This article reproduced below appeared in the Wen-hui Bao on 10 June, entitled For Reference 440 Although for a period of time in the past the Wen-hui Bao
in Shanghai and the Kwangming Jih-Bao in Beijing published a large number
of good reports and good feature articles, their basic political orientation was
that of a capitalist newspaper. In a period of time these two papers, making
use of the slogan, ‘A Hundred Schools Contend’, and the CCP’s rectification
campaign, carried many seditious reports showing the bourgeois point of view
which [the papers] were not prepared to criticize. These issue of the papers are
there for anyone to consult. Some people on the staff of the papers seriously
misconstrued the functions of newspapers. They confused the principles of
the press of a capitalist country with those of the press of a socialist country. Similar confusion can be found among the editors and reporters of other
newspapers and among the staff of some departments of journalism at the universities. It is not confined to the Wen-hui pao and Kwang-ming Jih-Bao alone,
though it is more prominent with these papers. Mistaken views can be studied,
examined, criticized, and then reformed. [This is what] we expect from these
papers. In the last few days their policy seems to have changed somewhat. Of
course, non-party newspapers should not be exactly the same as party organs;

they should have their individualities. None the less, their general orientation
should be the same as other papers, because in a socialist country the press
reflects through its reports the planned socialist economy based on public ownership. This is different from the press of a capitalist country which reflects
through its reports the anarchy and group competition of the capitalist economy. As long as class distinction exists in the world, newspapers are instruments
of class struggle. We hope a discussion on this issue will be developed in order
to arrive at a common understanding. Some journalists who are members of
the CCP or the Communist Youth League also have a bourgeois view on journalism; they, too, should study, examine, criticize, and then reform their view.
Doctrinaire views on journalism and the style of the ‘eight-legged essay’ should
also be criticized. These nauseating mistakes are shared by party organs as well,
including this paper. They should be criticized in the discussions. In that case,
a struggle on the two fronts against both the ‘left’ and the right in the field of
journalism should be waged. Yao Wenyuan’s article points out, albeit reservedly, the bourgeois tendencies of the Wen-hui pao and sees clearly the harmful
tendencies of some people on it to wage a struggle from the standpoint of the
bourgeoisie against the proletariat. It is a good article and therefore it is reproduced here. We take this opportunity to clarify our views to our professional
friends on the Wen-hui pao and Kwang-ming Jih-pao for their consideration.
Source: People’s Daily, June 14, 1957.