Soft Power: How China Continues to Game the System
China has found it doesn't need a particular soft power niche to play the soft power game...
So, it's been a while since we last posted. Journeying to the recent RSA Conference in San Francisco, the world's largest annual cyber security event, and doing follow up from there has occupied most of our time. But we'll be getting back into the swing of things; this post – while short – will serve as an antecedent to a deep dive on China that we'll post later this week, and we're also dropping a piece on the India-Pakistan fallout.
Last week, President Trump dropped – you guessed it – more tariffs, this time on films made in foreign countries1. Ostensibly the reasoning from the President is to protect Hollywood against competitors, but this is coming from a man clearly unaware that equating a reshoring approach of manufacturing is not the same as doing it for entertainment production (and perhaps more importantly, financing or services in general). But this isn’t only about attempting to reshore entertainment industries.
We should note that in the last few days both China and the US have made steps towards direct negotiations to scale back the trade war between the two countries, but the strength China has built in its internal soft power machine has left the US at a disadvantage.
Traditionally, one of the areas that China has struggled with is soft power, especially in comparison to its neighbours in Japan and South Korea, but in recent years it has found its way into the market. Instead of focusing on directly establishing a soft power niche, China has flexed two crucial opportunities to build influence in the arena. China, as the world’s second largest economy, has money and production capability to offer creatives and presents the world’s most lucrative legitimate markets in both the movie and video games spaces.
This gravity naturally accrues China an increasing level of influence on the behaviour of the industry and its most powerful players.
China has utilised the potential depth of its market to strengthen its own film and media industries, while also reaching out and engaging with foreign markets. There is a comparison to be made with the historical exclusivity that China has retained; Jackie Chan could be seen as the Chinese film equivalent of Europe's historical Marco Polo. An outreach between different cultures from Asia that found and retained popular success, but allowing Hollywood to feel comfortable even while opportunities passed them by. It's a reminder that even though precedent might be established by another, there are opportunities to be exploited – and advantages found – in playing catch up2.
It's not inherently unusual; in the early twentieth century, Japanese artists drew on animation productions in Europe and the United States, combining it with traditional Japanese art forms (plays, puppetry and prints). The resulting technical and artistic evolution resulted in anime culture, which Japan successfully exported as one of its largest soft power products. England and Brazil have a similar relationship regarding football.
But both of those previous examples were driven by free markets, not by an authoritarian regime – one notorious for its censorship and strict control of access of foreign content into the country. Moreover, that same regime has sought to shape markets externally, not simply internally – consider the subsidised undercutting of Western industry in solar panels and the car industry, amongst others.
A similar story is now happening in the games industry. Chinese studios have launched recent bestsellers like Black Myth: Wukong, Marvel Rivals and Hoyoverse titles Genshin Impact and Zenless Zone Zero. China has always been an incredibly strong market for mobile games, but China has started finding broader success across the mainstream. As in other industries, China engaged with foreign producers, taking lessons from their successes and failures, and protected their internal market while investing heavily into their internal industry. That they've found such success abroad while many Western studios released products quickly slated as the next contestants in the 'culture war' was also quite convenient for them.
Historically, entertainment and art have thrived in regions and states that have supported them, and there's little reason to think that this time would be different. We would recommend the Trump administration change tack to supporting their markets, rather than haphazardly throwing tariffs – that won't work as intended – around. China's biggest strength in such cultural and social products and services is its ability to maintain a huge internal market and manipulate the content its citizens have access to. Also akin to other industries, Trump should seek to bring other nations onboard, building a broader ethos and development of mutually supportive entertainment industries, instead of effectively crippling one of the United States' consistently strong soft power performers, its entertainment industry.
There is a sad irony that in the same week that Joseph Nye Jr – the American political scientist that coined the term 'soft power' – passed away, the Trump administration is tearing down, rather than bolstering, the US' soft power influence.
We also want to note here that “made in foreign countries” in regards to film production and the film industry is incredibly vague. It’s difficult to account for the true limitations this would pose on studios, expertise and film options within Hollywood.
Many countries have developed strong industries in many sectors by learning from established examples overseas. Countries looking to play catch up - such as middle powers wary of deepening geopolitical instability and potential shifts in the fundamentals of Western concepts of the rule of law - could do far worse.