The Defense Battle for Cantonese Language

July 5, Mr. Ji Keguang, a member of Guangzhou People’s Politics Consultative Conference delivered a sensational proposal to the mayor of Guangzhou. In his proposal, Mr. Ji suggested that Guangzhou Television should stop Cantonese broadcasting in its News Channel and Comprehensive Channel. It was claimed that it would be easier for both the national and international participants as well as visitors to communicate during the Asian Game, which is going to be held in Guangzhou this November. In addition, Mr. Ji also cared a lot about the popularity of Guangzhou Television across the country. He urged the Guangzhou TV change its broadcasting language to Mandarin so that it could further move into the satellite era.

Actually, this proposal didn’t come from the middle of nowhere. Starting from May 2010, Mr. Ji and his colleagues collaborated with other government bodies to survey the public on what language Guangzhou TV should use in their broadcasting. Among the 30,000 valid survey papers, 66.3% of the participants were Cantonese, while 33.4% were non-locals. 89.5% favored Cantonese broadcasting. In response to the suggestion of abandoning or at least reduce dialect broadcasting in the News Channel and Comprehensive Channel, only 20.5% replied positively. However, there were 82.1% of the surveyees believed that the Comprehensive Channel should be transmitted through a satellite to reach out the other parts of the country.

Upon submission, the proposition rippled the city like a stone thrown into the calm water. Within two weeks, thousands of people joined various virtue groups on Douban and Facebook and responded to the calling for peaceful demonstration. Some well-known Bulletin Board Systems (BBS) also attracted numerous netizens, especially the post 80s and post 90s. They have open discussions on everything, including reasons for this proposal, review of history, impacts on the local culture, hidden political agenda, and their personal experience. Some of them maintain rational, while a small portion tends to be more extreme.

On July 25, there were two gatherings initiated by online groups in Guangzhou. One was a flash mob outside the A Exit of Jiangnan Xi subway station. People wore white T-shirt voluntarily and lifted self-made signs to show their opposition against the proposal. The other one was in the People’s Park, where participants sang Cantonese songs together. A week later, a joint rally was held both in Hong Kong and Guangzhou on August 1. Thousands of people in both cities marched peacefully with their signs and some slogans.

At the meantime, the Provincial Governor Huang Huahua and the Secretary of Guangdong Provincial Party Committee Wang Yang clarified that the government had no intention of depriving Cantonese from Cantonese people. They insisted that Mandarin and Cantonese were not enemies. Both languages could thrive under the same sky. The initiator of the dispute claimed that the antagonism of the proposal proved that people need to be guided properly. It is the government’s responsibility to direct its citizens to speak Mandarin, a language understood by people all over the country. He also believed that eventually, Mandarin broadcasting would benefit the city.

Not only in Guangzhou and Hong Kong, the debate extended to other parts of the country as well. Some presses named it a Defense Battle for Cantonese. People’s Daily published an op-ed, claiming that the “battle” was unnecessary because the relation between dialect and the official language is not an either-or counter. The author recognized the importance of dialect for the local culture and understood that Cantonese people has great pride of their culture. He believed that the government is, and will continue protecting the diverse folk cultures in different rigions.