黄良天
黄良天，中国大陆媒体人，曾被评为2006年度全球华人公共知识分子， Index on Censorship2008年度自由表达提名奖 。
其经历，见其于2007年接受英国广播公司记者采访记录：
BBC: 向听众简单介绍您自己，您的工作经历。
从小在农村长大，1972年正式成为农民,1974年当兵，1978年之后又当了两年农民，期间当过当时和现在一个中国大陆农民所能当上的最大的官。
1980年考上了中国南方一所风景美丽的大学，四年后被分配到一个称之为老少边岛的贫困山区搞了两年计划生育工作。
1986年成为一名具有中国特色的新闻工作者，2004年9月被任命为《百姓》杂志主编，2006年12月31日被解职，同日接任《农产品市场周刊》主编。
BBC：介绍你现在的工作的状况？ 作为新闻人，你感到满意吗？
按照官方的统计数字，中国目前期刊9468种，报纸1938种。其中大部分是根据政府行政部门的权利划分而确定它的读者定位和市场趋向，所以，从严格意义上说，中国的报刊杂志实际上只是党的宣传部门和政府行政部门的延伸。是完全彻底地为党和政府的具体工作涂脂抹粉的。
农产品市场周刊是农业部有关司局投资的刊物，从目前看，它根本就不是一个独立的文化产品，投资者和管理者也不想让它成为纯粹的文化产品。
作为一个文化人，一个新闻人，我当然为官方对我的这种人事安排感到郁闷。
BBC：有没有想过改变现状？
我正在试图改变现状。
我改变现状的动力来自于我现在的一批非常年轻的同事，他们有的刚走出校门，有的还在实习，由于一些自己无法自主的因素，参加了这个编辑团队，我不想他们像我的许多同辈一样，在一个狗苟蝇营的环境里，逐渐消磨掉一个知识青年应有的独立人格和独立的思维习惯，消磨掉一个知识分子应有的尊严和风度。
中国的刊号，现在是一种国有稀缺资源，报刊杂志的文化含义，不在于它叫什么，我很想通过自己的努力，利用好这个稀缺资源，为我们的读者服务，尽量组织我的同事采写、报道一些真正对老百姓有用的资讯，我会利用一切机会让他们走出去，让我的年轻的同事们尽可能在其中最大限度地养成和体现一个文化人的自由意志。
BBC：在此之前，您曾在百姓杂志任主编。 介绍您曾经工作的杂志《百姓》。 您任主编后，改变了其风格? 您是基于什么理念， 当时杂志的宗旨是什么？
百姓杂志和农产品市场周刊一样，同属于农业部主管，也许是它的名称和农业部的行政职能没有关系，所以没有得到政府主管部门的财务投资。
我接手百姓杂志时，职工已经几个月没发工资，编辑部的电话因欠费而停机，也没有一家广告赞助商。
我估计，当时我的上级任命我为百姓杂志主编，其最重要的出发点，就是为了挽救百姓杂志糟糕的财务状况，当然，他们也没有忘记"让国有资产增值"，在任命我的同时，也规定了我每年必须上缴的不断递增的财务额度。
第一年，我的一位朋友资助了１０万块钱，百姓杂志得以艰难起步。
相对于杂志的财务状况，杂志的编辑力量却给了我十分充足的信心。
我当时的三个编辑，都是出自名校的研究生，都是中国共产党党员，他们这真正高学历的执政党党员身份，说明了这些年轻知识分子已经勇敢地自我承担了振兴国家和民族的历史责任，他们用自己的年轻和激情，铸就了百姓杂志２７期的辉煌。
期间，我们抵制了所有来自各方面的官样文章。拒绝了所有文章中的官话、套话、假话和大话，把读者对象从农民和农业官员转向一切关心国家和民族命运的知识分子。努力用平民的视角记录变革中的中国。
我们把一本官办的杂志改造成了一本真正的高品质的文化载体，在这片日渐清新的北方田野里，还有一批志向高远的公共知识分子和我们一起耕作一起和着中国的躁动喜怒哀乐。
BBC: 当时百姓《杂志》报道犀利，受到了广泛关注。当时都做了那些报道？
中国问题的根源在于土地，中国共产党革命和改革的发端，都开始于土地。前者有耕者有其田的号召，后者有家庭联产承包责任制的妥协，实际上，这两者的联系是一种历史的反动。
也正基于这种反动，当初革命和改革的动力成了当前社会矛盾和社会动荡的主要根源。也成了中国有权阶级滋生腐败的温床。
要以平民的视角纪录变革中的中国，任何一个有良心和良知的政治家或者公共知识分子，都无法对当前中国的土地制度和土地问题熟视无睹。
所以，在我主持期间，百姓杂志对中国的土地问题作了大量广泛和深入的报道和分析。其中四川温江、河南太康和江苏江阴失地农民的抗争报道，引起了国际舆论的关注。
与此同时，百姓杂志密切注视中国社会的全方位变革，站在理性和阳光的立场上，对中国宪政建设、民主制度建设、国有资产流失、传统文化重建、社会冲突根源、下岗工人待遇、医疗体制改革等问题适时地发出了公共知识分子群体负责任的声音，百姓杂志每一期都有文章和报道成为我们称之为"网络议会"的议题。
我感到很宽慰的是，我虽然离开了百姓杂志，但我们组织的许多成功的报道还有百姓杂志在不同时期发出的不同声音，已经永恒凝固在永远奔腾的网络里，凝固成了谁也无法篡改的历史。
BBC：当宣布您的调任通知时，您的感受？ 您同事的反应？他们的反应给您的感受？
我的调任，应该是我意料之中的事。
在此之前一个月，我作例行的述职报告，我的结束语是：百姓的今后，恐怕有待来者贤者了，说这话的时候，我看了看台下的领导，他们似乎没有什么反应。不知道是他们没听懂还是城府深。
调任前一天，他们找我谈，我说，不用谈了，我明天就离开百姓。
但真的要跟我年轻的同事告别时，我什么话也说不出来了，我掉了眼泪，我这一生，受过很多打击，但掉眼泪，加上我外婆和我父亲去世，只有三次。
去年的最后一天，当我把这个消息告诉我在香港读书的儿子时，我儿子说，像你这么干，撤职是早晚的事，但我没想到这么快，后来，第二天的明报登了我儿子的话，作为一个父亲，我真的对此五味杂陈。
今年元旦，我在美国、加拿大、土耳其、德国、香港、台湾的同学和朋友在不同的时区知道了我的被解职，但在电话里，基本是都是同一句话：该发生的，真的发生了。
BBC：共产党对新闻报道的政策是怎么样的？ 什么可以报道？什么不可以？报道口径的限制？
政策是相对于国家法律和部门规章而言的。
在中国，相对于法规，政策可以是多变的、随意的。而这种多变和随意有时仅仅取决一个部门领导的一个批示一个电话或者莫名的心血来潮。
中国没有新闻法，什么可以报道，什么不可以报道，其口径和标准是不断变化的，其口径的大小和标准的宽严往往取决于主管领导同志个人的政治素质、文化修养和道德风度，有时甚至还取决于领导同志的情绪。
希特勒有句名言：什么是权威，权威就是神秘。
我曾经对某媒体的一位长官说：你要这样的权威吗，那你最好经常发神经。
后来这位领导真的经常发神经，他的部下真的很怕他，因为谁也无法揣摩他的思维走势。
在中国，只要你是相当一级领导，那你就是相当一级的无所不能无所不知的导师，你冷不丁冒出个排比句或者儿歌童谣之类的话来，也会有人将之放在相当的政治历史文化道德的高度来歌唱，来统一相当范围内人民的思想和行为。
BBC：中国的新闻媒体能在这样的限制下能做到游刃有余吗？
中国新闻管控政策是多变的，其多变的原因，在于它的滞后性。
我曾经对南华早报记者说：这种管控政策是个橡皮筋，你在其中不动，它就那么小、那么紧。你拱拱它，它也就大了，宽了，不那么束缚了。当然，你别将它弄断了。
历史总是在艰难中前行。
当初，中国搞经济体制改革，邓小平给出的秘方是：你们给我杀出一条血路来。
永恒的自由，需要先驱者的胆识和牺牲精神。
I grew up in the countryside in the south of China and graduated from senior middle school in 1972, during the Cultural Revolution. The rules of the time meant that all middle school graduates were sent to impoverished villages to ‘be re-educated by the peasants’ for two years. Only then would the local Party branch recommend us for transfers to a factory, the army or a university. And so I spent two years in one of those villages and then joined the army, where I remained for a further five years. In 1978 I returned to village work for two years, becoming secretary of a grassroots branch of the Chinese Communist Party. That post was – and is – the highest official position a rural resident can hold. The class system in China means that those with a ruralhukou(a household registration document) are ineligible to work in state factories or government bodies, nor can they officially take posts in township-level Party committees.
After the death of Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping overturned some of his more extreme policies and restored the university entrance examination, which had been abolished a decade earlier. So eight years after leaving school, I took the exam, left behind an almost primitive rural life, and enrolled at university. Four years later, I was assigned to a poor mountainous area where I worked on implementation of the one child policy.
In 1986, I was transferred to a major government newspaper, becoming a ‘journalist with Chinese characteristics’. I say ‘with Chinese characteristics’ because I do not believe that China has journalism in the true sense of the word. Despite this, it does have an All-China Journalists Association, controlled by the Chinese Communist Party’s Publicity Department.
In September 2004, I was appointed editor-in-chief ofBaixingby Party bosses. Although it was overseen by the Ministry of Agriculture,Baixingreceived no financial support from the government, perhaps because it did not have a clear link with the ministry’s work.
According to official figures there are 9,468 periodicals in China, along with 1,938 newspapers. The majority of these have their target readership and market orientation determined by government. So, strictly speaking, China’s newspapers and magazines are merely extensions of government and the Party’s Publicity Department. Their job is simply to put a pretty face on their work.
When I took over atBaixing, the editors had not been paid for months, the telephone had been cut off, and the magazine did not have a single sponsor. I suppose that is one of the reasons I was given the job – to turn around the magazine’s finances. Nor did my bosses forget the government’s instructions to ‘increase the value of state-owned assets’, ruling that every year I would need to transfer increasing funds to my superiors.
In that first year, one of my friends provided financial aid of 100,000 yuan and we made our first faltering steps. But despite our problematic finances, I was full of confidence in our editorial team. The three editors in my charge all held MAs from renowned colleges and were Party members. They were committed to working for the nation and its people, and it was their youth and passion that gave the 27 issues ofBaixingpublished under my editorship their strength.[/font]
[font face="Times New Roman" size=4]During that time we boycotted all official articles, and stripped the others of bureaucratic jargon, stereotyped expressions, lies and boasts. We switched our target readership from farmers and agricultural officials to all intellectuals who cared about the fate of the nation and its people. We strove to record a changing China from the perspective of the common people. We transformed a government-run magazine into a genuine quality cultural publication. We were joined in this task by public intellectuals who helped us record China’s experiences.
We also turned the magazine’s financial condition around. If you will forgive me for quoting the figures, by the time I left, this monthly publication had an annual circulation of over 300,000 and advertising income of over 1.3m yuan. I believe that this success is primarily due to the concern my colleagues and I showed for China’s land issues.
China’s problems are rooted in the land. The Party’s revolution and its later reform both started there. The revolution promised land for every farmer. When reform started in the late 1970s, those who worked the land were allowed to profit from surplus crops. And in fact the revolution and reform are linked by a kind of historical discontent, rooted in the loss of land.
It is this legacy that has brought the motivation for revolution and reform, the main source of today’s social problems and unrest. It has also provided a breeding ground for corruption among the powerful.
To document a reforming China from the point of view of the common people, no politician or intellectual of conscience can ignore the current system of land ownership and its problems.
So, under my editorship,Baixingprovided a wide range of in-depth reporting and analysis on land issues. Our coverage of protests by farmers deprived of their land (in Wenjiang in Sichuan, Taikang in Henan and Jiangyin in Jiangsu) earned international attention.
Meanwhile, we also kept a close eye on China’s social reform in general. We took a rational and open stance, publishing the opinions of public intellectuals on the building of a constitutional government and democratic mechanisms; the loss of state assets; the rebuilding of traditional culture; the causes of social conflict; the treatment of laid-off workers; and reform in the healthcare system. Articles and reports from each issue would be debated in what we called the ‘Internet parliament’.
I am comforted by the fact that, although I have leftBaixing, many of the articles we produced and the different voices we published will remain available on the Internet, becoming part of a historical record nobody will be able to distort.
]In China, we speak of someone being ‘brave enough to speak the truth’, because if you speak the truth, there will be a price to pay. So it was inevitable that I would pay the price by being removed from my post.
Less than a month before my departure, at the end of 2006, I made a routine report on my work, ending by saying that in the futureBaixingmay need a better man at the helm than myself. My superiors did not seem to react to this. I don’t know if they failed to understand, or if they kept their thoughts hidden. [/font]
[font face="Times New Roman" size=4]The day before my departure they wanted to speak with me. I told them there was no need to talk, and that I would be gone the next day. But when it was time to say farewell to my younger colleagues, I found myself unable to speak. I felt I was letting them down. [/font]
[font face="Times New Roman" size=4] On the last day of the year I told my son the news, a student in Hong Kong. He said, ‘Dad, with what you did, you were going to be fired sooner or later. I just didn’t think it would be this quick.’ On New Year’s Day, Hong Kong’sMing Paopublished what he had said, and as a father I was left both proud and bitter.[/font]
[font face="Times New Roman" size=4]That New Year’s Day, friends from the US, Canada, Turkey, Germany, Hong Kong and Taiwan phoned me as they heard the news in their own particular time zones – and they all said the same thing: it was bound to happen, but they hadn’t expected it so soon.
Since being fired, a number of colleagues overseas have asked my opinion on China’s news policy.
I told them that China’s news policy could be described as a unique product of the nation. It needs to be contrasted with national law and ministerial regulations, but is in fact more changeable than either law or regulations. It can be decided by a memo from a ministerial official, a telephone call, or even on an inexplicable whim.
China has no media regulations. Anything can be reported – or not reported. The line to take and standards for what can be reported are constantly changing according to the politics, culture and morality of those in charge – and even, sometimes, according to their mood.
In China, if you are an official at a certain level you become the equivalent of an all-powerful, all-knowing guru. Suddenly spout an aphorism or a line from a fairy tale and it will be praised for its political, historical, cultural and moral significance, and then used to guide the thought and behaviour of the people.
I have never believed that China has a press in the true sense of the word. China’s publications are simply tools of the Party and government.
Nor do the Chinese authorities deny the nature of the Chinese press. Since the Chinese civil war, the Communist Party has ruled that the news media under its leadership is ‘the Party’s influence on public opinion’ or ‘the Party’s mouthpiece’. This definition and ideology remain unchanged.
Under the leadership of this ‘proletarian Party spirit of the news’, tens of thousands of journalists are working to produce around two thousand newspapers – almost all entirely identical.
And that is truly one of the great wonders of the global news industry.
After my departure fromBaixing, I was transferred toAgricultural Products Weekly. It is also funded by the Ministry of Agriculture, and currently cannot be described in any way as an independent publication. Nor do its investors or managers want to let it become so.
I will attempt to change the status quo atAgricultural Products Weekly. My colleagues are all young, some fresh graduates and some interns, assigned to the publication for reasons beyond their control. I hope that they will not – as many of my contemporaries did – lose their independence, dignity and integrity in this cut-throat environment
Publication licences – which allow the distribution of a periodical or newspaper – are in short supply in China. One way round this is for publications to change their specialism, while retaining their original name. I hope to use this rare resource to serve our readers, to have our journalists write and report on news of real value to the people. I will take every chance to send them out to cultivate and embody the free spirit of a professional reporter.
China’s so-called press now determines the value of news according to the rank of the officials quoted in the reports. Even if hundreds are buried alive in a mining accident, the entire nation’s radio stations, TV channels and newspapers will report simultaneously, telling you which leaders have issued instructions and who is on the scene, covering the entire Chinese leadership from top to bottom before reluctantly telling you the actual facts you wanted to know. [/font]
[font face="Times New Roman" size=4]There is no policy or regulation that says anyone who actually reports real news will be fired. However journalists ‘with Chinese characteristics’ have become accustomed to working the way they do.
When subservience becomes the norm for the intellectuals of a certain people at a certain time, those people and that time have lost their spirit and soul, becoming zombies
I genuinely hope that my Chinese colleagues can value themselves and abide by the basic morality and personal integrity of the educated and the intellectual. As an intellectual, this should not need any intense study of officially decreed moral principles – it should simply be understood.
China is currently advocating the construction of a harmonious society. I am delighted that the current generation of Communist Party leaders have taken this phrase from China’s cultural vocabulary to use as an objective for our society.
China’s written language can combine ideas, and our predecessors have already endowed the word ‘harmonious’ with rich sociological connotations: a society in which everyone has ample crops in the field and the right to speak equally and freely
The tens of thousands of people working in China’s news industry – if they still consider themselves to be professionals and intellectuals – can find within that idea the historical responsibility they bear, and the courage to march forward in its cause.
------《Index on Censorship：[/font][font]EditorHuang Liangtian’s investigations cost him his job – the price for refusing to be ‘a journalist with Chinese