Harbin, Benzene and H5N1

November 28, 2005 10:39 AM

Government is a Brand, Whether You Like it or Not: Officials in Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces, likely with the knowledge of the central government, lied to the public about the toxic spill that forced Harbin to shut off its water. A chillingly illustrated real time account reveals how the coverup was exposed amid a panic in Harbin. A PR man in Beijing discusses how this could result is a serious loss of public trust in the government of China, and how behavior like it compromises China's transition to a market economy. This story lends credence to the theory that China is not being honest about H5N1, previously discussed here. Has China learned nothing from SARS?
posted by [expletive deleted] (18 comments total)

I was in the street at noon. I saw people rushing about carrying bottles and contains of bottle around. I laughed. That's cute. Rumors are so scary. They went out so fast that everybody believes it. Can the government possibly let the people go without water?

I went home at night. I saw the district government notice. I was stunned. Water will be stopped for four days. I rushed home. There is not a single drop coming out of the drain. I drove to a Carrefour. Damn! It looked like they had just been looted. Not only was there no water, but every drink related to water and milk were all gone. Not even bread! Frightening! I can only make fun of myself. Do I trust this kind of government?

This is pretty much how I would have reacted too, and I'd have been stuck without water. Chilling. Sounds like they are bringing in water trucks though. More efficient than FEMA?
posted by agropyron at 10:55 AM on November 28, 2005

Has anyone remarked that the path that the poisoned river from China takes to Russia? Thats where the prized Kaluga Caviar comes from. Kaluga, a close kissing cousin to Baluga caviar, comes from the sturgeon fish living in that river, and prized for living in cleaner waters- well thats about to change now isn't it? Sadly- Go Long on Russian Caviar.
posted by Ladymerv at 10:59 AM on November 28, 2005

My concern is more with the rural population, who were basically abandoned, and it seems were probably not even told about the spill.

Another factor to consider is that the company responsible for the spill, the state owned China National Petroleum Corporation, is directly implicated in this. For a company publicly traded in Hong Kong and New York, this is a serious issue. This kind of behavior has to be confronted and addressed as China moves towards a market economy.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 11:07 AM on November 28, 2005

Won't somebody please think of the caviar?!@?
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:17 AM on November 28, 2005

Government is a Brand,

Anyone who works in government knows this.
posted by raedyn at 11:22 AM on November 28, 2005

I'm not quite sure what to think about this. Obviously it's horrible that the spill happened. But what are the political implications really? Such a thing could happen in the US and the fallout would be straightforward. People would sue the corporation into bankrupsy and that would be that.

The problem would still exist, and maybe stricter safety regulations would be enacted.

I guess we'll have to see what happens to those responsible for the leak.
posted by delmoi at 11:37 AM on November 28, 2005

Delmoi, I'm not speaking of the spill itself so much as the ensuing coverup. As to what will happen to the people responsible, my guess is nothing at all. I wouldn't be too surprised if the reporters who broke the story of the coverup were imprisoned though.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 11:42 AM on November 28, 2005

Delmoi, I'm not speaking of the spill itself so much as the ensuing coverup. As to what will happen to the people responsible, my guess is nothing at all. I wouldn't be too surprised if the reporters who broke the story of the coverup were imprisoned though.

All the reporters did was report on an official SEPA anouncement. I hardly think they'd go to jail for that. I didn't know there had been a cover-up, and reading this PR blog it seems like there was one. A lot of people could end up with thyroid problems because of this.

One of the interesting things about China's politics is that the government seems to be realizing that an autocracy just isn't sound policy in some ways, and that a sound environmental (as well as judicial) is required to help build the economy.
posted by delmoi at 11:48 AM on November 28, 2005

[ed], I disagree. From my experience, the Chinese govt is pretty consistent about holding people responsible for things like this (at least when they get publicity like this one), regardless of how senior they are. I think some heads are going to roll.
posted by banishedimmortal at 11:49 AM on November 28, 2005

There's also an intresting parallel between this event and the Katrina Aftermath, namely the national government blameing local governments (in this case jilin provence)
posted by delmoi at 11:53 AM on November 28, 2005

Perhaps you are right, banishedimmortal, but I don't see how anyone is clearly responsible here. The orders to cover this up initially may very well have come directly from Zhongnanhai, in which case, those responsible will not be punished, but a scapegoat might. The explosion itself, on the other hand, can still be chopped up to a tragic accident, with no one directly at fault. I haven't heard much about the Jilin accident itself, and I don't believe it is in any way clear what exactly happened there, or who, if anyone, is to blame.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 12:01 PM on November 28, 2005

Oh, and to clarify, I didn't say that no one would be held accountable, I just said that nothing would likely happen to the people who truly are responsible for this mess.

As for reporters being arrested, I still think there is a chance people who wrote stories explicitly showing how the government tried to conceal the problem from the public could find themselves in some trouble. I don't think it's that likely, especially right now, given the high profile of this story, but it still wouldn't surprise me.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 12:21 PM on November 28, 2005

One of the interesting things about China's politics is that the government seems to be realizing that an autocracy just isn't sound policy in some ways, and that a sound environmental (as well as judicial) is required to help build the economy.
posted by delmoi at 2:48 PM EST on November 28 [!]

There was an interesting story in the Times today about judicial policy.

Faced with the complex demands of governing a chaotic, modernizing country, China's leaders have embraced the rule of law as the most efficient means of regulating society. But a central requirement in fulfilling that promise lies unresolved - whether the governing Communist Party intends to allow an independent judiciary.

...

"For the first time, a judge announced a local law or regulation was void," said Xiao Taifu, a member of the Beijing Lawyers Association, which petitioned the central government on Judge Li's behalf. "It was historic. For the legal process in China, it was a first, and it carried deep meaning."

...

In the legal affairs office, the ruling was interpreted as a naked challenge to the lawmaking authority of the People's Congress. Provincial officials publicly described the ruling as "a serious breach of law."

posted by caddis at 12:44 PM on November 28, 2005

Umm. No. Government is not a brand.
posted by washburn at 4:54 PM on November 28, 2005

I don't want to be an apologist for China, but I (I live in Guangdong) heard about the chemical factory explosion and the benzene in the river on the local and Hong Kong news in what I would call record time for China.

What's funny about the coverup is that even though it's all supposedly a secret, everyone I talked to knew about it well before the 21st.

Something about a nation of 1.3 billion people is that not even the media can stop people from talking about what's going on.
posted by taschenrechner at 5:38 PM on November 28, 2005

Umm. No. Government is not a brand.
posted by washburn at 7:54 PM EST on November 28 [!]

Um, yes it is.

That's not an argument. Yes it is. No it's not. Yes it is..................................
posted by caddis at 6:44 PM on November 28, 2005

A friend of mine visited a mid-sized city in Hei Long Jiang a month ago and was shocked to witness a sanitation truck dump raw sewage into the Song Hua. So while the current situation is horrible, there's a more general carelessness towards the environment that might not grab headlines but should be part of the discussion here.
posted by Treeline at 9:54 PM on November 28, 2005

Umm. No. Government is not a brand. - washburn

So why do you suppose government hires advertising agencies and have "Public Affairs" or "External Communications" departments? If it's not a brand, why does it matter how I talk to my customers, how I dress? Why do we worry about what image we present? Why do we talk about our corporate values? Why do we adjust to the demands of citizens?

I'm not saying government always does a good job of these things. But neither do private companies consistently succeed. It is certainly something that we strive for. Sometimes, it works.

Government is a tarnished brand. The public (in North America at least) is pre-conditioned to not trust government, and to assume that government is an adversary, rather than an ally. But just because that's the image that people have of the government, doesn't mean that it's accurate or fair.
posted by raedyn at 7:21 AM on November 29, 2005