News 1: case of Lei Yang
The People's Procuratorate of Beijing published the autopsy result of Lei Yang on 30th June, 2016. The autopsy result stated that Lei yang died from asphyxiation resulting from chocking on his own gastric contents. And the Procuratorate decided to arrest the involved police officers on charges of their dereliction of duty that led to the death of Lei Yang.
In my opinion, the autopsy result is credible but the charges are not sufficient in this case. After all, a man died during interrogation. Not much we can conclude till further investigations are carried out. And it is hard to predict when government will give a final result of this case. The efficiency and equity that the Procuratorate has shown in publishing the autopsy result might be partially pushed forward by great pressures from the public.
Mainstream media in China like JINGWAH Times and Beijing News have published several articles to deliver their comments on this news. In summary, they almost unanimously commented that the Procuratorate of Beijing has been equitable in disposing this case and there is no opinion from the Procuratorate showing partiality to either the police or Lei yang. However, they also listed some comments and queries raised by the public that the autopsy result just makes the conclusion of this case ambiguous. The public want a clear and specific conclusion on the ‘case of Lei yang’ which the Procuratorate cannot give at present. The mainstream media therefore advise the public to wait patiently for the final result of this case and they also remind the government that the only the Procuratorate carry out their obligations and be equitable will the public trust and support their government.
This news and its relating comments are obtained indirectly from the PHOENIX News. Besides its own original product, PHOENIX News collects or edits comments, articles and news from other mainstream media. Although it is not known that whether these mainstream media have been controlled by the government, they are currently the most authoritative and objective media in China, especially the PHOENIX News.
Some foreign media like The New York Times also reported this news. The difference is The New York Times also includes the voice of the family members and the lawyer of Lei Yang. The lawyer made a comment to appreciate the prosecutors for “handling the case strictly, legally and thoroughly. ” But he also questioned that the charges on those arrested police officers were not sufficient given the circumstances of this case . The New York Times did not comment on this news in detail, instead, it just mentioned that another media Global Times, thought the police struggled to convince the public in dealing this case.
It is very interesting to browse news through Chinese media and foreign media and make a comparison of them. Sometimes, media have to considerate their benefits and restricts when publishing news. In Lei Yang’s case, the foreign media were more inclined to blame the involved police officer and the Chinese government in direct or indirect ways, however, the Chinese media were more reticent about criticizing the authorities.
 New York Times
News: ICBC limits Alipay payments to Zhejiang branches
Beijing News reported this news in Mar of 2014 that ICBC planned to limit Alipay payment to its Zhejiang branches in order to safeguard the transactions. Now it has been two years since the news was published but the announced plan of ICBC seems not progressing much – almost every shop in Suzhou allows using Alipay payment for transactions. However, if Alipay payment is not available in other place except Zhejiang, our life will become less efficient because we have costumed to use Alipay payment in daily transactions. If large banks like ICBC indeed have the plan to limit the third-party payment services, they must also have the plan to expand their own e-pay services. Then, we have to get used to use the payment services provided by those banks, or to deposit money in private banks who still cooperate with third-party payment service enterprises like Alibaba, Tencent and Baidu (BAT).
The intention behind this news might be to give a warning to other enterprises that are providing the third-pay payment services and to give the customers an intimation that these third-pay payment services will not be available in the future, which pushes people to switch to the e-pay services provided by the bank.