Remote Control: How the Media Sustain Authoritarian Rule in China

TLDR

The article extends recent work on authoritarian resilience by highlighting how media and courts, beyond elections, are used to bolster legitimacy. This study examines the role of the media in sustaining regime stability in an authoritarian context. Statistical analysis of a 2005 survey in four Chinese cities shows that exposure to labor‑law reporting promotes a pro‑worker image of the law, encouraging citizen participation in the legal system. Chinese media enhance regime legitimacy by propagandizing legal experiences, offering sophisticated, censorship‑aligned messages that satisfy readers, and, because of limited alternative information and citizens’ unfamiliarity with the reformed legal system, encourage participation in the legal system.

Abstract

This study examines the role of the media in sustaining regime stability in an authoritarian context. The article engages the recent work on authoritarian resilience in comparative politics but goes beyond the standard focus on elections to other important institutions, such as the media and courts, that are used by authoritarian leaders to bolster legitimacy. The authors find that the Chinese media contribute to regime legitimacy and effective rule by propagandizing citizens’ experiences in the legal system. However, unlike the “mouthpieces” of earlier communist regimes, the marketized Chinese media provide more convincing and sophisticated messages that continue to accord with state censorship demands while satisfying readers’ interest in real-life stories and problems. The “positive propaganda” and the relative uniformity of information sources because of state censorship lead aggrieved citizens to the law as a realm for dispute resolution and rights protection. Statistical analysis of a randomly sampled survey conducted in four Chinese cities in 2005 demonstrates that exposure to media reporting about labor-law-related issues successfully promotes the image of a proworker bias in the law among citizens, thus encouraging them to participate in the legal system. The state is able to achieve its political goal because of the lack of conflicting sources of information and the lack of previous experience with the reformed legal system among citizens.