Sizing up China and India

What is all the fuss about China and India? The quick answer is that they are a big deal, literally and figuratively.

China and India are home to 2.8 billion people or 36.0% of the world population (Worldometer, n.d.). China and India are also the fourth and seventh largest in the world in terms of area as they have a combined landmass of 12.9 million square kilometers (O’Neill, 2021).

While global exports and imports grew by an average of 2.7% from 2010 to 2019, China’s exports and imports grew by 4.8% and 4.5%, respectively; and India’s, 4.4% and 4.7%, respectively (World Trade Organization, n.d.). In 2019, China was the top global exporter and the second global importer while India ranked 18th in exports and 10th in imports. Not surprisingly, China and India accounted for 14.9% of world exports and 13.3% of world imports in 2019 (World Trade Organization, n.d.).

Some scholars say that there is now a shift in global power toward Asia due to “China’s and India’s meteoric rise to the global arena and the sheer magnitude of their populations” (James, 2019, para. 1). China and India may even rule the world in the future, based on projections of Citigroup and HSBC (Pritchard, 2011).

The rise of the two countries is a major factor in coining the portmanteau Chindia (see Ramesh, 2005). The word, however, is not new. There already exists a Chindia Tower in Romania built in the 15th century. The Romanian word “chindia” refers to large feasts and festivals. Archaically, it also means sunset (Georgievska, 2016). Initially meant to boost cooperation between China and India, Chindia “now connotes a wide range of things to many different actors” (Isar, 2010, p. 277) ranging from potential threat to dream team (see Ivanovitch, 2014).

About Chindia

Consistent with Isar’s (2010) cultural analysis of the term, this issue is titled “Chindia” to stress the two countries’ significance. While it is important to assess their political and economic clout, their media systems also need to be analyzed. Interestingly, the word “Chindia” is not found in the articles, commentaries, and reviews included in this issue.

This issue has three refereed articles mostly on China. Nairu Xu (Digital media and investigative journalism in China) studies the different social actors' interpretation of the truth and explains how journalistic investigation sheds light on the different versions of the narrated truth. Using as a case study the recurring smog crisis that started in 2013, Jian Xu and Wanning Sun (Propaganda innovation and resilient governance: the case of China’s smog crisis) analyze how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) uses crisis communication, focusing on censorship tactics, persuasion techniques, and propaganda. Marjorie Naguimbing-Manlulu (Climate change narratives in Philippine print news media) studies the reasons behind the Filipino journalists' failure to explain the nature of climate change scientifically. While the third refereed article focuses on the Philippines, it still mentions in passing that China and Europe are pushing for a greener Earth.

The three commentaries, three book reviews, and one film review focus mainly on India. Tawseef Majeed (Strategic journalism amid media repression in Kashmir) discusses how strategic journalism is done to present an impartial, contextualized picture of India-held Kashmir valley by making sense of tactical reportage that aims to protect lives and livelihood. V. Ratnamala and Kolly Kent Malsawmzuala (Media and indigeneity in Mizoram: influence of civil society in framing and priming news) explain why the media in Mizoram is de-professionalized where news has become both an agenda and a discourse, with opinion as a subterfuge. Rubal Kanozia and Garima Ganghariya (Cultural proximity and hybridity: popularity of Korean pop culture in India) explain why K-dramas and K-movies are widely perceived to be clean entertainment in India, at least when compared to Bollywood and Hollywood. In three separate book reviews, Oinam Bedajit Meitei (Challenging perspectives: Review of De-westernizing visual communication and cultures edited by Herdin, Faust and Chen); Rubal Kanozia and Ritu Arya (Critical media literacy and the youth: Review of Challenging discriminatory practices of religious socialization among adolescents by Kiran Vinod Bhatia and Manisha Pathak-Shelat); and Sushmita Pandit (Mapping the digital playground: Review of Gaming culture(s) in India by Aditya Deshbandhu) present their insights on three books regarding media-related de-westernization in general and cultural aspects of India in particular. Taranjeet Kaur Chawla (Acid attack as violence against women: Review of the film Chhapaak [Splash]) analyzes an Indian film whose main character is an acid attack victim, making the depiction a burning issue literally and figuratively.

Beyond Chindia

Given that there are other countries and territories in Asia, it is expected for Media Asia to analyze media-related issues beyond China and India. This is the case even if more than 25% of manuscript submissions in 2020 have sole or lead authors affiliated with universities from China or India. For the first half of 2021, manuscript submissions from the two countries accounted for almost 40 percent.

While the world watches developments in China and India, there are also other issues and concerns in other Asian countries and territories – wars of aggression, political persecution, economic deprivation, cultural appropriation, environmental degradation, and a plethora of social problems. Given that the mass media are part of the prevailing social systems, media-related problems like censorship and disinformation emerge from what is usually perceived as repressive realpolitik. As expected, media repression results in collective assertion (see Arao et al., 2020).

This explains why our journal’s themes starting 2020 may be considered socially relevant – Repression/Assertion (March–June 2020), Infodemics (September–December 2020), Pandemic Semantics (March 2021), and Rundown on Lockdowns and Crackdowns (June 2021). Our current issue on Chindia (September 2021) is consistent with this tradition. Our future issues will strive to be similarly timely.

Amid the difficulties brought about by the global pandemic, authors who still manage to conduct research deserve immediate feedback. Our journal maintains a quick turnaround time without compromising peer review quality. As of this writing, 97.92% of manuscripts submitted in 2020 already have final editorial decisions (i.e. accepted, rejected, or withdrawn). As regards manuscripts submitted from January to June 2021, only 24.51% of them are pending with editors, reviewers, and authors.

Based on our latest data on refereed articles, submission to online publication takes an average of 174.71 days. For non-refereed editorials, commentaries, and reviews, the average is 39.35 days. On a related note, Media Asia’s latest acceptance rates are 10.00% for refereed articles and 87.80% for non-refereed ones.

Clearly, authors do not have to wait that long to know the status of their manuscripts. The relatively fast turnaround time could be a major reason for the 300.00% increase in manuscript submissions for the first half of 2021 compared to the same period last year.

Much as this issue seeks to size up two of the biggest countries in Asia, may we also be reminded that Asia accounts for about 30% of the world’s land area “with roughly 60% of the total population” (Boudreau et al., 2012, para. 1). Size does matter and Asian voices deserve to be heard. Media Asia remains committed to provide a veritable platform for researchers around the world.