How does one report a pandemic from ground zero, especially when its a tough place like China? Tariq Hashmat of Health Analytics Asia spoke with Beijing-based media professional Suvam Pal.
Amidst the multiple tectonic shifts during this pandemic, the country where SARS-CoV-2 was first reported, seems to have emerged from the ruins relatively unscathed. As a point of comparison, China’s case count (89,943 as on March 4, 2021) is less than a tenth of Netherlands’, a country with nearly a tenth of China’s population.
Reporting a pandemic is challenging, even more so when ground zero is China. Over 800 journalists have succumbed to the virus globally, 13 of them this year alone. But as one of the many lessons this pandemic has taught us, there are always stories behind every number, and these are the stories that matter.
Health Analytics Asia spoke with Suvam Pal, an international journalist based in Beijing. Working for a number of media houses, most notably China’s state-owned CGTN, Suvam has reported the pandemic from the ground, including the epicentre city of Wuhan.
Here’s an insider’s view of China during the pandemic and after – through the eyes of a journalist.
Let’s begin with now. In your view is the worst over for China? Or is it still not out of the woods?
China’s approach is to not leave any stone unturned. That’s the main reason they have managed to tighten the noose around the virus at this moment. Initially, they tasted success, but in the last few months, with the onset of winter, there have been several cases in different parts of China, in clusters – not very serious or out of control. So the worst may be over but they’re not acting complacent, and are still observing very strict regulations.
How has it been for you reporting a pandemic on the ground in the country of its origin?
Quite an experience! The outbreak was highlighted in the month of January, but there was always the elephant in the room since December. Everybody was whispering about some mystery pneumonia in Wuhan, or Hubei Province. By the end of January China publicly declared – at that time an epidemic – and went for the unprecedented lockdown across Wuhan and three more cities in the Province.
It was fascinating because nobody knew what it was gonna be. China had previously had SARS experience, but it wasn’t as severe as this pandemic turned out to be. China being very strict about information sharing, they just shared only that amount of information which they feel convenient for others. It was quite challenging.
In your opinion, could China have alerted the WHO a little sooner about the outbreak?
Initially, at the local level, there was undoubtedly a delay. In fact the Chinese central administration accepted it and took strict action against some of the officials in the Hubei Province and Wuhan Municipal Administration. But you have to give some benefit of doubt because they were also figuring it out how to tackle the situation. It was an unprecedented situation. So I think they played the wait-and-watch game. They did buckle up well after that, and acted very efficiently.
A Johns Hopkins report in June 2020 called China, along with other countries, as “rotten apples” in terms of data quality for COVID-19. As a journalist how much of a struggle is it for you to acquire and verify the right numbers and the correct information?
These are vast countries. It’s very difficult getting all the data and extrapolating those data. You have so many nooks and crannies in the country.
Of course China came under fire for allegedly suppressing data, but they also accepted it. They rectified the numbers a few months later. And they did say that initially they didn’t have the full data, that they did a lot of back calculations. So that way, they accepted honestly.
But it’s a problem all over the world. On the ground, if one person is suppressing data or not providing the right data then the total data gets spoiled or disturbed. The top administration can’t control that in any country in the world. And these are big countries. China has discrepancies in their data, but they don’t have the motive to suppress. That’s what I believe.
In the initial days of the pandemic when much was yet to be made sense of, how did journalists such as yourself react to travel restrictions, the lockdowns and the fast changing truths?
One good thing about the Chinese style of democracy is that you see one voice coming out from the administration. Everybody is on the same page because of their structure and system of governance. This is not the case in any other democratic countries like India, U.S., or any European country.
Data coming from the officials in China was very consistent. There was unidirectional news and data flow and that helped. One nice thing that China did – they had most of the important health announcements were made by this handful of people. They didn’t have too many talking heads, and hence not much room for confusion.
The WHO is on a fact-finding mission to find the origins of the outbreak. Now the China part of this study concluded very recently. Do you think China is playing an impartial role into the quest?
I have seen China being the victim and perpetrator at the same time. At the beginning of the pandemic, western countries criticised China for their implementation of lockdown and their data. China was the victim, but at the same time their handling of issues wasn’t right. Once you have negative publicity all over the globe, you could have shown some sort of restraint and reconciliation – those were missing largely.
I can give you some examples – once Trump started calling this virus the “China virus”, China made counter allegations and floated a lot of conspiracy theories. Their diplomats took to Twitter to talk about and even endorse these theories. The government officials should have shown some restraint.
Of course they had every right to counter the allegations levelled against them. But if you are innocent, then you prove your innocence instead of counter-attacking. They went for the counter-offensive quite often which, I believe, wasn’t proper.
It’s now down to COVID vaccines and China is playing a big role. Have COVID vaccines become a diplomatic currency for China now?
China has shown a remarkable turnaround. Initially they were accepting all kinds of medical aid and equipment from all countries. But gradually they have become self-sufficient. They are manufacturing masks, medical equipment, and medicines at an industrial scale. China has converted itself from a receiver to a donor, becoming the largest donor.
China has joined the COVAX Alliance, Sinovac and Sinpopharm have started supplying medicines to a lot of countries including the UAE, Nepal, Pakistan, African, Latin American, Central American and Caribbean Nations. China is spreading its diplomatic, or donor tentacles all over the world. Their wolf warrior diplomats use this as part of their toolkit of diplomacy.
But when it comes to vaccine diplomacy, they’re being edged out by India. With its flagship vaccine manufacturers, including the Serum Institute, India has taken a lead there.
Is being a journalist in China any different from the rest of the world?
China is a world within a world. It’s a different ecosystem altogether. There are a lot of things to learn and unlearn. You have to understand that China is the second largest economy – they have the economic might and has also emerged as a global superpower. So working in China is a big challenge. There is also the massive language barrier that you have to overcome. It’s quite phenomenal to work in China.
The post “China edged-out by India in vaccine diplomacy” appeared first on Health Analytics Asia.
