Extravagant ceremonies are not in public interest
By Chang Weimin (China Daily)
Updated: 2005-10-31 05:21

A grand ceremony was held earlier this month in a central province to mark the return of seven relics from overseas 80 years after they were stolen.

Earlier this year, in a county in the same province, another grand ceremony was held, this time to hand out 11,000 yuan (US$1,360) to 100 couples to reward them for stopping their efforts to have a boy after giving birth to two girls and to support 10 schoolgirls from poor families.

After the awards were made a spectacular parade with a procession of 20 floats made of decorated vehicles drove by.

The cost of these spectacular scenes clearly exceeded the value of the awards many times over.

Actually, not only in this province but nationwide, endless mass rallies, cultural ceremonies, political campaigns, celebration galas and parades, conferences and other showy events are being held, more often and in much more spectacular ways than previously, leading many to wonder whether the country has entered an unprecedented era of spectacle culture, as rising powers have in the past.

Unlike commercial advertising campaigns that businesses launch to promote their products, services or corporate image, most of these grand gestures are paid for by public revenues, provincial or municipal.

Designed mainly to inspire or educate everyday people, such spectacular ceremonies, often full of cliches, have become the standard response to any event or anniversary for the masses.

The importance of building national identity, either connoted or denoted, is added as a powerful justification for organizing a ceremony.

Reports suggest grand ceremonies have become so frequent that it is difficult for organizers to avoid a celebratory event taking place at the same time as a catastrophe, at home or abroad.

Justifications for extravagant spending often boil down to the needs propaganda should serve.

The question is: Is it only increasingly expensive, large ceremonies that can promote heroic deeds, splendid achievements, prosperity and the rise of national strength?

Propaganda authorities seem to have been sticking with the outdated idea that only by holding such ceremonies or rallies can the masses' morale be kept high and what should be propagated made to seem impressive.

Is the country rich enough to afford these practices? Do hundreds of millions of taxpayers hand over their earnings for such spectacular, expensive scenes?

It is true the country is achieving high GDP growth. But tens of millions of citizens still live below the poverty line and the country's per capita wealth is still low, behind scores of other nations.

Decision makers in the central county that held the awards ceremony may be excused for using hyped incentives in an effort to reduce gender discrimination and encourage people to care more for girls.

Discrimination against girls remains widespread, making the gender ratio alarmingly unbalanced.

Why not apply cost-efficient mass communication instead, for even better results?

To disseminate the fact that some people have been rewarded for their contributions to the implementation of the population policy should be a sufficient incentive.

It would have been better if the money spent on the ceremony and parade was given to more people.

The man on the street, the target for this kind of propaganda, knows the value of money, living in a developing country.

Such boring propaganda campaigns, not much different to those of the 1960s or 1990s, make it difficult for one to work out what is behind the rhetoric or discover an alternative viewpoint. One can only follow the crowd, but with everyone jumping on the bandwagon, the effects of campaigns do not last very long.

Without evidence or simple but convincing logic, it is difficult for campaign organizers to achieve lasting attitude-changing effects in the target audience. If improperly handled, some may even turn out to produce resistance, or at least unexpected apathy.

Persuasion not with grandeur but with facts, convincing logic and solid evidence would be better. Extravagant use of public money for unnecessary campaigns contradicts the new State policy of building a frugal society.

In financial terms, why not learn from efficient businesses? How do they weigh up costs and benefits, use their public relations budgets, advertise products and services, or boost their corporate image? These approaches must be adopted for use in publicly financed campaigns that promote an ideology, a policy, a spirit, an incentive or just a message from the authorities.

(China Daily 10/31/2005 page4)