Why I don't work for CNN

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/business/2010/06/08/stevens.dnt.vietnam.growth.cnn?iref=allsearch

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/social.media/06/24/vietnam.cyberwall/index.html?iref=allsearch

CNN correspondent Andrew Stevens recently contributed two pieces from Ho Chi Minh City that encapsulate neatly the contradictions inherent in the neo-liberal paradigm (not the mention the idiocy of corporate mass media). The first is a celebratory look at the Vietnamese economy, peppered with references to 7% annual growth, 30% lower labor costs than China, and a quote from a German factory owner who, when asked what sort of downsides there were to operating in Vietnam replies “I haven’t found any yet.” A seasoned investigative reporter, Steven digs deeper (i.e. steps outside the factory doors) and identifies what is apparently the only weakness in what is otherwise a paradise of political stability and cheap labor: a creaking transportation infrastructure. On the whole, though, Steven and the fund managers he interviews (gosh, I’m sure they’ve got no interest in touting Vietnam as a destination for investment) come off sounding like shills for the Vietnamese Ministry of Planning. The piece ends with a shot of apparently docile Vietnamese workers, all in identical lime green factory t-shirts, lined up to punch their timesheets (and, we hope, eventually get their 30% smaller salaries).

The second piece shows, as it were, the dark side of the workers’ paradise: oh no, the Vietnamese state places limits on freedom of expression! Steven interviews Nguyễn Ngọc Như Quỳnh (you should hear poor Steven try to pronounce that one), a blogger who has faced arrest and other forms of harassment when she published blogs critical of China and apparent Vietnamese concessions to its powerful neighbor. Chị Quỳnh, who, viewers are told, evaded police surveillance to be interviewed, is moved to tears as she makes an impassioned plea for freedom of expression. The camera cuts to Steven, his expression grim, but obviously moved. What viewer could fail to be touched by chị Quỳnh’s plight?

This is in no way meant to disparage chị Quỳnh or the dozens like her who have suffered for their willingness to criticize the Party-State. It is, however, to suggest that lauding Vietnam as an investor’s paradise while simultaneously criticizing an authoritarian state is just a smidge disingenuous. It doesn’t take a genius to understand that political stability and a cheap and pliable labor force come at the cost of certain limitations on freedom of expression, association, and organization. But these are dots that Steven doesn’t feel comfortable connecting. So a State that limits freedom of expression and religion becomes the subject of hard-hitting, if clichéd journalism, while a State that has effectively outlawed strikes and fails to enforce its own already lax labor and environmental laws is lauded as the “one” in any investor’s “China plus one” strategy. A handful of middle-class bloggers like chị Quỳnh are given a name and a voice, while millions of Vietnamese workers and farmers struggling to support their families on a few dollars a day remained unnamed and unheard, little more than a backdrop for stories of 7% growth. And we smugly criticize the Vietnamese Party-State for harassing courageous freedom fighters while we marvel at the low price of our latest consumer product. Made in Vietnam, of course.