In its coverage of the Google affair, the New York Times is now quoting regularly from the Global Times. What is perplexing is that the American reporters in Beijing only seem to be reading the English version of the paper! The Chinese version (known as Huanqiu Shibao [环球时报]) is a much juicier, more nationalistic, and, quite naturally, reflective of what Chinese people are actually reading in the PRC.
The latest “big news page” set up by the Xinhua editors of the Huanqiu Shibao features a header which puts the Google issue into broader context and makes it clear that the CCP is now interpreting this issue within a mostly-nationalistic discourse:
Update: 发难 [fa1 nan4], the final characters in the above character, are defined as either a.) to rise in revolt or b.) to launch an attack. Thus the Huanqiu headliners manage to imply that the U.S. is encouraging a revolt within in China by its defense of “freedom of the internet” as well as mounting a frontal assault against “China.” (Note disapproving quotation marks: in the former case, to dispute the whole notion, in the latter case, to imply that “CCP” and “China” are not always wholly synonymous.) Thus, when an opponent of the construction of a faux-Confucian goal of a “harmonious society” (和谐社会) is found, language of the Warring States is ever appropriate. Who needs to resort to Mao’s evocation of “sugar-coated bullets of the imperialists” (帝国主义的汤炮弹) when you can call the assailant out into the open?