"Journalists" and Informers

Several of the Democracy Wall activistes interviewed (including Xu Wenli, Liu Qing, Xue Mingde, Huang Xiang, ...) report that they have been contacted and questioned at the end of 1978 or in 1979 by such "journalists" of party media . "Journalists" to be written within quotation marks, as their articles were rarely published  in regular media, but almost exclusively in "internal" information services for high-ranking cadres. These "journalists" therefore held multiple functions, there were also (or mainly) agents of various communist organizations, sent to observe and sound out Demcracy Wall activists.

Nevertheless, they used their real names and they were actually working for the media they said to represent (or one of their "internal" services), and the civil rights activists (and avant-garde artists) were usually quite aware of their identities. They knew that these "journalist" were not only reporting, but also playing a mediator role between the dissidents and leading officials. Actually we do know now some of their names and a number of reports they have drafted for internal purposes that have become publically accessible meanwhile due to various reasons.

One name appearing in several contexts is that of Wang Yong'an (王永安). Together with (already deceased) Zhou Xiuqiang (周修强) he had several longish interviews with Huang Xiang and other members of the "Enlightenment Society" from Guizhou. Their report that was published in the internal service of the "People's Daily" and is now accessible in the internet (in Chinese). Wang Yong'an's name also appears in one of the available issues of the "Situation Summary" from the end of 1978. Another name regularly mentioned in the interviews is that of Tang Xin (唐欣) who used to work for the "Beijing Daily" (北京日报).

More internal reports on the Democracy Movement (as well as parts of their contents) have become indirectly known through the memories of several people who were part of the political history of the 1970s and 1980s. For example, Fan Rongkang (范荣康) and Yu Huanchun (余焕春), two "People's Daily" reporters, presented a extensive "Analysis of the Xidan Democracy Wall" (西单民主墙剖析) to the "Forum on Theory Work" held in Beijing in early 1979. This report was also printed in the internal information service of the "People's Daily" (人民日报内参) distributed to high-ranking officials. And Tang Xin asserts in his memories of 2008 that between February 1979 and 1980, he has drafted a number of internal reports on the activities of dissident groups.

But beyond that, as we can conclude from several pieces of evidence (e.g. from Xu Wenli), there have also been secret agents acting covertly who had been planted into the civil roghts groups and editorial boards of independent journals by departments of state security organs. It is also said that such suspected agents have sometimes completely vanished from the scene without leaving any trace of who they really were and what their actual assignment was. Tang Xin also mentions at one point that especially in 1980, the dissident organisations were widely infiltrated by police informers.

As for direct contacts, we also know about several meetings between democracy activists close to the Youth League (such as Wang Juntao who was a leading candidate in the 1980 elections at Peking University, or Lü Pu [吕朴] who worked for the independent journal "April 5th Forum") with leading politicians such as Hu Yaobang and Hu Qiaomu. The "April 5th Forum" editor Xu Wenli says in his interview that he had once visited the central party newspaper "People's Daily" to discuss the arrests of some activists with Deputy Editor-in-Chief Wang Ruoshui.

For all of these reasons, high-ranking officials were quite well informed on the thinking of democracy activists and on the contents of independent dazibaos and other publications. At the same time, some of the party journalists who had been sent to investigate the Democracy Movement, have themselves developed sympathies for the dissidents, and most of these journalists also had close connections to the reformist faction within the Communist Party.

Tang Xin (唐欣) and Liu Qing (刘青)

A particularly interesting example is the role played by "Beijing Daily" reporter Tang Xin and his contacts with Liu Qing of the "April 5th Forum" and other dissident activists. Tang Xin himself talks on this very peculiar episode in a book published in Hong Kong in 2015 (Memories of the Xidan Democracy Wall ... In: Ding Dong, Xing Xiaoqun [Eds.]: How China's Political Reforms of the 80s Came to an Early End. Dashan Wenhua Chubanshe/Great Mountain Culture), while Liu Qing has also made public his version of these meetings (Liu Qing: Tang Xin and the Joint Conference. In: Beijing Spring (USA), February 1995; both publications in Chinese only).

Tang Xin is the son of Tang Ke (唐克) who held several ministerial posts (such as petrol industries and metallurgy) during the 70s and 80s. Tang Xin himself also studied engineering, but became a "journalist" of the "Beijing Daily" in 1978, more precisely of their internal publications department, an institution that existed (and still exists) in every big state or party newspaper. Such publications were not intended for "ordinary" readers, but for selected groups of cadres and high-ranking politicians as they also reported on politically sensitive issues and details usually not covered by the regular media.

At the end of 1978, Tang Xin writes, he already had, living in the home of an important politician, access to such classified information on dissident activities and the contents of critical posters from the Democracy Wall, and he often asked himself why it were mainly foreign journalists reporting on them. Finally he proposed to his editor-in-chief to have have a closer look himself on the dazibaos near the Xidan intersection. The editors agreed, and in early 1979, during ten days at first, Tang Xin investigated the Democracy Wall. He met a number of leading dissidents and drew up a 10.000 character report printed under the headline "Investigations and impressions from the Democracy Wall" (民主墙外采访印象记) by the internal service of the "Beijing Daily" (北京日报内参).

Tang Xin's Internal report on the Democracy Movement

In his memories Tang's basic assessment probably follows more or less this original report. He elaborates:

I felt like this: At the Democracy Wall there were three factions. The first and most important one was the "April 5th Forum" led by Xu Wenli, Liu Qing and Yang Jing. Xu Wenli ... was about the age of [Poland's dissident leader] Lech Wałęsa. Xu had, like many others, suffered during the Cultural Revolution, but not very heavily. His main slogan was that common people should also participate in debating big politics. He represented the urban population, the common working class and their claim that the weaker strata of the population should also get a chance to debate and formulate politics. The second faction were the leftists, represented at the Democracy Wall by the journal "Spring of Beijing". Their chief editor was Zhou Weimin, a Central Committee member of the Youth League, and his deputy was Wang Juntao, an alternate member of the Committee. Another one was Lü Jiamin, and among the eleven editors, nine were sons of high-ranking cadres, and almost all of them were "April 5th Heroes" [i.e. activists of the 1976 Tiananmen protests]. They were quite well informed on the Third Plenary Session and the Party Work Conference, and they seemed to follow the most radical party line. The third faction stood on the right, that was Wei Jingsheng. Wei war more advanced than all others in the emancipation of minds, his journal "Exploration" proposed a "Fifth Modernization" as "Four Modernizations" without political modernization was inconceivable for him. And he opposed any form of personality cult, he was particularly worried that such cult might arise around Deng Xiaoping, not to mention Wang Dongxing or Hua Guofeng. (Tang, p. 9)

Liu Qing who used to be the main interlocutor of Tang Xin, believed that the analyses of such "journalists" could exert a positive influence on the opinion of the Chinese leadership, quite different from the state security files. The following quotes all come from Liu Qing's memories published in an internet version of the 1995 US edition of "Beijing Spring". Liu describes Tang Xin's analyses this way:

Although these were internal reports, they were quite different from those forwarded by police or security institutions who wrote on us in the style of enemy reconnaissance, while the internal media, although not eulogizing, employed a generally objective and fair approach towards us. Not every reporter could write for the internal publications, their journalists always acted on behalf of someone. What happened at the Democracy Wall, was considered important, and those who had contact, were all well-trained and influential. A bit later we could also read this report. It began with a sentence in which the reporter described his participation at the the Joint Editorial Conference as being like a step on the surface of the moon, as arriving in a completely different world. (Liu Qing)

Talking to this author, Liu Qing also mentioned that he did not possess Tang Xin's report, but had a chance to read it at that time. In his memories written in 1995, he still remembers some of the details, especially Tang Xin's judgements on the Democracy Movement in 1979:

Besides describing the various organisations, Tang Xin's article emphasized on the individual personalities, to more than ten he devoted a whole paragraph in his text. Concerning the "April 5th Forum", that were myself and Xu Wenli, from the "Spring of Peking" it were Han Zhenxiong, Wang Juntao and Zhou Weimin, specifically mentioning also the still very young Lin Gang; as of "Today", he described Bei Dao and Mang Ke, and beyond those he also wrote on Wei Jingsheng and Ren Wanding. For the "Spring of Peking" people he made quite flattering remarks, calling them "Tiananmen heroes" [referring to the 1976 protests] and adding that some of them were Central Committee members and candidates of the Youth League, that they came from families of high-ranking cadres and therefore possessed a good background of politics. They also had a clear political stance, and they were usually a few steps ahead of the leadership's intentions. The staff members of the other journals and organizations were more vaguely described, on the "April 5th Forum" he wrote that we mainly consisted of workers who preferred organizational activities, and that we showed no peculiarities in regard to ideology or theory. Tang Xin's article was obviously based on personal impressions, sometimes far from reality. As for the "April 5th Forum", he only perceived some members of the core editorial board, although there existed several other gifted contributors, and among the nationwide correspondents there were some outstanding authors like Wang Xizhe, Chen Erjin, Sun Feng or Xu Shuiliang, and as a matter of fact, the best writers and theoreticians of the Democracy Wall were often linked to the "April 5th Forum". It was correct though when Tang Xin mentioned that the "April 5th Forum" mainly consisted of workers. Tang Xin himself was the son of a high-ranking official, and therefor he more easily understood ideas and opinions that came from the same sphere. Some of his judgements still seemed quite questionable. Although people who were not directly classified as reactionary or dangerous themselves, would laugh about, but old Wei (Jingsheng) and old Ren (Wanding) felt quite uneasy as even some of our own people also openly talked like this. I do remember that once at the Joint Editorial Conference, some were shouting at Wei Jingsheng, Ren Wanding and Lu Lin that they could become famous now, having made it on the list of bourgeois and reactionary elements in an internal report handed to the Politburo and Central Committee. Wei Jingsheng and Ren Wanding felt quite embarrassed though, and certainly not amused by this internal report. ... In my opinion this report rather provoked some people to react even stronger and with more far-reaching consequences. ... The internal reports only painted a rather vague picture, it was certainly not a signal for repression, as the authorities at that time were more interested in influencing the Democracy Movement and even clinching a deal with it. (Liu Qing)

Tang's First Meetings with the Dissidents

But back to the beginning of this unusual encounters: Before visiting the Democracy Wall for the first time, Tang Xin talked to his direct superior Wang Fengyu (王丰玉), a close collaborator of Hu Yaobang. Tang also worries how he will be received by the dissidents and takes some precautionary measures:

Going to the Democracy Wall for the first time, I felt quite anxious. When I arrived there, I found an edition of the "April 5th Forum", one of the big publications. It had a contact address written on it, Dong Si Shi Tiao, Liu Qing's apartment. I noted this address on a piece of paper which I handed to my sister telling her: In case I am not able to come back, please immediately call uncle Lin [Beijing's Mayor and Party Secretary Lin Hujia] so that he can rescue me. But when I arrived at Li Qing's place, he received me very cordially. This was the beginning of my long contacts with the Democracy Wall that were to last for several months. I met 125 persons, among them Gu Xiang (Gu Cheng's sister) [Gu Cheng 顾城, famous poet and novelist, 1946-1993], Lü Pu [吕朴, editor of the "April 5th Forum", from a well-known politician's family], Lü Jiamin (actually Jiang Rong, the author of "Wolf Totem"), Zhou Weimin, Wang Juntao, Xu Wenli, Wei Jingsheng, Zhao Zhenkai (Bei Dao), Jiang Shiwei (Mang Ke), Hu Ping who worked for the journal "Wotu" (Fertile Ground) and people around Jiang Hong [姜洪, leading economist and academic]. (Tang, pp. 8-9)

In his own memories, Liu Qing describes his first meeting with Tang Xin like this:

Tang Xin briefly knocked at the door, just opened it and stepped in. I was just in a conversation with Lin Gang of the "Spring of Peking" who was only nineteen then. Just like the others of the "Spring of Peking", he possessed two characteristics: He came from a family of cadres , and he had been arrested and kept in prison in 1976 because of his participation in the "April 5th Movement". He had come to see me as the "Spring of Peking" representative at the Joint Editorial Conference. I met him for the first time, and we had talked for more that one hour. Tang Xin looked at us and asked who was Liu Qing from the Joint Editorial Conference. He introduced himself as a journalist of the "Beijing Daily" and pulled out a press card to show it to me, smiling, not bragging, but more to prove himself open and trying to gain our trust. It belonged to his job to meet us, unlike other officials who had come and told us that they wanted to talk to us in a private capacity.

Tang Xin said that the whole world discussed the Democracy Wall, but Chinese media kept their eyes closed, it seemed an awkward situation that they did not notice and ask questions. He hoped that informations would not only depend on reports from abroad, he had come to find out things himself, without any ulterior motives, there was no reason for us to worry. I did not know why he used this phrase, it seemed as if he actually wanted to tell me the contrary. But whatever he tried to say, it could not change my attitude. We had often heard of spies and had earlier discussed this among us, but we wanted to remain open and transparent, and even the police we wanted to receive in such way. That is what I also told Tang Xin. He just turned his pale face towards me and said, "is it like this?" but did not seem surprised. Tang Xin conveyed a broad interest, we talked on the Democracy Wall and on current developments in the society, on the peculiarities of the different journals and on their various staff members. Nevertheless I noticed that he clearly knew to distinguish what was important and what not, and his main interest was focused on the journals and their main staff.

This seemed to me a good opportunity to demonstrate our openness and transparency to him, and as there was a meeting of the Joint Editorial Conference planned for this very evening, I decided to tell him that he could also come and listen I he wanted. This time he arched his eyebrows and just said "really?" (Liu Qing)

Openness vs. Scepticism

Liu Qing had just invited the representative of the "Beijing Daily" to attend the Joint Editorial Conference of the various independent journals, where the dissidents coordinated - especially after the arrest of the female activist Fu Yuehua - their common approach and line of action:

More participants than usually had come at this evening, sometimes two from the same journal, "Exploration" had sent Lu Lin and Wei Jingsheng, from the "April 5th Forum" there was me and Yang Jing, and there were even some people who had not been invited. I told Lin Gang that I had also asked other representatives of the "Spring of Peking" to attend, but only Lin Gang had come. Some had arrived a bit before the announced start of the meeting. When I informed the participants that I had invited someone, I tried to explain the situation before the first open contact with a representative of the authorities. In the history of the Communist Party, I said, journalists from the Xinhua News Agency have often been charged with delicate missions during special situations. And as this constituted the first such meeting, we should expect debates.  

The fact that I had invited an official on my own initiative, rather aroused some interest among most of the participants than any misgiving. I remember that there were hardly any concerns. We rather asked ourselves whether Tang Xin really would, as he had said, investigate on the Democracy Wall and the Joint Editorial Conference in order to write an objective article, and whether his appearance had been arranged by a certain faction of the political forces. We were a bit excited, even pleased and happy, that our people's journals and organizations had finally received some appreciation which implied to us a chance of further development. Some said, if the newspapers report on us, what could become of our articles?

Tang Xin arrived an hour later than agreed, he explained that he wanted to give us the opportunity to thoroughly discuss if we would really allow him to attend the Joint Conference. He cannily added that he wanted to give us more time to talk ourselves on his attitudes and on the issues we were going to debate. It seemed that his thoughts were even more numerous and weirder than ours. That probably had its reasons. He removed his coat, and again pulled out his journalist accreditation to let every single participant inspect it. Most were taken by surprise, they only kept it briefly, some even said, "did we not trust you enough?" But not with all of them the perplexity exceeded their curiosity. When one wanted to hand the press card back to Tang Xin, Wei Jingsheng and Lu Lin who were sitting at the end of the bed, interrupted him. Lu Lin stretched out his hand to grab the card, turning it also around to closely scrutinize both the front and the back. And smiling and completely innocently, they asked Tang Xin two more questions, whether the press accreditation had been issued just recently, and if he was a reporter working for the internal publications department. I began to feel a bit uneasy, but Tang Xin remained calm and continued to make jokes with the representatives of other organizations, he hardly seemed to notice the attention for his press card that came from the other side of the room. The apparently innocent questions did not disturb his conversations, and he answered just briefly, as if it were the most natural thing. There was no embarrassment felt, which made me think that this was a good sign that everything was going smoothly.

But as a matter of fact, Tang Xin was not like what he pretended to be. It was certainly not alright with him how Wei Jingsheng and Lu Lin had scrutinized his press card. In his internal report that he later drafted for the leaders, he wrote a whole paragraph on this procedure, reasoning that the "Exploration" people were probably more reserved, while those from the other journals and organizations had more easily trusted him. He finally concluded that these words, and maybe other things as well, expressed an attitude towards the government, as the staff of "Exploration" harbored deep-rooted distrust of the leadership, while the others had only little suspicion or none at all. Of course this was not a formal verdict on "Exploration", but in his article Tang Xin also wrote a kind of official judgement of the journal, categorizing it as extreme and problematic. Although many of us had similar ideas, there was still a difference in this classification. We had also called this category "extreme", but for Tang Xin it was not only "extreme" but it also represented a bourgeois and reactionary ideology and dangerous leaning, and he included in this group also organizations like the "Chinese Human Rights Alliance" [of Ren Wanding]. The journals that Tang Xin liked most, were "Spring of Peking" and "Fertile Soil", both almost openly praised by him. In his article he also wrote positively about "Today" which he referred to as a "contribution" and an "achievement" for literature and arts. The other people's journals and organizations he just described as remaining in a gray area. (Liu Qing)