>
the national government is trying to find a scapegoat to blameIt's definitely a possibility that cannot be ruled out.
> they also control the news in China.
Now, this point-of-view is too simplistic, First, it's certainly the truth that every single news outlet is ultimately owned and controlled by the national government, but sometimes, this model is insufficient to describe many observed complex behaviors in national politics - saying that they are all a monolithic institution is somewhat misleading. Why? Because the very same reason I stated previously,
> In an authoritarian government, the best interests of the ruler at a higher level is not always served by the ruler at the lower level.
It's usually difficult to see it in political operations, since the national politics is not transparent. On the other hand, it's relatively easy to identify this phenomenon in the media, you may even see it in a propaganda campaign with direct support from Beijing.
Before I try to explain anything, it must be understood that, in all forms of governments (perhaps with the exception of the most totalitarian governments), different interest groups or political fractions always exist. In a liberal government, the struggle over political powers, the debate on different policies, etc., are often carried out in public, via means defined by the Constitution, and governed by civil institutions - federal power vs state power, a new election, a judicial review, an impeachment, the existence of multiple political parties, or the existence of different media outlets, are all examples.
In an authoritarian government, the situation is actually not too different, except that the power struggle is not carried out by defined means in the Constitution or governed by civil institutions, instead, they are governed entirely by informal interest groups, political conspiracies and sometimes "gangs" behind the scene. Superficially, it may appear that everyone works for the government is loyal to the government, but at a closer look, it isn't the case at all. Power in a authoritarian government can be, de facto, separated, in a chaotic and pathological way.
If one studies the media outlets in China, a lot of anomalies can be identified.
1. It's different for Beijing to micro-manage every single media outlet. Some media outlets are more independent than others.
2. The national politics is too opaque, sometimes even the state media outlets have difficulties understanding the national government's real motivation, not even mention media outlets at second-tier and lower levels. As a result, everyone is forced to play an educated guess on Beijing's intention and act accordingly. Observable, sometimes significant, inconsistencies exist in the news coverage of the same topic by different media outlets.
3. Since the political system is authoritarian, even a powerful state media outlet can operate under the fear of being punished if it's not what Beijing wants, in this case, many media outlets will choose a conservative style of reporting - repeat thoughtless propaganda, withholding information, etc., ironically, sometimes it can backfire and effectively work against the interests of Beijing.
4. Media outlets are biased in their own ways. Although every media outlet is state media outlet, but they can serve the special interests of different people in power. The people who are operating these media outlets can influence the style of reporting as well, it's easy to recognize "liberal" media outlets and "nationalistic" media outlets.
5. Although state-owned, some media outlets are commercial and operate for profit. Sensationalized news is launched in exchange of more views and ads revenues. State media outlets are not immune from the impact either, bad articles can be published even at the expense of the media's reputation.
6. People themselves who are working in the media outlets, can become dissatisfied regarding to the actions of the government and secretly sabotage the propaganda in subtle ways. One example is, when the Xinhua News Agency, the mouthpiece directly represents the national government, miswrote "Obama" as "Omaba", the mistake in the original article was left unchanged and forwarded by a huge number of local media outlets. One hypothesis was that some people in media outlet identified the mistake, but left it uncorrected intentionally to ridicule the government power over media outlets.
All of these above occur from time to time, and remember, they are only a few selected examples of anomalies on the management and reporting of the media. Now imagine the situation of national politics in China behind the scene, or the internal politics within the CPC. Often, it's not something that the Western press like the New York Times is willing to report - not all journalists are familiar with the situation, and the internal politics inside the authoritarian government of China is simply too complex to even make sense of.
What is the moral of this story? Remember, nobody knows anything about China, including the Chinese government.
* https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/21/nobody-knows-anything-a...