What China’s Newspapers Say Today

Giant panda flattens soccer team

Beijing Guoan's Zhang Xizhe (C) fights for the ball during their Chinese Super League football match (CSL) with Meizhou Hakka FC at the Workers' Stadium in Beijing on April 15, 2023. STR/AFP via Getty Images

Commentary

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) strictly controls China’s newspapers, making sure all stories are aligned with exactly what it wants. Reading between the lines of Chinese publications is edifying, especially this May Day.

China Daily recently reported on Meng Lan, a panda. In writing and by video, the publication reminded Chinese citizens of the Beijing-based panda’s kung fu skills, that he climbs, digs, does sit-ups, and remains a “hardened criminal” after trying to escape. The article also mentions the attention Meng Lan is getting and his “celebrity pedigree.”

People in China (and elsewhere) love panda bears. But the thing is, Meng Lan had not done anything captivating recently to warrant an article. Nevertheless, China Daily used words and video images to update its audience about Meng Lan’s cuteness. The story sidetracked people’s attention from the nation’s vast array of problems. Welcome to how China’s media manipulates its citizens.

China Daily also published another recent story headlined “Shanghai soccer team takes ethics vow.” Gu Jiqing, the Communist Party secretary and general manager of Shanghai’s football club, took a vow of integrity and self-discipline. All the team members visited the site of the CCP’s first congress—a dull place right next to one of the most touristy and posh areas to eat and shop. Without announcing specific charges, eight soccer officials had been under investigation.

China’s central government would prefer that people pay attention to the panda since China’s performance in soccer has been corrupt and disastrous. It is another staggering example of how top-down planning produces awful results.

In 2015, Chinese leader Xi Jinping came up with a plan to make China a soccer superpower. Beijing developed a 50-point plan that “included a directive to include soccer in the national school curriculum,” according to The Japan Times. The CCP, along with investors and companies, spent billions on acquiring teams, building stadiums, soccer academies, and world-class foreign talent. According to Transfermarket, 75 foreign players were acquired. The top 10 had an average transfer fee of $39.2 million.

“In the 1980s, the Chinese men’s soccer team was among the top five in Asia,” according to China Daily. Now it ranks about No. 80 in the world.

What happened? How could a country with 1.4 billion people not have a good soccer team?

Some say it was because of corrupt officials, coaches fixing matches, and other crimes. Now, all but a few of the foreign talent have returned to their home countries, and COVID-19 exacerbated the situation since audiences could not attend matches.

Most agree that Chinese men are not great soccer players. But few have tried to pinpoint the reasons why. As with other sports in China, high-potential soccer players are identified at an early age and placed in separate programs for more focused training. Most soccer players agree that passion for the sport is key to success. Passion takes time to grow and cannot be selected too early.

Others theorize that single child-families do not inculcate the tendency to share (and sacrifice) fundamental soccer skills.

Others observe that China’s academic system and intense Gaokao test are the top priorities for parents and, therefore, kids. Still, China’s horrible results in developing a decent organic team are confounding. Many third-world countries have great teams, as well as nations like South Korea and Japan. After all, all you need is a ball to play.

Whatever anyone says, Xi’s plan for soccer was an unmitigated disaster. It exposed a big flaw in China’s system of governance and societal organization. Maybe the CCP should pour its yuan into promoting panda bears.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.