The abrupt closure of the China Project, a prominent English-language news website, has emerged as a stark symbol of the increasingly fraught media landscape, shaped by the intensifying geopolitical tensions between the United States and China. Operating for seven years, the China Project was often caught in the crosshairs of divergent perceptions: some viewed it as an agent of Beijing, others as an anti-Chinese platform, and yet others saw it as a casualty of an unsustainable business model.
Analysts point to a significant shift in the media environment, now favoring a more hawkish view on China, complicating the task of reporting on the Asian giant. The China Project’s experience mirrors this transformation, reflecting the complexities of covering a nation characterized by its massive state-led economy, contentious human rights record, authoritarian governance, and the looming threat of conflict over Taiwan.
The political atmosphere in Washington, increasingly inclined towards a hardline stance on China, has complicated the media’s efforts to provide a balanced understanding of the nation. According to the site’s final editor-in-chief, Jeremy Goldkorn, the challenge lies in navigating the truth about China in both Beijing and Washington. Jonathan Hassid, a political science professor at Iowa State University, suggests that the shutdown of the China Project underscores a narrowing corridor for balanced perspectives on China, indicating a loss of a middle ground in the discourse.
Launched in New York in 2016, the China Project quickly became a central figure in discussions about China. It covered a diverse range of topics, including the economy, defense, human rights, culture, and history. It notably featured columns on the Chinese government’s human rights abuses in Xinjiang and LGBTQ+ life in China. However, the November 6 announcement by Goldkorn, who is based in Nashville, Tennessee, marked the end of its journey.
The immediate cause of the outlet’s closure was the sudden loss of critical funding, highlighting the precarious nature of start-up news outlets in a struggling media industry. Goldkorn and outgoing CEO Bob Guterma acknowledged the hesitance of investors and advertisers, wary of the potential consequences of associating with a platform critical of Beijing and banned in China since 2018. The Chinese state-run Global Times has previously dismissed the China Project as a “West-backed anti-China organization.”
Investors expressed admiration for the outlet’s work but often declined involvement due to political tensions and business interests in China. The site’s affiliation with conferences and events also raised concerns among sponsors, with some requesting the removal of their names from promotional materials over fears of political repercussions in China.
A staffer on the U.S. House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party views the closure as reflective of the broader, more strained relationship between Washington and Beijing. The diminishing of moderate viewpoints is seen as a microcosm of the escalating tensions.
Accusations from both the United States and China of working for the other’s government further compounded the outlet’s challenges. In October 2022, allegations surfaced, reported by Semafor, involving Shannon Van Sant, a former business editor at the outlet, who filed a complaint with Congress alleging the outlet’s ties to the CCP. These claims were denied by the China Project, which labeled them as unfounded and the product of a disgruntled former employee. Van Sant’s lawyer, Andrew Bakaj, maintained her dismissal was due to her refusal to align with the outlet’s narrative on China.
Despite denials of Beijing ties, the accusations impacted the China Project. Informal inquiries by multiple government agencies were launched, further straining its operations. The SEC filings indicated that the outlet had been financially struggling for some time, a point humorously noted by Guterma in public speeches.
In the United States, policy on China remains one of the rare bipartisan issues, uniting lawmakers against Beijing’s economic and human rights practices. This prevailing sentiment, some analysts argue, fosters an environment where any deviation from an anti-China stance is viewed with suspicion, potentially stifling nuanced discourse.
The closure of the China Project raises concerns about the future of balanced and comprehensive reporting on China. The prevailing anti-China consensus in Washington, while addressing legitimate concerns, may inadvertently limit opportunities for dialogue and understanding, essential for effective international relations. The case of the China Project exemplifies the delicate balance media outlets must maintain in reporting on politically sensitive topics, particularly in the context of global power dynamics.
The story of the China Project’s rise and fall serves as a cautionary tale for media organizations navigating the complex interplay of international politics, financial sustainability, and journalistic integrity. As the global media landscape continues to evolve, the lessons learned from the China Project’s experience will undoubtedly resonate for years to come, highlighting the importance of maintaining a diverse and independent press in an increasingly polarized world.