与纽约时报记者作斗争

昨天华人网上一个mm帖了纽约时报记者的一篇文章，题目是“China's 1-2 Finish in the Women's 200 Butterfly Raises Questions”。前半部分用大篇幅质疑刘子歌和焦刘洋的金银牌，怀疑她们嗑药；后半部分介绍了刘mm在上海的训练经验，字里行间透露着中国训练的不人道，当然也提了一下刘mm的刻苦。中国这次刚拿到第一个游泳项目的金牌，纽约时报就来这么一篇，不由得让我们窝火。中国虽然有前科，也不能这样无事生非地泼脏水啊。尤其是看了这个Andrew Jacobs几个月来的报道，几乎都与中国有关，几乎都是反面报道。忍无可忍之下，决定给这个脑残写信讽刺一下。他让我难受了，我也不让他好过。当时真是出离愤怒，没想到会有什么结果的。有意思的是华人网上的咖啡因mm也生气了，也写了一封。不过明显她比我心平气和。

结果在我们意料之外，我两一前一后收到了他的回信。交锋的结果是他把责任推到了编辑身上，说题目不是他起的。然后我们发现他们把文章题目改为“Surprising Gold for China Leaves Questions in Its Wake”。呵呵，虽然没啥大区别，但看得出他们心虚了。也算是胜利吧。纽约时报比较亲民主党，一贯较反华。其实我们也只是想和他沟通一下，没想到会有回复。想到给这个记者做research的还都是中国人，就有点心寒，或许是被利用了。要感谢华人网上的各位姐妹，给我们出主意，还提供有用的信息。
我的信：Dear Mr Jacobs, I am quite disappointed at your article "China's 1-2 Finish in the Women's 200 Butterfly Raises Questions". Apparantly, you applied double standards to Chinese athletes. Please be fair to them and show your respect. When athletes break world records, we cheer for them and wish them all the best, not questioning their integrity. When you accused (suggested) someone of doping without any evidence (yah, we know how to read between lines), it showed how shallow it is. Following your logic, can I say that US track athletes' performance raise eyebrows because there were notorious doping scandals in the States, say Ben Johnson's famous case, and Marion Jones', and Joyner's death? Do you feel hurt? Do you think your athletes are subjected to indignity and humiliation? If you find yourself pointing your finger at someone else, remember that there are always three pointing back at you. Regards, xxx

他的信：I am not in the business of cheering athletes, or anyone. I am a reporter, and I report on what people are saying, even if they are sore losers (which in this case, many of those people were). If you read my story closely, you would see that I was not making the accusations. I was merely reflecting the voices, and there were many, that were questioning how someone who was ranked 22 broke a world record. But most importantly, my piece presented the probable reasons for her success: that she trained hard. The bottom line of the piece was that it showed Liu Zige worked extremely hard for many years. And that's all she did was train. And I made it clear that China does not tolerate doping. I'm not sure what I could have written to make it clearer.

华人的mm给我出了很多好主意，可是我实在懒得和他纠缠，就写信冷嘲热讽了他选择性失明地报道赛事搏眼球，同情他混口饭吃也不容易。然后告诉他事实胜于雄辩。我不跟他废话了。（原文都忘了存档。。。）

咖啡因mm的信写得比我好多了。而且她比我耐心。

I've just read your article online "China's 1-2 Finish in the Women's 200 Butterfly Raises Questions" and I was very disappointed by your article and the apparent double standards you've shown.

I grew up in Beijing and I've lived in the States for seven years. When Michael Phelps had won six gold medals, all I read on Chinese news websites and internet chatrooms (hosted in the States) was praise on how great an athlete Phelps was and how China could improve to perform better. Apprently you chose a different approach. An approach that is unfair to the hard working Chinese athletes who trained for years for the games and unfair to all Chinese people who care about the games. You've never written an article to question any American athlete's integrity when they performed well, but your tone is completely the opposite when American athletes couldn't win the gold medal in the 200 meter butterfly. What a shame. The Olympics spirit is faster, higher and stronger and unfortunately you've chosen the low road.

If you still question why the Chinese have done so well, the answer is that we work harder. While you guys are whining and pointing fingers to others, the Chinese atheletes are training very hard to improve the performance. I sincerely hope that you can read the article again and ask yourself. Have you even tried to show fairness and integrity in the article? Many American people might find your article makes them feel better, but at the end of the day, whining never helps you do better. Hard work does.

记者的回信：I think if you read the article closely, you will see that I am not questioning her success. As a reporter, my job is to reflect and process what is out there, and among a lot of swimmers, there was questions, grumbling, and yes whining.

But while the story starts out with that, the bulk of the article actually presents the very things you say: that she trained hard. (By the way, early on there were plenty of people questioning Phelps success).

Anyway, I'm not sure why such articles are interpreted as being anti-Chinese. If an American swimmer that was ranked 22 in the world, and whom no one had ever heard about, had broken a world record, people -- being petty and jealous -- would raise questions. The media simply reflects and reports on that.. And then, if we're doing our job, we try to present some of the facts, which is what I did in the case of Liu Zige. To ignore that is simply poor journalism.

然后咖啡因mm又回了，我觉得这封写得很好，让对方很羞愧，他那个research不知道是怎么做的。

Thanks for your time to read and reply my email. Don't get me wrong, I've never considered or expressed that your article was anti-Chinese. But if your intention was to explore why Liu Zige has earned her gold medal, the title wouldn't have been written as "...Raises Questions", yes? I understand that you were trying to do a good job of reporting facts, so I'd like to add that Liu Zige had trained with Jessicah Schipper, the Australian athlete who finished the third, in Australia from January 2007 to March 2007. Maybe Jessicah simply never communicated this experience with her mother? In addition, Liu's record had been improving since her training experience in Australia. In particular, Liu had beaten the Olympics Silver medalist, Jiao Liuyang in the National championship earlier in 2008 with a 2'07"76 record. Liu is only nineteen years old, and I believe that she has a long and productive career to come.
Words are strong, and words from a New York Times jounalist are among the strongest. If your intention wasn't questioning her success, I wish the title hadn't been "China's 1-2 Finish in the Women's 200 Butterfly Raises Questions".

然后记者就开始耍无赖了。
I hate to be a cop out, but reporters don't write the headlines for their stories. They're done by copy editors, in this case, in New York. (and unless we're in the office at the time, sitting next to them, we have no idea what they've done until we read the story) Anyway, I agree that it wasn't the greatest headline.

果然是为了吸引眼球啊。大多数人哪能把报道从头读到尾呢。所以他们这样的编辑牛啊，先搞个恶心人的标题，然后把恶心人的东西通通放到文章前面。最后一句再点个题。中间的内容都不重要。这就是西方的媒体。

嗯，我们也要学学。写paper，abstract一定要好好写，表格和图都要好好整，总结一定要有远瞻。当中通通不重要。