[Prev][Next][Index]
Replying letter to CBS
- Resent-Message-Id: <9410281557.AA07054@bunny.rhic.bnl.gov.zoo>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 94 10:40:31 CDT
- Sender: fcbs-l@ifcss.org
- From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
- To: Multiple recipients of list <fcbs-l@ifcss.org>
- Subject: Replying letter to CBS
- Resent-To: www@ifcss.org
- Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 94 11:57:06 -0400
- Resent-From: D-P Deng <deng@bunny.rhic.bnl.gov>
Mr. Lin Huang
National Coordinator
CBS Incident Committee
3044 Albany Crescent 1G
Bronx, NY 10463
(718)-548-9114
Mr. Eric Ober
President, CBS News
524 West 57th St.
New York, NY 10019
Dear Mr. Ober:
Most of us in the Chinese community watched, with great
anticipation, the CBS clarification aired on October 21
regarding the Chinese spy segment on May 19, which branded
all Chinese people in the US as either spies or potential
spies. After a few days of discussion across the country, we
do feel that CBS has taken a sincere step in the right
direction, a step we hope can indeed lead to a long-term
constructive relationship between CBS News and the Chinese
community in this country.
While we acknowledge and appreciate this positive move by
the CBS management, we must, however, point out that the
clarification falls far short of undoing all the damages
that have already been done to us. This clarification lasted
only several seconds, compared to the four minutes and
fifteen seconds you used for the sensational story on May
19. While the story was heavily promoted before its airing,
the clarification came and went without any promotion.
Besides, we cannot help but note the difference between the
script in closed caption and what the reporter actually
read. While the captions read "we apologize," the
anchorwoman read "we regret it." This apparently deliberate
difference shows insincerity by some in your staff but also
sincerity at least by those who drafted the script.
As I write, there are still a lot hurt feelings and a lot of
hurt people out there. A danger lingers on that members of
our community will suffer in one way or another because of
the libelous story five months ago. We wish balanced and
professionally produced programs could be aired to undo the
harm. We, and the staff at the Independent Federation of
Chinese Students and Scholars, will do our best to cooperate
and help.
I hope that our good will shall be reciprocated and that no
similar incidents occur ever again. I am pleased to inform
you that the ad hoc CBS Incident Committee is now being
reorganized into a permanent body to help and monitor in
future Chinese-related news coverage and other civil rights
issues in the US. We are determined not to tolerate more
than our fair share of racial stereotyping and
discrimination.
May this unfortunate incident mark a turning point for the
better in the relationship between the Chinese community and
the CBS News. We appreciate much your very sincere letter to
Ms. Ginny Gong, which has shown your personal integrity and
principles. But there are much to be done to communicate
with some people in your organization and few others such as
Mr. Eftimiades, the person who lied to your people about his
expertise.
Yours Truly,
Lin Huang
National Coordinator
CBS-IC
CC:
Vice President Lane Venardos
Producer Tom Anderson
Anchor Connie Chung
Anchor Dan Rather
Foreign Editor Allen Alter
P.S. You may call the following number to check Mr.
Eftimiades and DIA's position,
Mr. Donal R. Lenker, Chief, Public Liaison Staff, DIA, at (703)-695-0071
And also U.S. Commerce Department to verify the following data:
US Commerce Department (1986 -1993, Including Civil Cases)
Hong Kong Cases PRC Cases All the Cases
(Including East Bloc) (Including via HK) Around World
1986 0 0 21
1987 1 1 24
1988 3 4 38
1989 11 2 46
1990 3 0 41
1991 2 1 44
1992 2 2 49
1993 5 4 37
Total 27 14 300
9.00% 4.67% 100.00%
Please note that, in Mr. Eftimiades's book and Mr. Lane
Venardos' letter to IFCSS, you both mentioned "13.4% " or
"one in eight" cases involving PRC. It is impossible unless
you add all the East Bloc's and Hong Kong's cases to PRC.
Otherwise, it is "5%" or "one in twenty". Furthermore, civil
cases are not all espionage cases. When we look at Justice
Department's record:
Significant Export Control Cases, January 1981 to October 1, 1993
Justice Department
Iran 21%
Russia 8%
South Africa 6%
Libya 6%
England 4%
P.R. China 3% (2.9%, or 9 cases out of 309)
HongKong 3% (Hong Kong 2.6% and Taiwan 0.3%, 8+1 cases)
Switzerland 3%
Iraq 3%
West Germany 2%
Cuba 2%
Japan 2%
Chile 2%
It is only 3%, or one in thirty. The convicted are not all Chinese.
Another list, looking at the time span, the cases involving China are:
81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93
0 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 0
We have investigated each and every line in your program as well as
in the book. There are numerous errors in both. They are hardly
professional.