About Me 0009: Making Easy Money

Thought the ZH famiglia would enjoy this comment from my old friend Sol Sanders, who has been watching China long enough to actually remember Mao. I read Chinese history as an undergrad and worked as a banker in the semi cap equipment market, which is now dominated by Asian nations. But the export market that China and its neighbors depend upon has never come back. Is China the next Egypt? A version of this column is scheduled for publication in The Washington Times, Monday, Feb. 14, 2011. -- Chris

Follow the Money No. 53: Rolling the dice in China

By Sol Sanders <solsanders@cox.net>

When scientists get further along with epigenetics, they may discover the Chinese have two unique DNA: a gambling gene, and another for hospitality. The first, of course, explains why Macau is odds-on favorite for replacing Vegas as No. 1 world gambling champion. The second suggests why few escape the lure of a Chinese campaign to win visitors’ hearts and minds.

Looking at a new determined shift in Beijing’s economic strategy, one has to chalk it up to that gambling gene. Intoxicated with turning into “the world’s factory”, Beijing plans to sail right past their successful collaborative development with foreign multinationals. Its new strategy literally amends Maximal Leader Deng Hsiao-ping’s dying instructions two decades ago to hide their capacities until they had achieved his four modernizations.

One can only chalk up Western businessmen naiveté to that second suspected Chinese gene, the ability to vamp any visitor. Of course, Frederick Engels, Karl Marx’s more literary companion, explained it all more than a century ago. He foresaw that on the way to the gallows, the capitalists’ greed would drive them to compete with one another to sell the rope to their executioners.

From mid-summer last year Chinese authorities – as a muddled but highly informative U.S. Chamber of Commerce report concludes – shifted from defense to offense. Years of studying their acknowledged total dependence on foreign technology has culminated in proposing 16 new megaprojects. With them they aim:

1] To provide new opportunities for stealing foreign technology. Now, before any technology can be introduced into China, it must be intensely “studied” -- in fact, stolen even before it enters the market. Another is increased allocation of “patents” to Chinese firms with virtually no verification, making it virtually impossible to pursue legal indemnification for losses.

2] To restore the primacy of the SOEs, the state-owned enterprises, those giant behemoths notorious for their inefficiency and corruption but powerful political entities. Massive funds [$25 billion] -- out of the huge 2008 stimulus package, originally aimed at warding off contagion from the world financial crisis – have been allocated to the SOEs to produce “indigenous innovation”

3] To continue to ensnare foreign companies, Beijing will suggest in return for continued tech transfers, they will get a share of the growing Chinese markets. They will also be offered participation in new technologies in China using government funds. But increasingly “import substitution”, that protectionist policy which crippled much of the third world before “globalization” became fashionable, is government policy.

Beijing’s new turn is loaded with risk. The history of Chinese innovation during the current boom is miserable. Eighty percent of China’s major firms do not have R&D at all. One reason may be it has been so easy to rent or steal needed foreign technologies. But there may be even more important – if difficult to evaluate – cultural factors.

Although China was historically leader in basic scientific development, simply said, the Europeans picked up on those breakthroughs to initiate the industrial revolution leaving China behind. Why? The answer to this question is perennial among scholars. One answer lies in China’s intense bureaucratization, in part arising from the need for huge collective enterprises – largely for water control. Another, of course, is Chinese learning has always put the emphasis on rote memorization and an inordinate, even religious, respect and adherence to what has gone before. It may be no accident, as the Communists used to say, now bereft of its Marxist-Leninist-Maoist dogma Beijing is turning back to Confucianism. [A statue of Confucius was recently installed in Tien An Mien square alongside a huge portrait of his greatest adversary, Mao Tse-tung.] With its emphasis on ritual, Confucianism represents the antithesis to the restless European [Greek] mind. An even greater threat to the new effort to produce originality may be the all pervasive corruption permeating Chinese life today which means vast sums promised R&D will go astray.

China is also taking other risks. Despite an intense campaign, Beijing has not been able to lure home more than a few prominent scholars among more than 62,000 Chinese in the U.S., many in technological research. With ties in both cultures, they have been critical to transferring technology. The new Beijing strategy may jeopardize that relationship as American business, reluctantly, and the U.S. government becomes increasingly cautious about China deals.

True, economic development in East Asia was always full of warfare over intellectual property. Japan, Taiwan and South Korea have been major culprits. But the Chinese pour salt in the wound by offering products overseas based on stolen technology. Thus California’s former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was talking to the Chinese about proposed federally subsidized high-speed rail based on their theft from three foreign companies that had cooperated in creating them in China. At the moment, Washington is grappling with the proposed purchase by Huawei, a Chinese entity with military connections, of an American IT company with the Pentagon as a client.

Beijing’s gamble if successful would insure continued giant leaps forward but like Mao’s infamous economic plays, this one could prove catastrophic.

I started writing TV recaps and reviews a few years ago when a friend of a friend at a major newspaper told me they were expanding their TV coverage and needed people do cover a few shows, so I picked up two programs I already watched a lot, 'The Office' and 'ER.' It sounded easy enough, writing my thoughts on shows I already had opinions on anyway, although it took several tries to get the tone right–sometimes it still does. Some publications want a lot of recap, and some prefer that you assume that the readers saw the show and just touch on the major points. Some editors encourage plenty of sassmouth and snark, whereas others won’t tolerate even a hint at a swear word.

Typically, I'm assigned to review either an episode or a series of a show. I watch the show, and as quickly as possible, but as thoughtfully and with as much "voice" as possible, record my impressions of the quality of the episode along with the recap.

It’s a fun job, one that I’m lucky to have, period, let alone make a few bucks off, but like any writing gig, it comes with its own writey lessons.

• Long scripted dramas and reality TV shows are the easiest to cover. Half-hour comedies are some of the hardest. It can be difficult to stretch a recap of a half-hour show into several good paragraphs and you can only say “…and it was funny when…” so many times. Also really hard to turn into something: results shows that aren’t finales.They’re usually all filler except for the results–the best reality TV competition shows are figuring out how to make the results shows worth watching because otherwise people will just skip and read about what happened online. With a drama, though, you can usually find something to say about the season (or series) as a whole even if the episode didn’t give you a ton to work with.

• Screeners make life so much easier. I think I automatically relax and like a show more if I know I have a day or two to think about it after I watch it than if I only have an hour or two to write it up. Knocking out a writeup on a two-hour episode of 'American Idol' an hour after seeing it and making it comprehensive, entertaining, and spelling-error free is sometimes a challenge.

• Livechatting reality TV show finales is way more fun than writing about them. As great a job it is to write about television, actually talking to like-minded people in real time and trying to one-up each other with jokes and observations is more fun. They’re like TV-watching parties but without that pesky real live interaction that goes along with that whole having-to-put-on-a-bra thing.

• If you truly love a show, don't review it. I get asked occasionally to review 'RuPaul's Drag Race' but I won't, at least not full-time, because I like saving that show as pure entertainment, just me and the TV and no notes or observations. Because even though writing about TV isn’t especially grueling work, it’s still work, and if you really love letting a show take you away for a little while, it’s best just to keep it as entertainment without turning it into an assignment, to remember what it’s like to just watch something without taking notes. I do like subbing for people who cover shows I watch just for fun, though. There’s less pressure to come up with something new to say, and you get to come at it from a fan’s perspective, not a critic’s. Plus, if for some reason you rub the readers the wrong way, it was just a one-time thing and they won't be back next week to tell you what an ass you are.

• Commenters will eat your soul if you let them. I have other critic friends who can avoid comments completely or not let them get to them. I am not one of these people. Why do I read comments on my pieces? Because I’m a masochist, that’s why. I guess I should stop being surprised when people use the internet's anonymity to be jerks. Being told that your mother should have had aborted you when she had the chance because of your opinion on 'Lost' (this didn’t happen to me, it happened to a colleague) never goes down easy. I learn to laugh a day or two later but I’m still naively shaken sometimes by how rude people can be (My opinion on one episode of 'SNL' made one person decide that I am "literally retarded"). That said, I also feel crappy if a commenter politely points out that I made a mistake or missed something.

• Whenever people find out you're a TV critic and ask you what’s good, without fail, you draw a blank and then you feel like an idiot. I feel like I can’t keep saying 'The Wire' for forever, I’m afraid to admit to how loyal a 'Bridezillas' viewer I am. Alternately, they haven't heard of any of the shows you do recommend. Or, they watched a few episodes of your favorite show and hated it and then you say “Oh, well,” and secretly judge them.

• Network swag is fun to receive, and then you throw it away. It’s entertaining to receive a big silly package from a network in the mail, until I realize that I have to dispose of all the packaging that it came in and what do I need with some of this swag, anyway? Except the time that a network sent me some pancake mix and syrup for Christmas. That was great.

• Going out and having a few drinks before you go home to write sounds like a much better and more enjoyable idea than it is. For something that sounds so fun and easy, you have to take it pretty seriously in order to do a decent job at it, especially since there are probably 200 people who would gladly take over covering for you. This goes double if you have a day job and can’t afford to sleep in because you started watching the two-hour 'Idol' “event” at 10 PM.

• Change is good. 'American Idol' is only two episodes in but the consensus amongst reviewers is that, so far, it’s not too terrible. In my experience, a reality TV show changing up its format, if even slightly, is a good thing, at least from a writing perspective. When 'So You Think You Can Dance' incorporated its All-Stars last season, it might not have been for the best of the show, but at least I could evaluate the changes and ask the readers what they thought. When a show rests too long in format you can get too comfortable (Eventually I had a hard time finding much to say about 'Project Runway' for the first 75% of each episode, since it started to feel like everything prior to the runway was pretty irrelevant, unless Tim Gunn did something noteworthy).

• Tim Gunn, over the phone, is as nice as you’d hope he’d be. Better, even. Classy, charming, intelligent, friendly: I was so excited after I interviewed him that I did a horrible job spell-checking the interview and let it get posted when it really shouldn’t have. I just wanted to brag to the world that I talked to him. Also very nice, despite probably being richer than anyone else I know: Nigel Lythgoe.

Claire Zulkey lives in Chicago. You can learn so much more about her here.

Photo by Powi, from Flickr.

bench craft company credit card

About Me 0009

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Making Easy Money

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

Heptastic science <b>news</b>

Experiments In Realtime <b>News</b>: The Eqentia Streams

Iowa GOP, Fox <b>News</b> set presidential debate for week before Iowa <b>...</b>

No comments:

Post a Comment