As we noted in our previous email to you January 2015 we hold your publication in the highest regard and have for a considerable time respected the invaluable work you do for Tibet and its just cause.
However we remain troubled by an editorial policy in which Tibetan territories are described as Chinese Provinces, usually without any mention of their authentic Tibetan names.
Take for example your latest report Feb 25 2016 Lone protestor arrested in Kham Tehor in which it states:
“A middle aged Tibetan man was arrested on Feb.14 for protesting alone in front of the government compound in Kham Tehor in Kardze County, Sichuan Province.” (Emphasis Added)
We previously advised you that a worrying aspect of this is that a considerable number of readers of your publication may not be deeply informed on Tibet and its geography, nor indeed its recent history and the invasion, occupation and subsequent renaming of Tibet and its regions into Chinese provinces and so-called ‘autonomous regions’.
In addition the vast majority of Internet users may know little of Tibet beyond being aware of His Holiness the Dalai Lama or that Tibetans are Buddhist.
Such under informed readership invests considerable trust in the veracity and accuracy of your journal and will consume without critique as fact what your reports state. So in the context of the report in question they will be given to understand that there is a region of China called Sichuan and that Tibetans live there. Emphasized by your report’s inclusion of this phrase “Tibetan areas in the Qinghai and Sichuan”.
Is that a balanced and full account of the facts? Does it inform the reader that in truth the area is actually Kham region of occupied Tibet?
Are we hoping for too much that such a highly valued Tibetan publication would ensure that when reporting on events inside Tibet that care is taken not to repeat China’s propaganda that renames Tibetan lands as Chinese provinces?
These thoughts and concerns are offered in a spirit of positive support.