Reporters on the Job: On the hunt for disappeared Chinese knockoffs

Staff writer Peter Ford questions a Chinese stallholder about why knockoffs went missing from a market in Beijing, when a man barrels up to him to aggressively video his interview.

Intrigued by reports from my sons that the Silk Street Market, an Aladdin’s cave of cheap counterfeit clothing that they frequent, had suddenly been stripped of everything bearing a false brand name, I went to have a look at the place last week.

Sure enough the stalls were almost bare, staffed by sales girls who did not want to talk about why they had nothing but unknown Chinese brands to offer.

On closer inspection, some of the shirts turned out to have Chinese labels hastily and inexpertly sewn over existing (fake) Ralph Lauren labels, which remained legible. I was questioning a stallholder about this when a man barreled up to me holding a camera phone in front of him and stuck it in my face as he video-recorded my interview.

He refused to identify himself, other than as “a passerby,” and continued to hold the camera close to my face. The stallholder said she did not know who he was, he ignored my requests to stop interfering, and eventually I ignored him.

Ending my interview, I made my way to the top floor, where I had arranged to meet the market’s general manager, Hu Wenli. The walls of her office corridor were covered with photos of local and foreign celebrities (including George Bush Sr.) in the company of … none else but the man who had just been harassing me.

He turned out to be Zhang Yongping, the owner and president of the company that has owned the Silk Street Market since it was moved off the streets and into its current premises seven years ago. He insisted on being interviewed himself (though he spent two hours simply evading my questions), but did not once apologize for his behavior downstairs.

He said he had suspected that I was an undercover investigator attending a meeting of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) that was taking place in Beijing at the time (see accompanying article) and had been curious to hear what I was talking about.

I left the market none the wiser about why the normal counterfeit goods had disappeared, (although I thought the WIPO conference probably had something to do with it) and spent a couple of days puzzling about what I was going to write.

And then, on Sunday, one of my sons went on a reconnaissance trip to the Silk Market, and found that everything had miraculously returned to normal. On Monday I went down there to see for myself, and sure enough, it offered the same cornucopia of counterfeits as it had always done.

There was an added benefit: Who should I bump into as I walked down a corridor lined with stalls selling fake luxury watches but Mr. Zhang and his general manager Ms. Hu. They looked surprised to see me, and Ms. Hu looked a little shamefaced, as well she might have done considering that it was now obvious that she and her boss had spent Wednesday morning being more than economical with the truth. But Zhang was just as adept at not answering my questions as he had been a few days earlier.

He walked away from my questions. Too late, I thought of taking out my iPhone and filming him walking among all the counterfeits he had told me did not exist any more in his market. Then, perhaps, we would have been even.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Reporters on the Job: On the hunt for disappeared Chinese knockoffs
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2012/0703/Reporters-on-the-Job-On-the-hunt-for-disappeared-Chinese-knockoffs
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe