Link is broken for me.

It's on Typepad, which is blocked in China (just added a note to the text above).

Her blog has been censored in mainland for a while, so the mp3 can't be accessed. For these in mainland and who know Chinese, you could read on this link.

the red ones are her answers.

I was able to easily access and listen to the interview using just a random proxy server (Proxycat.com).

I'm madly in love with Rebecca McKinnon! She handled herself incredibly well in this interview, coming across very frank yet non-confrontational, principled yet nuanced, critical yet tolerant, opinionated yet thoughtful. And all in measured, fluent Mandarin (this women went to grade school at Fangcaodi, for heaven's sake!) We need more journalists like her! This subdued interview probably did more for softening and defusing the simmering anger of these young people than a dozen books or conferences. Brava, Rebecca! I hope I can meet her someday.

I will strongly suggest listening to the original copy of interview (which is also in chinese, surprisingly), the summary kinda skew-matched some of the Q&A pairs.

Must use proxy to view...

But this is the best post for some time...

hmmm, the audio record breaks at around 60mins... did anyone suffer from the same problem ?

Ok so does she frequently visit Anti-CNN.com? I get the feeling that CNN and Anti-CNN are becoming complementary to each other, in commercial sense, I let you criticize to make you popular, and you criticize me to make me popular.

Everyone can read her entile article at www.anti-ann.com site. To me, this is a typical biased viewpoints from an American journalist. It looks like that she used this chatting opportunity to collect materials to prove her biased views that, I'm sure, will be included in her book. By doing this, she can claim that she is a China "expert" who is actually as shallow as many of her peers. The very limited viewpoints from AC members and other Chinese she mentioned are out of context; only to be used to prove and enhance her own biased viewpoints. Too bad that she even does not realize how biased she is!

if you can view anti-cnn during the conversation, you can watch they post transcription of Rebecca's answer simultaneously. you can still view the transcription now, i wonder why Jeremy Goldkorn said anti-cnn needs to censor the chat.

Props to Rebecca MacKinnon for the excellent work. Though I wish that she'd been a bit more forceful at times, it was a good effort.

One wonders if the hoopleheads at Anti-CNN recognize the delicious irony in their decision to censor Rebecca's comments regarding such things as 6/4 and Hu Jia's. My guess is a big, fat NO.

As for Anti-CNN's stated aim of "[helping] their fellow citizens to think more critically about global media" -- I'd be much more sympathetic if they would first demonstrate the ability to think critically about China's media. As things stand now, it feels a bit like the blind leading the blind.

Well, a slightly different perspective. With so much praise heaped on this, I hope my critique is not viewed as personal attacks.

I first read Rebecca's blog entry, then read the chat text in Chinese on anti-cnn, and finally listened to the whole recording from start to finish. It is interesting how the three different ways of delivery gave me slightly different impressions.

The blog entry was all right. It has always been my personal opinion based on reading her writings and her sessions at various conferences that Ms. MacKinnon has the flair of a single-issue and self-righteous activist. I am not saying the issues she likes to talk about are not important though, I just wish she could cut away what I perceive to be the all-knowing, "commie-ccp-can-do-no-good", democracy fan-girl club attitude a bit. (Disclaimer, I support the rule of law and democracy too). In that regard, I share the sentiment expressed by nobias above, though I do believe MacKinnon has good intentions.

I actually liked the chat text recorded by anti-cnn people. Overall, I think they did a great job. It is unfortunate that Rebecca's talk on 64 was not recorded there, though understandable, given the censorship and idiotic nanny that they are subject to.

After listening the whole recording, though, Rebecca came across to me as being pretty defensive, even evasive, constantly mentioning that she left CNN in 2001, and dancing around questions like how the western media deals with mistakes by saying nobody is perfect or some like that. She used Abu Graib as proof of "how the interests of the U.S. media and government often do not coincide". Bad example! In fact, American media got hold of shitload of evidence (images in CD-ROMs) for months and months before publishing that news. Only when the Aussies (I believe) got hold of it did Washington Post, NYT, CBS News do an about-face. Glenn Greenwald gives the best, by far, critique of American mainstream, in my opinion.

I was a bit surprised that when 德国之声 张丹红 was mentioned at first, Rebecca said she didn't know much about it, considering how much interest she has shown towards China-related news, although at the end of the recording she did say that it was all right for 张丹红 to express her opinions in a talk-show.

I simply don't understand why so much indignation toward anti-cnn. Sure there are idiotic firebrands on their forums, but I felt it has moderated quite a bit and seemed to be moving toward the middle. The US media and some expats in China likes to harp on the Fenqins, but for every Fenqin it caricatured, there is at least one equally, if not more vocal West worshipper trolling behind the GFW and shouting down dissidents. I think if the true objective is to promote freedom of speech and diversity of ideas, anti-cnn should be supported and encouraged, just like Al Jazeera should be supported and promoted, instead of being treated as enemy by the US government and deliberately bombed at in Baghdad. Watch The Control room for details. No, I don't equate anti-cnn to Al Jazeera.

Hi Ji Village News
I think some of the indignation toward anti-cnn comes simply from their opening premise - anti-cnn. Seems a little ironic to be anti-cnn while self-consoring for the net nanny and ignoring the news output of CCTV and Xinhua.

An 'anti-news media' would be a far more worthwhile venture and wouldn't stick in the throat quite as much as the populist, bandwagon-jumping intentions of anti-cnn.

link
anti-cnn has post Rebecca's narration of the dialogue on their website. so readers of anti-cnn can view what Rebecca want to say just inside the webpage of anti-cnn. it's fairly clear they just edit the transcription instead of trying to hide Rebecca's word.

@Willy

Rebecca didn't mention what was censored. Listens to the original un-cut copy of the interview is still a preferable choice.

i just want to stress, viewer can read Rebecca's version of the conversation including the part of Tiananmen massacre victimn and dissident Hujia on the webpage inside anti-cnn. so AC don't mind their readers know it.
i think the significant difference between AC and the patriotic movement in the past is many participants accept western value. they participate AC because they think too many westerners don't respect western value in China issue.
i think AC provides a platform people can learn how to read news with the proper level of skepticism and critical thinking.
to Stinky, i think if you focus lies from domestic media, that's exactly blind leading blind. most of Chinese know they are just mouthpiece of Chinese government, if Chinese can learn to read news from western media with proper level of skepticism and critical thinking, they will apply it to demestic media too.

i just want to say her version of the dialogue has been post on anti-cnn, including the part about 6/4 and Hu jia. so AC doesn't mind their viewers know about it.
i think the significant difference between AC and patriotic movement in the past is many participants recognize western value, they defense for their country because they think many westerners don't respect western value in China issue.
i think AC provide a platform for Chinese to learn how to read news with proper level of skepticism and critical thinking. most of Chinese have already known domestic media are mouthpiece of the Chinese government, when they know how to analyse news from western media, they become be smarter in analysing news from domestic media too.

In my opinion, CNN's coverage of China/Tibet issue is quite bad journalism. Those Chinese youth at Anti-CNN organize a website to criticize CNN and some other west media's behavior, I applaud their efforts. I also believe they have done some good work with good principle. I am glad Ms. Mackinnon interview and report them.
There are people who try to defend CNN or just to feel superior by gloating over:
1) They have to censor Tiananmen 6.4 event on their website so they would get into trouble with Chinese Government.
2) They have some immature opinion about some issues.
3) They didn't criticize some of the poor qualities of journalism in China. (I agree that there are plenty of them.)
I would say to those people, give me a break, don't be so pathetic.

I put myself through both version, the one on anti-cnn isn't really censored. (god it was long and boring)

Totoally agree with Ji Village News.

Rebecca came across to me as being pretty defensive, even evasive, constantly mentioning that she left CNN in 2001, and dancing around questions like how the western media deals with mistakes by saying nobody is perfect or some like that. She used Abu Graib as proof of "how the interests of the U.S. media and government often do not coincide". Bad example!