Revise and Statistical Analysis of the Alien Press Errors in History of Chinese Journalism by Ko Kung-chen

LIU Xiao-yu,WANG Xiao-lin,CHEN Hui-xin

Since Ko Kung-chen published History of Chinese Journalism with Shanghai Commercial Press in 1927， this work had been published by different publishing houses and reprinted many times amounting to 18 editions. There are many historical narrative and fact errors of alien press in this work， and up to date these errors are not revised. This essay aims to revise the omitted errors of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism systematically besides those corrected by other works or essays， and carry on the statistical analysis of the errors to probe new approach for the study of alien periodicals and press in China.

Keywords： History of Chinese Journalism by Ko Kung-chen， alien periodicals and press in China， revise of historical narrative and fact errors， statistical analysis

History of Chinese Journalism （《中國報學史》） by Ko Kung-chen （戈公振，1890-1935） was first published by Shanghai Commercial Press in November 1927， and has been reprinted and published in 18 editions1， of which 17 are Chinese editions and one is Japanese version by Kobayashi Po in 1941 entitled 支那新聞學史. In those reprinted editions， spelling and typographical errors in foreign words， deficiency in historical data， fact errors， and statistical data have been continuously revised， and research on History of Chinese Journalism and its historical fact errors has contributed to the study of the history of the Chinese press and journalism. However， in History of Chinese Journalism， many historical fact errors and controversies in alien press， including foreign press in the Chinese language and foreign language press， have not been systematically revised or solved， and some misstatements are still being transmitted， which need to be analyzed statistically， corrected and studied in depth and detail.

I. Literature Review of Studies on History of Chinese Journalism and Revision of Its Historical Narrative and Fact Errors

History of Chinese Journalism was the first to establish the academic status of the history of Chinese press， famously heralding the beginning of the history of Chinese journalism. After a century， the work remains an essential bibliography for the study of Chinese journalism and “reading and studying this work is a must for all those who want to study the history of Chinese press” （寧树藩， 2003， pp. 513-523）. From the summer of 1925 to June 1926， Ko Kung-chen wrote the book on the basis of lectures given at Kookmin University in Shanghai（1913-1914）， South University of China （1950-1952）， and Fudan University. Due to various constraints then and the fact that Mr. Ko collected materials merely in Shanghai， and that to survey the history of the development of Chinese Journalism was a pioneering task， the work inevitably contained a number of errors in historical facts （杨瑾琤， 1985， p. 57）. Certain omissions in History of Chinese Journalism have been corrected in Ko’s posthumous work Reading Record in London2 （《英京读書記》）， and Ko had planned to revise the work based on newly discovered historical materials when he was alive.

Contemporary scholars have interpreted the academic value of History of Chinese Journalism from various perspectives and repeatedly cited its views and historical data， and thus there are many documents on its historical value and fact details. The content and value of the History of Chinese Journalism are discussed in the articles “Ko Kung-chen’s History of Chinese Journalism” by Ning Shufan （宁树藩， 1962）， “On Ko Kung-chen and His History of Chinese Journalism” by Yen Feng （严锋， 1990）， “The Cornerstone of the History of Chinese Journalism： Reading Ko Kung-chen’s History of Chinese Journalism” by Chiang Chin-ko（蒋金戈， 1991）， “Reading Ko Kung-chen’s History of Chinese Journalism” and “The Seminal Work in the history of Chinese Journalism： Reading Ko Kung-chen’s History of Chinese Journalism” by Wang Yü-chüan（王玉娟， 2006）， “Ko Kung-chen and History of Chinese Journalism” by Li Chen-kang （李贞刚， 2010） and“How History of Chinese Journalism Sheds Light on Ko Kung-chen’s Views About Journalism？” by Yeh Ching （叶静， 2015）， etc.. What is more， Li K’ai-chün’s （李开军， 2010） article “The Origin of Ko Kung-chen’s Opinion on the Four Periods in Chinese Press” explores the origin and influence of Ko Kung-chen’s Opinion on the Four Periods in Chinese Press； Wu Hsiang’s （吴翔， 2010） article “Eight Editions of Ko Kung-chen’s History of Chinese Journalism” compares the format， the additions， and deletions of the eight editions； Chang Wei’s （张伟， 2012） article “Reflections on the Ontology and Historical Value of Chinese Press Studies by Taking History of Chinese Journalism as an Example” demonstrates the exemplary and historical value of this work for the study of the ontology of the Chinese press.

There are only a few contemporary works that have revised historical narrative and fact errors in History of Chinese Journalism. To date， the first and the reprinted 18 editions of History of Chinese Journalism have not yet systematically and accurately corrected historical narrative and fact errors of alien press in this work， and some editions have even truncated the original text. Three articles on the revision of the historical facts in History of Chinese Journalism are limited to the examination and revision of the historical fact details in the new Chinese local press. Wu Hsiang’s （吳翔， 2012） article “Liang Shuming： The First to Correct Errors in History of Chinese Journalism—From the Examination of the Errors in Ko Kung-chen’s Narrative of ‘P’eng I-chung’s Case’” discusses Liang Shuming’s correction of the three errors in Ko Kung-chen’s interpretation of the late Qing Dynasty “P’eng I-chung’s case” in his 1960 book “Remembering Mr. P’eng I-chung”. Wu Hsiang’s （吴翔， 2013） another article “Addendum to History of Chinese Journalism： the late Qing Dynasty‘Official Gazette Era’ in Nanjing” supplements and corrects the historical facts about Nanjing press in the Late Qing Dynasty in History of Chinese Journalism. Mao Chang-ch’ing’s （毛章清， 2003） article “Correction and Addendum of Ko Kung-chen’s History of Chinese Journalism—An Analysis of Early Journalism Education at Xiamen University” discusses the narrative errors of early journalism education at Xiamen University in History of Chinese Journalism.

In “Revision of Historical Actuality in History of Chinese Journalism”， Yang Chin-cheng， Ning Shu-fan， Fang Han-Ch’i and Wang Feng-ch’ao （杨瑾琤， 宁树藩， 方汉奇， 王凤超， 1985） revise historical narrative and fact errors in the work. In “Study of Historical Fact Errors in History of Chinese Journalism”， Chang Hui systematically examines 1563 factual and non-factual errors listed in “Revision of Historical Actuality in History of Chinese Journalism”， subdividing these errors into time errors， errors in names， press name errors， location errors， misspellings， combined errors （multiple errors） and other types of errors （张慧， 2016， pp. 38-41）， and attempts to uncover the reasons， the historical and social context behind the errors， and Ko Kung-chen conception of journalism. These two articles can be regarded as useful attempts to revise and study the historical facts in History of Chinese Journalism. However， many problems arising from the historical errors and misinterpretations in alien press in China have not been precisely corrected and thoroughly studied.

The article “Revision of Historical Actuality in History of Chinese Journalism” lists 164 historical errors that have been corrected， but omits a number of historical narrative errors， especially those errors in alien press in China. As stated in the article， “this revision cannot be done in one go and needs to be continued and supplemented， and there may still be many errors in our revision， so we sincerely ask scholars to correct them if any” （楊瑾琤， 1985， p. 58）. The other article “Study of Historical Fact Errors in History of Chinese Journalism” does not systematically uncover and correct the historical errors in History of Chinese Journalism，but merely categorizes and counts the 156 historical errors listed in the “Revision of Historical Actuality in History of Chinese Journalism” and there are still some omissions in its statistics.

The purpose of this paper is to supplement the existing revision of the historical fact errors of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism and to solve the new problems that have arisen. By applying the basic rules of statistical data measurement and classification scale， the paper aims to classify the historical errors of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism， to conduct a statistical analysis of all these errors and explore the reasons behind the errors， so as to explore a new path for the study of the history of Chinese journalism and the history of alien periodicals and press in China.

II. Supplements to Corrections of Historical Fact Errors of Alien Press in History of Chinese Journalism

The alien press in China has witnessed the history of modern Chinese Journalism and also the development of Chinese society. According to Ko Kung-chen， “as far as the foreign-language press in China was concerned， the earliest press was in Portuguese， the most numerous one was in Japanese， and the most powerful one was in English” （戈公振， 1955， pp. 83-84）， and the press had a profound impact on Chinese politics， education， science， diplomacy， commerce， and religion. When systematically correcting and classifying historical errors in History of Chinese Journalism， we must consider the basic historical facts that alien press in China have witnessed the development of China’s modern journalism and that Chinese local press and alien press in China were intertwined. In addition， we must subdivide the foreign press in China， instead of treating alien press in China as a mere “episode” in the history of Chinese journalism. Only in this way can the historical narrative and fact errors be corrected to the greatest extent possible.

History of Chinese Journalism systematically recounts the historical evolution of the Chinese journalism and outlines the development of the Chinese press， which ranges over the period when official gazettes were exclusive， the founding period of alien periodicals and press in China， the period of the rise of the native press， and the period of press operations （戈公振， 1955， p. 22）. From official gazette to foreign press， the native press， and the modern press， Mr. Ko adopted a macro-linear staging method， highlighting the climax of press establishment spawned by the Reform Movement of 1898 and the Chinese Revolution of 1911， and he considered the development of foreign press in China as an independent stage in the history of the press in China. “Since the arrival of Protestant Christianity in the east， William Milne （1785-1822） have created A General Monthly Record （《察世俗每月統纪传》）. With speech and news chronicle， the magazine heralded the beginning of the modern press in China and thus we had the second period called the founding period of alien periodicals and press in China. For the sake of convenience， I would like to describe the situation of foreign press in our country today” （戈公振， 1955， p. 22）. In the 1920s and 1930s， Chinese journalism works followed the historical staging method of History of Chinese Journalism， and after the War of Liberation， journalism researchers on the mainland still followed the press staging method developed by Ko Kung-chen.

In History of Chinese Journalism， the discussion framework and the four periods of the history of the press in China delineate the classification of press： “official gazettes” in the first period refer to Ti-pao and Peking Gazette. “Therefore， the book starts with Ti-pao while talking about official gazettes” （戈公振， 1955， p. 23）. “Since the Han and Tang dynasties until the end of the Qing dynasty， Ti-pao has been the center of Chinese press. Although there were many foreign press and native press at the end of the Qing Dynasty， they merely lasted for a very short period of time. Thus， we had the period when official gazettes were exclusive”（戈公振， 1955， p. 22）. The alien press in the second period refer to the Chinese and foreign language press established by missionaries， foreign investors， and foreign governments and agencies in China， “during this period， the press were aimed at preaching or business and were in the Chinese language or in foreign languages” （戈公振， 1955， p. 22）. The native press in the third period actually refers to the new local Chinese press that arose under the influence of foreign press. “The press run by Chinese people has emerged as early as the end of the Tongzhi year （1862-1875）. They had original styles different from the alien press and most of their distributions were written by outsiders under a pseudonym. After the Sino-Japanese War， they embraced a wide range of issues， such as Constitutional Monarchy， democracy， national treasures and some catered to the needs of the times. This is why ‘the period of the rise of the native press’ gets its name. And the rise of the native press also contributed to the success of the Chinese Revolution of 1911” （戈公振， 1955， p. 22）. The press in the fourth period mainly refers to the commercial press in Republican China （1912-1949）. “Since the founding of the Republic of China in 1912， the party struggle has frequently recurred， and all the press that did not want to be involved in the political disputes gradually shifted their emphasis to business. As material life increasingly improved， the press was more business-oriented. Thus， we had the fourth period called ‘the period of press operations’” （戈公振， 1955， p. 22）.

Based on the four periods in the history of the press in China and the characteristics of press in each period， China’s press can be divided into three major categories， namely Ti-pao， Peking Gazette， alien periodicals and press in China and the new local Chinese press， which is the premise for the correction of historical fact errors， data statistics， and qualitative analysis of History of Chinese Journalism. Qualitative data describe the quality and characteristics of things. This data type is non-numerical in nature， and its results are usually expressed as categories， also known as quality data （袁衛， 2002， p. 10）. In order to correct the historical fact errors of different categories of press based on the existing revisions of History of Chinese Journalism， it is also necessary to classify and statistically analyzing the historical narrative and fact errors in the work.

Based on specific information of historical fact errors in History of Chinese Journalism， errors of alien press in China， including foreign press in the Chinese language and foreign language press， can be divided into five categories： I. errors in spelling and printing of words in foreign language press； II. errors in the translation of the name of foreign language press； III. errors in characters and proper names in foreign language press； IV. errors in historical facts of foreign language press； V. errors in historical facts of foreign press in the Chinese language. This classification follows the criteria of exhaustion and mutual exclusion of the classification scale in statistics （袁衛， 2002， pp. 8-9） to ensure that each historical fact error identified can be assigned to a certain category without omission， and to avoid the situation where one historical fact is assigned to several historical error categories， unless several errors do occur in the exposition of that historical fact.

From the columns “Review”， “Literary Notices” and “European periodicals beyond the Ganges” in The Chinese Repository （The Chinese Repository， 1836， pp. 145-160） to “Notes of New Books and Literary Intelligence” and “Collectanea Bibligraphica” in The China Review， or Notes and Queries on the Far East， and“Publications” and “Notices of Recent Publications” in The Chinese Recorder and Missionary Journal， all the columns are a complete record of the historical evolution of the press and publishing business in modern China， especially the development trajectory of alien press in China.

The purpose of this paper is to check and revise the historical facts of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism one by one with reference to the press writings and major alien press in Portuguese， English， Japanese， German， French， and Russian in modern China， and to correct the historical errors omitted by the existing historical fact revisions or research results， such as those corrected by the essay “Revision of Historical Actuality in History of Chinese Journalism”， as shown in Table 1 below. The serial numbers marked with an asterisk in Table 1 are new corrections of errors or details different from those in “Revision of Historical Actuality in History of Chinese Journalism”， and the 63 corrections by and large concern the historical facts of foreign press in China. Each serial number generally corresponds to one error， and some serial numbers include two or three errors in their historical statements.

III. Statistical Analysis of Historical Fact Errors of Alien Press in History of Chinese Journalism

Based on the correction and classification of historical fact errors of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism， and through analyzing the categorical data of errors of alien press in the work， we can gain insight into the distribution of all these errors. By analyzing classification of historical fact errors in History of Chinese Journalism and contributing factors to these error types， the essay aims to probe new approach for the study of alien periodicals and press in China.

Statistical Analysis of the Errors

According to Table 1， the statistics of historical errors of foreign newspapers in History of Chinese Journalism are as follows： I. 27 errors in spelling and printing of words in foreign language press； II. 21 errors in translation of alien press name； III. 25 errors in characters and proper names in foreign language press； IV. 21 errors in historical facts of foreign language press； V. 46 errors in historical facts of foreign press in the Chinese language， totaling 139 errors. The five types of errors can be sequenced as follows： V-46， I-27， III-25， IV-33， II-21， IV-21.

Of all the errors， 19.4% are errors in spelling and printing of words in foreign language press； 15.1% are errors in translation of alien press name； 18% are errors in characters and proper names in foreign language press； 15.1% are errors in historical facts of foreign language press； 33.1% are errors in historical facts of foreign press in the Chinese language.

Among the historical errors of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism， spelling and printing errors in foreign language press， to some degree， don’t fall under historical fact errors. There are 46 historical fact errors of foreign press in the Chinese language， accounting for 33.1% of the total； errors in translation of alien press name， in characters and proper names in foreign language press and in historical facts of foreign language press all involve the translation of foreign press name and historical facts， totaling 67 or accounting for 48.2% of the total. In other words， the errors in translation of foreign press name and of historical facts have become the main part of revisions.

Contributing Factors to the Five Error Types

As of the early 20th century， there was no uniform Chinese translation for foreign press in China in English， Portuguese， Japanese， German， French and Russian. In the process of writing History of Chinese Journalism， Mr. Ko rendered each name of foreign press into Chinese， but he failed to make a systematic study of the changes of foreign press in China and the development pattern of foreign papers in various languages， so it was difficult for him to read through all these foreign papers in a short period of time. That might explain why mistranslation and incomplete translation of alien press names and publication information were common in the work.

The reasons for the distribution of historical errors in History of Chinese Journalism are manifold： alien press in China could be regarded as recorders and commentators of the history of modern China， the trade between China and Western countries， military conflicts and cultural exchanges； their variety of types and languages， the complexity of their operation， their long history and their far-reaching influence are rare in the history of the world press. Although Mr. Ko collected and sort out a large number of materials for this book， various constraints then made it impossible for him to entirely uncover or know about the historical facts of alien press； while listing and discussing foreign press in different languages， Mr. Ko can only translate the basic information of papers based on limited sources or with the help of others， which inevitably leads to misinformation about the translation of paper names and general historical facts； the development pattern of alien press in China is complex and needs to be studied in depth and systematically. Moreover， given that History of Chinese Journalism is a pioneering work in the history of Chinese Journalism， Mr. Ko has no ready-made documents to refer to， so he can only briefly describe the alien press in China regarding its development as the founding stage of the entire history of the Chinese journalism.

The 46 historical fact errors of foreign press in the Chinese language in History of Chinese Journalism are not attributable to the lack of rigor in Mr. Ko’s work， but largely to the complex situation of the modern Chinese journalism and the great variety of papers. In the history of Chinese journalism， the question of “how many papers there were in modern China” is still an open question， and many of these topics need to be studied in depth and precisely.

Conclusion

The paper checked and revised the historical facts of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism one by one with reference to the press writings and major alien press in Portuguese， English， Japanese， German， French， and Russian in modern China， and corrected the historical errors omitted by the existing historical fact revisions or research results， such as those corrected by the essay “Revision of Historical Actuality in History of Chinese Journalism”. By applying the basic rules of statistical data measurement and classification scale， the paper classified the historical errors of alien press in History of Chinese Journalism， conducted a statistical analysis of all these errors and explored causes behind these errors. In summary， these errors fall into five categories. They are： （I）. errors in spelling and printing of words in foreign language press； （II）. errors in the translation of the name of foreign language press； （III）. errors in characters and proper names in foreign language press； （IV）. errors in historical facts of foreign language press； （V）. errors in historical facts of foreign press in the Chinese language. The contributing factors behind the errors are varied. Despite the large quantities of errors， it is not the lack of rigor in Mr. Ko’s work but the complex situation of the modern Chinese journalism and the great variety of papers that should take the blame.

References

Britton， R. S. （1966）. The Chinese periodical press 1800-1912. Taipei： Ch’engwen Publishing Company.

Chen， S. S.-W. （2019）. Children’s literature and transnational knowledge in modern China education， religion， and childhood（Deakin University Melbourne， VIC， Australia）.

European periodicals beyond the Ganges. The Chinese Repository， 5（4）， August， 1836， 145-160.

Ko， K.-C. （1927）. History of Chinese journalism. Shanghai： Commercial Press in Shanghai.

Ko， K.-C. （1955）. History of Chinese journalism. Beijing： SDX Joint Publishing Company.

NING， S. F. （2003）. A study on the history of Chinese journalism by Ko Kung-chen. Anthology of NING Shufan. Swatow： Swatow University Press.

Secular Literature. Records of the General Conference of the Protestant Missionaries of China. Shanghai： American Presbyterian Mission Press， 1877， 227.

The Chinese Recorder and Missionary Journal， V， September-October， 1874， 303-304.

The Chinese Recorder and Missionary Journal， VI， July-August， 1875， 297-298.

The Chinese Recorder and Missionary Journal， VII， March-April， 1876， 151-152.

YANG， J. C.， NING， S. F.， FANG， H. Q.， & WANG， F. C. （1985）. Rectify of the historical narrative errors in the history of Chinese journalism by Ko Kung-chen. Journalism Research Material， （4）， 57， 58.

YUAN， W.， PANG， H.， & ZENG， W. Y. （2002）. （Eds.）. The statistics. Beijing： The Higher Education Press.

ZHANG， H. （2016）. A study on the historical narrative errors in the history of Chinese journalism by Ko Kung-chen. Journal of Western Studies （News and Communication）， （6）， 38-41.