China and the US both say the other is winning the propaganda war. Is either right? ​​​​
What do China and the US share, besides butchering each other's cultures? Trying to convince everyone that they're better than the other. Certainly, on the issue of human rights, they sharply differ -- and they have launched a global propaganda war over this discrepancy.
These discrepancies over human rights are rooted in history. Part of the fundamental nature of Western notions of individualistic, universalistic, and liberal human rights, drawing on influences from Plato to the Enlightenment and Age of Revolutions, is that they must be globally adopted. On the other hand, The People’s Republic of China (PRC), drawing on a mix of its Confucian and communist roots, emphasizes less globally reaching, less individualistic, and more socio-economic-focused rights.
Although China doesn’t precisely encourage their perspective on human rights, China has proved exceptionally loud in criticizing Western -- especially US-- human rights and steadfast in neutralizing any system that can scrutinize China's human rights’ violations. Its goal is not to enforce socio-economics-focused rights for everyone, but to ensure that others can not hold them accountable for their lack of liberal human rights.
To counter Western ideologies on universalistic human rights and the perceived lack of these rights among the Chinese people, China’s global propaganda suggests that the West’s preaching on global human rights falls flat when it doesn’t follow its own rules at home. Especially when targeted at Americans, this propaganda both fosters doubt in the American system and tries to get Americans to sympathize with the PRC. To try to improve its global image, China seems to be focused on quantity over quality, as they use upwards of 10 billion USD in soft power campaigns to convince others of the hollowness of U.S. promises, highlight China’s greatness, and distract Westerners from the liberal human rights abuses that China tries to de-emphasize.
China’s massive funding powers state-backed news outlets such as the Global Times, which specifically targets English-speaking audiences. Such online platforms initially appear to provide standard journalism. However, upon closer inspection, the Global Times delivers targeted propaganda aimed at critiquing the US and suggesting a positive Chinese narrative.
Consider one representative article, “The age-old tactics used by the US to smear China”. The article claims that the American Government has lied to its people about China, particularly concerning the well-documented Uygur camps in the Xinjiang region of China or the state of democracy in the Chinese parliament. Through manipulative gaslighting, a form of manipulation and psychological control where victims are deliberately and systematically fed false information, the article claimed that “Anyone in America reading this would, and should, be horrified by such crimes, except that not one word of it has been proven to be true.”
Such articles are clearly aimed towards the English-speaking world. For example, the political cartoons included are similar to US political comics, and all of it is in English. Yet these superficially Western-style cartoons don’t hold much meaning and are literal. Take this typical example:
The image leaves no doubt or room for misinterpretation, even resembling Uncle Sam, an iconic American character. Their goal is simple: getting Americans to believe that these are articles written by Americans, or at least from Western countries, in order to further convince them that China isn’t all that bad.
America engages in a different sort of propaganda. It is more discrete, less likely to gaslight, and comes not only from the American government, but also from private actors, especially private media. Furthermore, the U.S. government has only recently seemed to notice the threat of Chinese propaganda and deployed countermeasures.In 2024, the House of Representatives backed a bill that spends 1.6 billion USD within five years to promote anti-China propaganda. Compared to the 10 billion USD that the Chinese government spends annually on propaganda, the amount of money this bill requires seems miniscule. Yet, it is important to recognize that, due to the Chinese government’s control of Chinese media, American propaganda largely falls on deaf ears in China. This gives China the unique advantage of being able to affect Americans with their propaganda, but not allowing America to do the same to its people.
Underlying questions remain: has this propaganda been effective? Who is winning this propaganda war? Is anyone’s opinion of either country really being changed? On the one hand, China’s messaging to Western and/or developed countries seems to be failing, as negative views of China reach historic heights. A recent survey of 14 developed countries shows that public views of China went from generally positive in the early 2000s to distinctly negative by the late 2010s.
These dips in ratings seem to correlate with Chinese attempts at increasing propaganda aimed at Westerners. Although it isn’t certain if this is causation, or simply a coincidence, it is undeniable that the Western news outlet look-alikes didn’t do much to help; these poor ratings are despite huge propaganda investments and success in shifting the media narrative during Covid.
This is not to say that China has had no success in sustaining a positive global image of itself after the pandemic. Although many developed countries have increasingly negative views of China, many countries in Africa are starting to see China in a more positive light.One survey from Afrobarometer, a non-profit and nonpartisan survey research network that surveys Africans, determined that 65% of people across 16 African countries believe that China’s influence is positive. But this isn’t only because of the copious amounts of propaganda, China has invested significant funds and political capital in Africa. Over the last 20 years, it has become “sub-Saharan Africa’s biggest bilateral trading partner”.
Though this may seem like America has “lost” the influence battle in Africa, the CEO of Afrobarometer Dr. Joseph Asunka explains that people who feel positively about the influence of China are also more likely to also view U.S. influence as positive. “Ratings of each country may have less to do with the specific actions or investments of each … but instead reflect an overall sense of whether external powers are generally contributing to the well-being of the respondent’s country,” he says. This brings in a new perspective, that both the U.S. and China can improve their global image. Neither of them has to definitively win or lose.
China is not alone in its ongoing struggle to improve its global image and counter Western notions of human rights through propaganda. As demonstrated by Anne Applebaum, China collaborates with other increasingly authoritarian countries, like Russia, to “poison” the ideas of liberal human rights globally. The non-authoritarian world is just starting to counter these campaigns. But questions remain. Is the authoritarians' world attempt to propagate its values and image a zero-sum game? Or can, paradoxically, both the authoritarian and non-authoritarian world’s image improve, as possibly demonstrated in Africa?
If the “Free World” wants to effectively fight back in the “propaganda war”, without the massive funding China enjoys, it needs to not just fight back with more disjointed propaganda, but a collective strategy where policy makers understand the role “anti-Americanism” in Chinese politics, consider what the Chinese think of Americans, avoid the stereotypes, and actively take measures to counter the spread of the CCP’s messages.