Tibet floods: China accused of censoring videos, restricting foreign media

Beijing: The Chinese government used a combination of restricted media access, online censorship and a focus on positive coverage to shape the narrative surrounding the devastating floods in Tibet, according to a report by The Diplomat.

The report said the approach follows a broader pattern in China's crisis reporting, where state-controlled media are encouraged to highlight positive developments while criticism of the government's response is restricted online.

“As a general practice, China’s state media outlets are instructed to emphasise ‘positive reporting’ during times of crisis, while censors remove criticisms of government responses or culpability online,” the report in The Diplomat said.

A growing dispute over coverage of the floods in Nepal and Tibet has emerged on social media, particularly following a report by Laura Bicker, the BBC's China correspondent, concerning the alleged removal of videos showing the scale of the devastation.

According to The Diplomat, Bicker reported that footage of the landslide and flood surge at Gyirong Port, along the border, was removed from the internet, partly because of concerns in Beijing over instability in Tibet.

“Bicker said videos of the landslide and flood surge sweeping through Gyirong Port on the border were scrubbed from the internet, in part, because Beijing fears instability in the politically sensitive region of Tibet,” the report said.

It cited the removal of videos showing a huge wave of mud and water engulfing Gyirong Port as the clearest example of the alleged censorship.

“As Bicker noted in her report, the most concrete example is the deletion of videos showing the massive wave of mud and water swallowing Gyirong Port. The footage was initially circulated on the platforms Weixin and RedNote, but users later could not access it,” added The Diplomat.

Foreign journalists face restricted access

The report also pointed to restrictions on independent and foreign journalists seeking to report from Tibet as another factor limiting outside scrutiny of the disaster.

It cited Allyson Horn of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, who said she had made several requests to travel to Tibet but was denied access. Other foreign journalists have reportedly faced similar restrictions.

“Allyson Horn of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation said she had made repeated requests to travel to Tibet, but was denied. Other foreign journalists have similarly been blocked. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for foreign media to independently verify the Chinese government’s account of what happened there,” the report emphasised.

With limited independent reporting and some disaster footage reportedly removed from social media, The Diplomat said Chinese state media have been able to play a dominant role in shaping public understanding of the floods.

“This reflects a longstanding tendency in Chinese media to avoid material that could cause social instability or public panic,” the report stated.

State media highlights rescue and leadership

According to the report, Chinese state-controlled media coverage has focused heavily on rescue efforts by the People's Liberation Army (PLA), Premier Li Qiang's visit to the affected area and President Xi Jinping's leadership during the crisis.

Coverage has also highlighted efforts to restore roads and deliver disaster-relief supplies to residents affected by the floods.

However, the report said comparatively less attention has been given to the impact of the disaster on local villagers, their homes and communities.

“But as the Guardian has noted, there has been much less reporting about how the disaster has affected local villagers, their homes, and communities. On the Nepali side of the border, meanwhile, foreign journalists have been able to interview survivors without restrictions. Critics also say the Chinese government is hiding the true number of casualties. The problem with these contested claims is that no outsiders – whether they be critics or not – have been able to verify the death toll due to the restricted access to the disaster site,” the Diplomat report noted.

The contrasting access available to journalists on the Nepal side has further intensified debate over the transparency of reporting from Tibet, with questions remaining about the extent of the disaster and the actual casualty figures.