The Award Ceremony for the 2010 Nobel Prize notoriously aroused controversies

across Asia. A dissident intellectual, Liu Xiaobo, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

for his long non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in Asia (nobelprize.org,

2010). However, the Chinese Communist Party created a confrontation over the giving

of the Nobel Prize to Liu Xiaobo, which consequently caused his absence at the

ceremony. He sentenced to 11 years in a prison due to the fact that he was prosecuted

for inciting subversion of state power. From my perspective, the Nobel Committee, for

this reason, used the ceremony as a mediated discourse to express their views on

decisions from the Chinese government. They applied Western values to the ceremony

speech to generate a discussion about changes which should be made throughout the

Chinese political system. This paper is going to critically analyze the media discourse

which looks at the media coverage of Liu Xiaobo.

Dijk (2014) believes that media nowadays is very Western dominant. Western beliefs

and values have spread to other nations through the media. However, some countries

like China, which is ranked 171 out of 178 countries in the 2010 World Press Freedom

Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF, 2010), oppose this. On account of the

apparatus of Chinese governments power play, their desire to control and dominate

over people, they dont want to allow Western views and ideologies to leak into their

country. The Norwegian Nobel Committee called attention to what was, in their

perspectives, wrong with the way the Chinese government controls their nation. They

used the live broadcast for the ceremony to suggest ways for development through

actualizing these Western predominant behaviors. The predominance of Western media

in a worldwide sense enables these perceptions to be broadly encouraged, yet

restrictions, censorship and the idea of control avert these views with an aim to stopping

radical endeavors to subvert their current power.

From my standpoint, there is a cultural difference between Asian countries and Western

countries. The Asian values give prominence to order, solidarity and society or national

interests. It is a remarkable inverse of what matters to Western values. It is evident that

the Chinese government is not centered on the interests of the mass, yet rather look at

the how they can get through economic development and pay little attention to the

impacts on the people. In my opinion, social order thus is kept up through controls and

censorship. It is by all accounts fundamentally the same as the authoritarian press

model.

The Nobel Prize Ceremony used the empty chair as a symbolically powerful image,

where Liu Xiaobo deserved to be seated, to be metaphoric to the lack of freedom of

speech and the control the government has on the public. They oppose against the

authoritarian ideology. The fact is that China at that time refused to broadcast the

ceremony to support the idea of their authoritarianism. The government doesnt want to

let people get obsessed with the ideas of democracy due to their fear of being

overthrown. For this reason, the control over the media in China get stricter as a way

they defend themselves. Their main objective is to prevent an uprising and maintain a

strategic distance from social chaos.

Moreover, Thorbjrn Jaglan, the Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, talked

about various different examples of when the laureate could not attend because of

some conflict in their country. Thusly, it seems, to some degree, to make threats against

China as a subtle warning. By highlighting what is happening, it implies that the Chinese
government is confronting the partisans of global freedom. People should be granted

the human rights they seek. It also encourages people to defend for the freedom they

deserve to enjoy and stand up for their desire to accomplish democracy. The Nobel

Prize committee took steps with the delivered warning. What they mentioned doesn't

mean to cause offense but rather consider it to be a chance to spark the discussion.

They whereby used Liu Xiaobos situation to set an example for the injustice in the

society. It is a result of determined attempts to fight for peace, freedom and human

rights. In addition, the honor symbolizes to those whose actions are legitimate and

encourage more people to revolt for the rights they deserve.

In a nutshell, the ceremony was successful in their aims. However, there should be

more discussion to get the Chinese government take more democratic approach to their

judgment. Furthermore, media should be kept separate. In the era of integration and

development, China needs to adopt more Western views and perceptions in order for

the press freedom to be accomplished and take steps away from the authoritarian

ideologies. Thus, it helps to take closer steps to abolish wars and barriers between

nations.

WORD COUNT: 797

REFERENCE LIST:

Dijk, T. (2014). The mass Media Today: Discourses of Domination or Diversity?

Nobelprize.org. (2010). The Nobel Peace Prize 2010 - Presentation Speech. [online]

Available at: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2010/presentation-

speech.html [Accessed 23 Aug. 2017].

RSF. (2010). World Press Freedom Index 2010. [online] Available at:

https://rsf.org/en/world-press-freedom-index-2010 [Accessed 25 Aug. 2017].