In a sense, what the China 2008 Olympics lack is a load of highly motivated (think a lot of money) spin doctors to manipulate the overseas press. The Chinese government does not have such an operation which is in direct contrast to, say, the Bush administration in the United States, or, more precisely, the recent Blair regime in the UK which practically redefined the term ’spin doctor’ so that the UK had government by spin.

Now The Economist has tried to balance out the assorted stories and look at how the Games stand.

It mentions:

The impressive collection of new and renovated sports venues that will house the competitions, such as the National Stadium, and the equally impressive array of new roads, railways, and metro lines that will ferry the massive crush of spectators and athletes around the city.

It goes on to say other logistics seem likewise well in hand. The ticket program, organizers say, is proceeding smoothly. And although officials think they will need 100,000 volunteers to help run the games, they have already received more than 560,000 applications.

On the hardware side of the ledger, and especially when it comes to the venues themselves, it would seem every detail has indeed been attended to. Not only will all 37 venues be completed well in advance, officials promise, but they will be ready for any contingency.

Planners are also likely to succeed in bringing Beijing’s notorious air pollution down to more bearable levels during the games. If they have to impose draconian restrictions on traffic and industrial activity in the weeks before the games, they will have the authority they need to do so.

Even the weather is taken care of. Officials at Beijing’s municipal Weather Modification Office say the timely launching of chemicals into the atmosphere will allow them to dispel clouds and largely control the time and place of rainfall.

So on that side of the ledger everything is very well prepared. Far more so than other host countries were at the same time before their games. Athens was still slapping on paint up to the day of the opening.

The Economist lists all this and then gives the other side of the coin. It reads:

The government seems far less prepared, however, when it comes to the delicate business of handling the activists and pressure groups that are sure to use the event as a soapbox for their many and varied criticisms of its policies. Whether to do with labour rights, religious freedom, the mistreatment of ethnic minorities or general political repression, there is no shortage of causes, and no shortage of champions prepared to take advantage of the Olympic spotlight.
Much of the world assumes — with justification — that China hopes to use the games as a global coming-out party, raising its international profile and softening its image. But another important goal is to convey to the domestic audience that China has the stature and ability to take its place at the centre of the world stage. Neither goal will be well served next year by ham-fisted responses to criticism.

Which is equally true and fair. On the other hand, does China needs government by spin doctors? Should all decisions be based on what the world’s press will say? There is a middle position which, perhaps, it could be argued, China should take. The article presents both sides of the case very well.
Source: The Economist