Potentially as the result of developing a very niche skill set (asset management in the Chinese mainland), and a pseudo-familiarity with China in general, many media articles come off as either incorrect or under researched. Bank of China to Issue New Shares (Wall Street Journal) originally reported that Bank of China was issuing lots of bonds to increase its capital, which had been depleted by lots of lending. This was true, though the original article missed that it was a simultaneous bond and stock issue, and that the bonds were convertible. The article was later edited, though I cannot imagine a similar omission being made with regards to, say, Morgan Stanley. This distinction between bond/convertible bond is significant insofar as mainland fixed-income markets are not very well developed by global standards, and a move by such a large player is important for anyone who cares about the depth of China’s financial markets (which relates to global imbalances caused by high savings rates). The alternative explanations in these cases: I simply misread the Chinese, or the world has suddenly turned into an interactive Kafka novel.

Even the NYT’s reporting on China often seems anecdotal at best, though certainly the quality of the work the publication delivers, given time and resource constraints, is impressive. However, every month or so there’s an article about Americans working in China, the latest of which concluded that ‘in some workplaces there are conflicts. If they happen while Americans are working in China, they must be due to cultural conflicts because China is strange and different.’ The article came off as under-researched, and played up broader narratives for the sake of mass appeal, such as when the author notes that “Chinese workers have a deeper understanding of the influences, like Confucianism and Communism, that play a part in their country’s culture and economy.” Sure these two systems existed at different points throughout Chinese history but they aren’t particularly relevant modes of discourse at present. It comes off as crass as writing “France’s Catholic history, a religious system that stresses a particular combination of guilt inducing mechanisms and flagellant self-sacrifice, has made the nation particularly amiable to the demands of the modern welfare state, unlike its Protestant neighbors.”

As for myself, I tend to have many more genuine cultural conflicts with people from the east coast of the US – they are tall and mean – whereas urban Chinese are polite and fun to talk to.