citizen complaints, integrating them into an expanded media supervision system. This multimedia approach allowed grievances like the rotten-tail buildings case to gain more traction. In one follow-up case about a similar project, journalists referred the complaint to the Xi’an Housing Security and Management Bureau. The bureau fined the developer and tasked a lower-level bureau with further handling the issue.
These interventions once again underscored the dual function of minsheng xinwen. On one hand, programs like Xi’an Zero Distance empowered citizens by amplifying their voices and pressuring local governments to act. On the other hand, the framing of such issues as isolated incidents—blaming developers or lower-level officials—allowed the state to deflect attention from deeper structural failures in the housing sector and make incremental but insufficient governance improvements.
Journalistic Pragmatism in Minsheng Xinwen
The journalists who produce minsheng xinwen occupy a unique position within China’s media landscape. Unlike elite investigative journalists in print media, who often adopt a critical stance with a systemic focus (Hassid 2016; Repnikova 2017b), these television journalists operate as pragmatic actors, balancing state-imposed constraints with their professional identities as problem-solvers.
Pragmatic journalists in China operate within an intricate matrix of political censorship, commercial imperatives, and audience expectations. Their ability to succeed hinges on their skill in crafting narratives that resonate with viewers while carefully adhering to the boundaries set by the state. This duality—balancing professional aspirations with the realities of state control—has shaped the emergence of minsheng xinwen as a unique journalistic model.
The wave of media reforms in the 1990s introduced commercialisation into China’s state media landscape, fundamentally altering how local television stations functioned. Previously dependent on state funding, media organisations began to rely on advertising revenue, which in turn was closely tied to viewership ratings. This transition placed immense pressure on journalists and producers to create content that attracted and retained audiences. For television news, the rise of minsheng xinwen was a direct response to these pressures.
Critical reporting became a profitable venture. Programs like Zero Distance on Jiangsu Television Station, 1818 Gold Eye (1818黄金眼) on Zhejiang Television Station, and On the Spot (DV现场) on Guangdong Television Station demonstrated that investigative pieces addressing local grievances could captivate audiences, driving up ratings and generating significant advertising revenue. For example, in the early 2000s, Zero Distance achieved average ratings of 9.2 per cent, with advertising revenue surpassing 13 million yuan annually—a remarkable feat that showcased the commercial potential of critical reporting (Chen 2020).
Beyond commercial pressures, journalists in this space developed a strong professional identity centred on advocacy. They viewed themselves as champions of ordinary citizens, leveraging their media platforms to amplify public grievances and demand redress. This advocacy-oriented identity was shaped by the populist mission of minsheng xinwen: to be ‘close to reality, close to livelihood, and close to the people’ (贴近实际、贴近生活、贴近群众) (Zhang and Wang 2012).
Original survey data from my first book, Convenient Criticism: Local Media and Governance in Urban China (2020), revealed that on the question of ideal journalistic role, 28.1 per cent of television journalists at a municipal television station in northeastern China considered themselves ‘bridges between the government and the public’, 19.8 per cent described their mission as using media power to help citizens solve problems, and 32.3 per cent thought helping people understand issues and acquire information was their most important role. This populist orientation was reflected in their content, with citizen disputes and grievances consistently ranking among the most covered topics.
Political constraints remain a defining feature of the journalistic environment in China. Journalists must operate within tightly controlled boundaries, avoiding topics that could undermine the regime’s legitimacy or implicate higher authorities. Instead, their work focuses on street-level bureaucratic failures, which are framed as isolated incidents that can be swiftly addressed.
For example, in the forklift driver case, journalists on Zero Distance used strategic framing to expose corruption within the city management bureau without critiquing the broader regulatory system. This approach ensured the story remained palatable to authorities while delivering tangible outcomes for the aggrieved drivers.
Survey data underscore the prevalence of political intervention in this space. In the same original survey, 31.3 per cent of journalists reported experiencing frequent government interference in their critical reporting. Despite these challenges, they leveraged creative strategies to expand the boundaries of permissible discourse, often using social media trends or public opinion as justification for their reporting choices.
The dynamic interplay between journalists and local officials further complicates this landscape. While journalists aim to advocate for citizens, local leaders often coopt critical reporting to advance their governance agendas. For instance, by allowing or orchestrating critical reports, leaders can discipline street-level bureaucrats, address public grievances, and bolster their reputation for effective governance.
This symbiotic relationship highlights the dual utility of minsheng xinwen. On one hand, it provides journalists with the professional satisfaction of addressing social issues. On the other, it serves as a governance tool for local leaders, enabling them to showcase their responsiveness and commitment to public welfare without challenging systemic problems.
Despite these constraints, journalists have carved out a precarious but impactful role within China’s media ecosystem. Their work often results in tangible outcomes, such as fines for corrupt officials or reforms to problematic policies. At the same time, their dependence on state approval underscores the fragility of their position.
In this context, the success of minsheng xinwen lies in its ability to ‘secure both ends of the bridge’: addressing citizen grievances while aligning with state priorities. By so doing, these programs have established themselves as indispensable players in local governance, navigating the tension between advocacy and compliance.
The Shift from Organic to Orchestrated Reporting
In the early years of minsheng xinwen, many reports arose organically, driven by journalists who independently identified compelling stories through citizen complaints, hotline calls, or grassroots investigations. These organically initiated stories often reflected the agency of journalists within the constraints of state control. However, as political oversight tightened under President Xi Jinping’s leadership, this space for spontaneity has steadily diminished.
The centralisation of power under Xi has amplified the rigidity of media control. Local leaders increasingly see orchestrated reporting—where government officials actively direct media coverage—as a safer and more effective strategy. Orchestrated critical reporting ensures that topics align closely with governance priorities and sidestep politically sensitive or systemic issues. For instance, officials often use orchestrated criticism to highlight governance successes or address minor bureaucratic infractions, presenting the government as both capable and responsive. By shifting from organic to orchestrated reporting, the autonomy of journalists has been curtailed, effectively coopting their professional aspirations into serving state objectives.
The shift towards orchestrated reporting carries significant implications for the credibility of local television news. Early iterations of minsheng xinwen enjoyed widespread public trust, as their investigative tone and tangible outcomes made them appear authentic advocates for citizen concerns. Over time, however, the increasingly performative nature of orchestrated reports has eroded this trust.
Audience scepticism has grown as citizens recognise the formulaic structure of orchestrated reports, which often highlight minor grievances while deflecting attention from broader systemic problems. This loss of credibility poses a challenge for the regime, as the effectiveness of controlled criticism relies on its perceived authenticity. A report that appears overly staged or overly protective of higher authorities risks alienating the public it seeks to placate.
Controlled criticism in minsheng xinwen exemplifies the adaptability of China’s authoritarian regime in leveraging the media for governance. The model of controlled criticism has evolved as a tool to maintain ‘performance legitimacy’—a concept highlighting the regime’s need to demonstrate its effectiveness in addressing public grievances (Nathan 2009). The theory of ‘convenient criticism’ advanced in my book underscores this dynamic: criticism is allowed and even encouraged when it aligns with governance goals, such as disciplining bureaucrats or addressing localised complaints, but it remains tightly bounded to avoid challenging the regime’s foundational legitimacy.
This adaptability reflects broader trends in authoritarian media politics. Scholars like Maria Repnikova (2017b) and Rongbin Han (2018) have shown how state–media relationships in authoritarian regimes can shift from outright suppression to strategic cooptation. By allowing limited criticism, regimes like China’s not only mitigate citizen dissatisfaction but also coopt media professionals into serving the state’s broader goals. This dynamic contrasts with older models of authoritarian media control that relied primarily on censorship and propaganda, highlighting the increasing sophistication of authoritarian strategies.
While controlled critical reporting offers short-term gains in bureaucratic discipline and public satisfaction, its long-term effectiveness is uncertain. The reliance on superficial resolutions and performative governance creates a fragile foundation for sustained legitimacy. Without addressing the underlying systemic issues that drive citizen grievances, the regime risks fostering deeper public cynicism. Furthermore, the declining autonomy of journalists reduces the diversity and depth of media coverage, undermining the very mechanism that once strengthened governance at the local level.
These limitations highlight the precarious balance authoritarian regimes must maintain in using the media as a governance tool. While controlled criticism can be a potent mechanism for reinforcing state authority, its utility diminishes as public trust erodes. As China continues to centralise control over its media landscape, the question remains: can controlled critical reporting adapt to the challenges of an increasingly sceptical public in an age of rapid social and technological change?
References
Chen, Dan. 2017. ‘“Supervision by Public Opinion” or by Government Officials? Media Criticism and Central–Local Government Relations in China.’ Modern China 43(6): 620–45.
Chen, Dan. 2020. Convenient Criticism: Local Media and Governance in Urban China. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Han, Rongbin. 2018. Contesting Cyberspace in China: Online Expression and Authoritarian Resilience. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Hassid, Jonathan. 2016. China’s Unruly Journalists: How Committed Professionals are Changing the People’s Republic. New York, NY: Routledge.
Nathan, Andrew J. 2009. ‘Authoritarian Impermanence.’ Journal of Democracy 20(3): 37–40.
Repnikova, Maria. 2017a. ‘Media Openings and Political Transitions: Glasnost versus Yulun Jiandu.’ Problems of Post-Communism 64: 141–51.
Repnikova, Maria. 2017b. Media Politics in China: Improvising Power Under Authoritarianism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Zhang, Jiangeng 张建赓, and Wang Jia 王嘉. 2012. 零距离制造 [Manufactured by Zero Distance]. Nanjing, China: Nanjing Chubanshe.
