Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Reader expected more from USA Pavilion
By Robert Jacobson |
June 10, 2010, Thursday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
DEAR Editors,
THE article on June 1 by one of US "Student Ambassadors" who greet Chinese visitors to the US Pavilion was enlightening - and disappointing.
Enlightening, because it captured the enthusiasm of America's youth for good relations with the Chinese people.
Disappointing, because it indicates that the Student Ambassadors have been recruited with less than full knowledge about the enterprise which they're promoting.
In that article, another journalist and I were singled out for generating "negative press."
I don't think our coverage of the Expo or USA Pavilion is "negative"; it's simply tough love for the American values we cherish and our nation's presentation in Shanghai.
The negative press that the USA Pavilion has received in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Foreign Policy, National Public Radio, and other respected journals and media is not something that we invented.
The whole story, obviously not known to the Student Ambassador, is not very pretty. But it's been told elsewhere and doesn't need repeating here.
On the other hand, although I have yet to travel to Shanghai, everything I have heard about the Student Ambassadors at the USA Pavilion has been favorable.
According to published and personal accounts, they have been the saving grace that makes the pavilion experience memorable despite its treacly "values" message and over-the-top commercialism.
It's great that this young person has experiences that are enjoyable and is sharing them with Chinese who are similarly benefiting from the exchange.
But the Student Ambassador is incorrect to imply that the whole purpose of the US Pavilion is simply to entertain and edify Chinese visitors.
In past Expos, US participation has also had as an equal goal clarifying for Americans their image of themselves, what they stand for; and educating them, in the run up to an Expo, about the significance of Expos and the host nation in particular.
This US effort has done neither. From the standpoint of the American people, the Expo might as well not be happening at all. It is not producing a positive effect.
The full cost of the USA Pavilion, now estimated to be over US$75 million (we may not know until the organizers finally open their books) is fully tax exempt and contributions are tax deductible - which means that the organizers and the corporations who run the show get to enjoy the benefits of being in Shanghai without paying any taxes.
Taxpayers' money
Guess who has the privilege of making up the difference? Yes, the American taxpayers, the rest of us who enjoy none of the benefits.
The Student Ambassador is wrong, by the way, to claim that "US law banning the use of public funds required that corporations step up to put forth the US$61 million to ensure that the US would be showing up in something other than a tent."
There is no such law.
Congress has been able to make an appropriation of public monies sufficient to get the US Pavilion started since planning began in 2007. But the US administrations chose not to ask for such an appropriation.
The Student Ambassador notes: "To be fair, the USA Pavilion doesn't have some of the features of other pavilions ... It would be nice to include elements explaining American democracy and to show elements of our past and present that have come to define us as Americans."
It would be more than nice. It would be essential.
Even where the US and Chinese people observe different customs and hold differing opinions, it's best to know one another honestly, sincerely, rather than via veiled allusion.
The Student Ambassador also lamely defends the multinationals - Chinese and American: "Many of the companies that are producing a so-called 'poor image' of America at the Expo are likely to be the ones that will make the investment and fund the research to create this innovation ... to create a better world for all of us."
Perhaps, but many of them are doing exactly the opposite.
This too is a feature of American life, no secret and not our proudest feature, but the situation may be changing as new awareness intrudes on "business as usual."
The USA Pavilion could have promoted this change and the American people's will that is driving it, thus giving hope to the world that its largest economy can become a force for saving the earth. It doesn't.
I thank Student Ambassador for his or her hard work in behalf of America's international image.
The Chinese people also are to be thanked for their genuine interest in America as expressed through their visits to the USA Pavilion.
But sentiment must not paint a false picture. The USA Pavilion does not do an adequate job of educating the Chinese people (and other Expo visitors) and American people about one another.
(Dr Robert Jacobson is a blogger at Huffington Post. http://huffingtonpost.com. The views are his own. Shanghai Daily condensed the letter.)
THE article on June 1 by one of US "Student Ambassadors" who greet Chinese visitors to the US Pavilion was enlightening - and disappointing.
Enlightening, because it captured the enthusiasm of America's youth for good relations with the Chinese people.
Disappointing, because it indicates that the Student Ambassadors have been recruited with less than full knowledge about the enterprise which they're promoting.
In that article, another journalist and I were singled out for generating "negative press."
I don't think our coverage of the Expo or USA Pavilion is "negative"; it's simply tough love for the American values we cherish and our nation's presentation in Shanghai.
The negative press that the USA Pavilion has received in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Foreign Policy, National Public Radio, and other respected journals and media is not something that we invented.
The whole story, obviously not known to the Student Ambassador, is not very pretty. But it's been told elsewhere and doesn't need repeating here.
On the other hand, although I have yet to travel to Shanghai, everything I have heard about the Student Ambassadors at the USA Pavilion has been favorable.
According to published and personal accounts, they have been the saving grace that makes the pavilion experience memorable despite its treacly "values" message and over-the-top commercialism.
It's great that this young person has experiences that are enjoyable and is sharing them with Chinese who are similarly benefiting from the exchange.
But the Student Ambassador is incorrect to imply that the whole purpose of the US Pavilion is simply to entertain and edify Chinese visitors.
In past Expos, US participation has also had as an equal goal clarifying for Americans their image of themselves, what they stand for; and educating them, in the run up to an Expo, about the significance of Expos and the host nation in particular.
This US effort has done neither. From the standpoint of the American people, the Expo might as well not be happening at all. It is not producing a positive effect.
The full cost of the USA Pavilion, now estimated to be over US$75 million (we may not know until the organizers finally open their books) is fully tax exempt and contributions are tax deductible - which means that the organizers and the corporations who run the show get to enjoy the benefits of being in Shanghai without paying any taxes.
Taxpayers' money
Guess who has the privilege of making up the difference? Yes, the American taxpayers, the rest of us who enjoy none of the benefits.
The Student Ambassador is wrong, by the way, to claim that "US law banning the use of public funds required that corporations step up to put forth the US$61 million to ensure that the US would be showing up in something other than a tent."
There is no such law.
Congress has been able to make an appropriation of public monies sufficient to get the US Pavilion started since planning began in 2007. But the US administrations chose not to ask for such an appropriation.
The Student Ambassador notes: "To be fair, the USA Pavilion doesn't have some of the features of other pavilions ... It would be nice to include elements explaining American democracy and to show elements of our past and present that have come to define us as Americans."
It would be more than nice. It would be essential.
Even where the US and Chinese people observe different customs and hold differing opinions, it's best to know one another honestly, sincerely, rather than via veiled allusion.
The Student Ambassador also lamely defends the multinationals - Chinese and American: "Many of the companies that are producing a so-called 'poor image' of America at the Expo are likely to be the ones that will make the investment and fund the research to create this innovation ... to create a better world for all of us."
Perhaps, but many of them are doing exactly the opposite.
This too is a feature of American life, no secret and not our proudest feature, but the situation may be changing as new awareness intrudes on "business as usual."
The USA Pavilion could have promoted this change and the American people's will that is driving it, thus giving hope to the world that its largest economy can become a force for saving the earth. It doesn't.
I thank Student Ambassador for his or her hard work in behalf of America's international image.
The Chinese people also are to be thanked for their genuine interest in America as expressed through their visits to the USA Pavilion.
But sentiment must not paint a false picture. The USA Pavilion does not do an adequate job of educating the Chinese people (and other Expo visitors) and American people about one another.
(Dr Robert Jacobson is a blogger at Huffington Post. http://huffingtonpost.com. The views are his own. Shanghai Daily condensed the letter.)
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
