From the Group Comes the Nation: China’s First Mass Political Organization, the Baohuanghui
By Jane Leung Larson
We recently learned that the Chinese government has deemed the term “civil society” [gongmin shehui ????] too sensitive to use in Chinese news reports. Apparently, even the mention of Chinese citizens voluntarily joining together for a common cause challenges the authority of China’s rulers, especially when that cause is political. Such aversion to autonomous organizations goes back to imperial China, and it was not until the last throes of the Qing dynasty that the first truly political Chinese organization emerged and grew. And that organization had no choice but to be based outside of China.
Chinese civil society took a big step forward in 1899 with the founding of the Chinese Empire Reform Association, or the Baohuanghui ??? (literally the “Protect the Emperor Society”), in Victoria, Canada. In effect a proto-political party, the Baohuanghui was founded on the premise that the first step in reforming China was the launching of an organization of like-minded Chinese who believed in its mission and would support a variety of methods, from uprisings to newspapers, to achieve their goals. This kind of voluntary association, or qun [? group], was distinguished from the traditional Chinese organizations that formed around native place, clan, guild, or religious identities, which only reinforced the cliquishness and infighting of Chinese people. From the qun, it was hoped, would come the guo [? the nation].
The Baohuanghui became the largest and most influential overseas Chinese political organization during its late Qing heyday, far surpassing Sun Yat-sen’s revolutionary groups in scope and influence, both inside and outside China. By 1905, more than 150 chapters had been established in Chinese communities in North and South America, Southeast and Northeast Asia, Australia and even Africa, totaling perhaps 100,000 members with a broad reach into China. Its ultimate objective—transforming China’s autocratic system into a constitutional monarchy, much like that of Great Britain or Japan—failed, but it was crucial in spreading the acceptance of constitutionalism, nationalism, and popular sovereignty among Chinese both outside and inside China.
How did the Baohuanghui arise, expand so rapidly among overseas Chinese, and get its message inside China? And why has it received so little attention by scholars of modern Chinese political history?
The origin of the Baohuanghui lies with the Hundred Days of Reform of 1898, a turning point in Chinese politics that was noted by the drafters of Charter 08, among them 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo. Charter 08 asserts: “The first attempts at modern political change came with the ill-fated summer of reforms in 1898, but these were cruelly crushed by ultraconservatives at China‘s imperial court.” Charter 08 ends by calling for those who feel the same sense of crisis and responsibility for China’s future to join in a citizens’ movement to “bring to reality the goals and ideals that our people have incessantly been seeking for more than a hundred years.”
The “ill-fated reforms” initiated by the Guangxu Emperor between June and September 1898 were intended to launch the political and economic renovation of an autocratic empire by turning it into a constitutional monarchy that gave some measure of popular sovereignty to Chinese citizens. Overly ambitious in scope (110 edicts issued in 103 days) and undercut by inept political moves that raised the hackles of powerful court officials, the reforms were abruptly halted with a coup by Empress Dowager Cixi, who had stepped aside as Regent for the young Emperor but remained the power behind the throne. She put the Emperor under house arrest for the rest of his life and executed six of his advisors.
China’s “first attempts at modern political change” did not end in 1898. The Emperor’s leading reform advisors, Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao, escaped China with prices on their heads and one year later, founded the Baohuanghui, with Kang as President and Liang as Vice President. Kang, Liang, and other key leaders began traveling the globe, stressing the urgent need for political reform in China and setting up Baohuanghui branches.
Baohuanghui Vice President Liang Qichao wrote the Charter of the Los Angeles chapter in 1903 on official letterhead.
The charter of the Los Angeles chapter, written by Liang Qichao on his visit to the U.S. in 1903, described the Baohuanghui’s goals: “This association aims to save China. The efforts of each of the 400,000,000 Chinese people must be combined in order to carry out the Emperor’s 1898 reforms. The purpose of this association is to establish a constitutional government. After the constitutional government is established, we will form a large political party that will always exert itself in the affairs of the nation.”
Quite consciously, with the intention of preparing members to create and lead a modern nation, Baohuanghui leaders fashioned an organizational identity that echoed a national identity, including a charter or constitution, a flag, badges, rules for meetings, and elections. The organization’s members also visibly represented “China,” unlike the memberships of most domestic reform organizations during the Qing, which were composed of gentry, merchants, and returned students. Baohuanghui chapters, though generally headed by merchants, were far more inclusive, with, for example, laborers making up a large part of the membership in the United States.
The Baohuanghui’s structure was in itself an experiment in political participation. When Liang Qichao drafted the charter for the Los Angeles chapter, he apologized for “putting in too many details in the section on meeting procedures. This is because Chinese people never had any rules for holding a meeting, and therefore a meeting often ends up with no decision or resolutions. This charter takes the meeting rules of Western meetings of all kinds as a model, and we Chinese should learn from them.” As to members, the charter states: “Any patriotic Chinese is qualified to join the association at any time. People may register as members regardless of their surname, native place, or religion.”
The romance of the association is reflected in group letters from Baohuanghui chapters, like this one from the Hartford, Connecticut branch, written in 1902 to their comrades in other cities: “The first priority is to enlighten people if one wishes to save China from its dangerous predicament. In order to enlighten people, the most important thing is to form mass organizations and associations. . . . Newspapers are the vanguard to provide people with knowledge. Commerce is the foundation of people’s finance. Education is for the germination of talent. These all need to be accomplished so that we can carry out the mission of reform.”
Newspapers, commerce and education were incorporated into the organizational structure to reach out beyond the Baohuanghui’s members—through an international network of civil and military schools, a program to fund overseas study, and a business conglomerate that included publishing and translation companies, newspapers, banks, hotels, restaurants and streetcar lines. There also were early attempts to carry out assassinations and uprisings in China in order to restore the Emperor to his throne (all of which failed), and later more successful efforts to mobilize major nationalistic movements including the anti-American boycott of 1905 and anti-Japanese boycott of 1908.
Overseas Chinese found the Baohuanghui’s moderate political agenda of special appeal, and its political program, focused as it was on making China competitive in the modern world, gave them hope as they looked with increasing distress upon their beleaguered homeland. The Baohuanghui ideology has been called an early expression of Chinese liberalism, a middle way that joined the interests (and freedoms) of individuals to public and national interests—advocating constitutionalism, rule of law, representative government, civil and human rights, limitations on the power of government authority, opposition to autocracy, and economic modernization. These ideas had begun circulating in China in the 1880s, but only with the Hundred Days of 1898 did they form a template for action, which was further developed by the Baohuanghui and their reform allies in China.
After the disastrous Boxer Uprising and the ensuing burden of foreign indemnities, the Empress Dowager finally was convinced that constitutional reform was imperative to China’s survival, and by 1905, constitutionalism was broadly accepted as the proper path for China. In Peter Zarrow’s words, “when even officials had become constitutionalists . . . what was once radical had become mainstream” (Introduction, Creating Chinese Modernity).
Much of the credit for making constitutionalism a mainstream idea must go to the masterful propaganda of Kang, Liang, and their disciples, who changed the medium as well as the message heard by the Chinese people. The Baohuanghui made innovative use of speeches, political rallies, circular telegrams, and petitions, but most influential were the newspapers read far beyond their immediate geographical locations, which included the U.S., Canada, Japan, the Philippines, Burma, Siam, Java, Hawaii, Mexico, and China. With his aptitude for adapting Western concepts like constitutionalism and citizenship to a Chinese milieu, Liang Qichao took the lead in founding, editing, and writing for Baohuanghui-funded papers like New People’s Miscellany [Minxin Congbao] and Shanghai’s Eastern Times [Shibao]. Liang probably had the widest readership of any journalist in the late Qing, and even Mao Zedong hung on his every word as a young man.
His biographer, Kung-chuan Hsiao, described Kang Youwei as “an insistent reformer believing in the possibility of perfection through progress.” But Kang was adamant that progress should be gradual, moving step by step in China from autocracy to constitutional monarchy to democracy, although the pace he sought quickened as the Qing began to implement its plans to transition to constitutional government. In 1907, Kang changed the Baohuanghui’s name to the Xianzhenghui ???, or Constitutional Association. He spoke openly about when the organization might return to China as a full-fledged political party. In 1908, Liang Qichao transferred an affiliated political organization, the Political Information Society, or Zhengwenshe ???, from its overseas base in Tokyo to Shanghai. Both organizations moved to the forefront of a national petition movement that urged the Qing to delay no longer in convening a parliament to debate and promulgate a constitution. Kang drafted a lengthy petition that claimed to be signed by overseas Chinese in “200 different cities, representing several hundred thousand people.” Although Kang’s petition was deemed “absurd” by the Qing court and the Zhengwenshe was shut down for “pretending to study current affairs while secretly pursuing the provocation of unrest and harming national security,” the wave of constitutionalism and yearning for political participation quickly outgrew the ability of the Qing government to meet reformers’ expectations. Three years later, China’s imperial system was gone.
Why did the Baohuanghui, which broke ground in the development of Chinese civil society, fade into obscurity in Chinese political history? Most obviously, the Baohuanghui’s identification with the monarchy left it on the sidelines with the coming of the 1911 Republican revolution, while its role in spreading the acceptance of constitutionalism, nationalism, and popular sovereignty was quickly forgotten. The Baohuanghui became an emblem of reaction and counter-revolution in Republican and Communist China, and only when Deng Xiaoping brought reform back into fashion (and by implication suggested that the Qing reform movement might have some relevance to the present) did research on Kang, Liang, and the Baohuanghui take off. Most scholars of Kang and Liang touch only incidentally on their lives and writings as Baohuanghui leaders, even though the organization’s activities consumed the two men during the Qing’s last decade. Finally, those who study the Baohuanghui as a transnational organization must incorporate scholarship on both the histories of China and of the Chinese diaspora. For all these reasons, there have been only a handful of books devoted to the organization and none to its development worldwide.
Interest in the Baohuanghui is slowly building. For instance, historian Zhongping Chen of the University of Victoria has begun to survey archives in North America, bringing a fresh interpretation of the Baohuanghui and its origins in Canada. With the help of a Chinese colleague, Chen Xuezhang, I have established a collaborative online forum, Baohuanghui Scholarship—it includes postings on new research developments, a bibliography, scholars currently doing research in this area, archival sources around the world, and Mapping the Baohuanghui, which charts the locations of chapters, newspapers, schools, women’s associations, and businesses around the world. An exhibition this spring at the Hong Kong Museum of History on the 1911 Republican revolution will include a section on the contributions of the Baohuanghui. Also coming this year is a docu-drama that gives considerable attention to the Baohuanghui, Datong (Great Society), directed by New York-Hong Kong filmmaker Evans Chan and narrated by Swedish Chinese theatre artist Chiang Ching.
Jane Leung Larson began research on the Baohuanghui in the mid-1980s after the papers of her grandfather, a student of Kang Youwei and founder of the Los Angeles chapter, were re-discovered fifty years after his death. Among her publications is “Articulating China’s First Mass Movement: Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao, the Baohuanghui, and the 1905 Anti-American Boycott” (Twentieth-Century China, November 2007).
Photo via UCLA Library Digital Collections.
Casey Anthony: State wants Jose Baez held in contempt — he cites confusion
Defense attorney Jose Baez attended a Jan. 14 hearing in the Casey Anthony case. Photo credit: Red Huber/Orlando Sentinel
The stations tonight quickly addressed the latest news in the Casey Anthony case. The main focus: defense attorney Jose Baez.
WESH-Channel 2 titled its brief report “State wants Baez held in contempt.”
Anchor Jim Payne said, “Baez missed a deadline to lay out the defense’s objections over some of the scientific evidence expected at trial. The defense says the missed deadline was caused by confusion over the order. The state claims the order was nothing short of clear. We’ll let you know how Judge Belvin Perry proceeds with the state’s contempt request.”
Anthony is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, 2-year-old Caylee. The trial is scheduled to start in May.
Here’s how WFTV-Channel 9 anchor Martie Salt explained the Baez development: “State prosecutors say Casey’s defense attorney has missed another deadline. In a motion filed today, prosecutors say Jose Baez did not turn in a list on time of issues he would object to for an upcoming hearing about what scientific evidence will be allowed during Casey’s trial. Baez claims he was confused about what he needed to turn in. Prosecutors are asking the judge in the case to hold Baez in contempt of court.”
Salt also noted that the defense today asked for express copies of transcripts of some depositions of state witnesses. “Express copies would be more expensive and the state agency, which regulates defense attorney spending, is objecting to paying for them,” Salt said. Perry will decide the issue.
At 6, WFTV’s Kathi Belich came back with a longer look at the Baez story. She noted it was the second time that prosecutors have asked Baez to be held in contempt for missed deadlines. Perry didn’t find him in contempt the first time, but fined him nearly $600. “This time, WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer says Baez is coming dangerously close to being found in contempt and testing the bounds of the judge’s patience,” Belich added.
Reading Round-Up, 2/20/11
• If you’re looking for a few China book recommendations, check out these two recent interviews at The Browser’s “Five Books” feature: the New Yorker’s Evan Osnos suggests five books that first-time visitors to China should read before they go, and Victor Shih of Northwestern University shares his favorite titles dealing with the Chinese economy.
• Osnos also writes about “China’s Education Binge” at his “Letters from China” blog on the New Yorker’s site.
• China Beatniks around the web: at the International Herald Tribune, Daniel A. Bell evaluates the chances of protests in the Middle East being replicated in China. For a comparative look at how the Chinese and North Korean governments have been reacting to the ousting of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, see this article at the Korea Times, where China Beat consulting editor Jeff Wasserstrom is quoted on the parallels between present-day protests and the anti-Chiang Kai-shek demonstrations of the 1940s in China. And at the Business Standard, Pallavi Aiyar writes about why the Egyptian protests could be a warning for China.
• Jottings from the Granite Studio guest-blogger Yajun analyzes “Why Groupon is Flailing in China”:
I argue that Groupon’s problem is its arrogant attitude. It had no sense of political sensitivity of certain issues for Chinese consumers. Its inefficient internal coordination and its lack of effective communication with its Chinese partner put them in an embarrassing situation. It ignores advice from Tencent, and their management team doesn’t seem to have the experience necessary to really get in touch with Chinese consumers.
As a Chinese tuangou veteran, I suggest that rather than paying expensive salaries to MBAs, they should listen to what their partner say about Chinese market. They should find out what young urban people with money to burn wish to burn it on.
Have you ever seen an old Chinese woman buy vegetables at a morning market? Consumers in China are tough and persistent. We like to bargain and we are good at it. Most of us don’t care about the background of the company. (Even though Groupon is well-known abroad, for Chinese consumers, it is just another group buy website). I personally only care about the best value and reliable service.
• If you’re a polo fan, see Lara Farrar’s article at the Wall Street Journal discussing the sport’s rising popularity among the very rich in China.
• Finally, for a glimpse at how food moves from the farm to the dining tables of Beijing’s residents, see this slideshow by Jonah Kessel. Kessel visited one of the city’s major food markets, the Xinfadi Agri-product Wholesale Market, to see how the operation worked.
This week: ‘American Idol’ announces Top 20; ‘Survivor’ goes to Redemption Island; ‘America’s Next Top Model’ returns
Judge Steven Tyler helps narrow the "American Idol" field this week. Photo credit: Tony Duran/Fox
It’s a big week in reality television. Just consider:
***”American Idol” delivers four hours this week. The contestants sing Beatles songs at 8 p.m. Wednesday in a visit to Las Vegas. The judges reveal the Top 20 contenders — 10 guys and 10 gals — starting at 8 p.m. Thursday.
***”Survivor” gives viewers a better understanding of the big twist, Redemption Island. Viewers will see Francesca, the first player voted out, settle in there at 8 p.m. Wednesday on CBS. Ejected contestants go to Redemption Island to live until they battle the next voted-out contestant. The winner gets to stay on Redemption Island. The duels between castoffs continue until a certain point — not yet revealed to viewers or players — when the victorious castoff returns to the game.
***”America’s Next Top Model” returns to the CW lineup at 8 p.m. Wednesday. Nicole Lucas of Orlando is among the 14 hopefuls competing for a contract with IMG Models; a fashion spread in Vogue Italia; a cover of Beauty in Vogue; and a $100,000 contract with CoverGirl Cosmetics. Lucas, 20, is a student at the University of Central Florida. Just think: It’s season 16 of this long-running reality series.
***On “The Bachelor,” Brad Womack meets the families of the final four women. The preview suggests this is a very rocky outing. You can see for yourself at 8 p.m. Monday on ABC.
***”The Real Housewives of Miami” debuts at 10 p.m. Tuesday on Bravo. How much will a gorgeous backdrop help this familiar franchise?
***Shedding for the Wedding” debuts at 9 p.m. Wednesday on The CW. Think “The Biggest Loser Gets Married.” Overweight couples compete to a win swank nuptials. The charming Sara Rue plays host.
In the scripted arena, Laurence Fishburne will be in competition with himself this week. A new episode of “CSI” airs at 9 p.m. Thursday on CBS. And Fishburne plays Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall in “Thurgood” at 9 p.m. Thursday on HBO. This is a filmed versio of the play that brought Fishburne a Tony nomination.
***Adrian Pasdar plays a determined federal agent on ABC’s “Castle” at 10 p.m. Monday.
***Gary Cole returns to “The Good Wife” at 10 p.m. Tuesday on CBS. This is very good news for anyone who enjoyed Cole’s chemistry with Christine Baranski. The other guest stars are America Ferrera of “Ugly Betty” as a nanny and Jerry Stiller as a judge with a habit of falling asleep during trials.
***On “Modern Family,” Phil and Claire have a fight — and Phil doesn’t understand why, which should mean good comedy. The ABC sitcom airs t 9 p.m. Wednesday.
***”Royal Pains” offers its season finale at 9 p.m. Thursday on USA.
***The preview suggests that “The Mentalist” could offer a particularly shocking episode. The evidence in an antique dealer’s murder suggests someone at CBI is responsible. The episode airs at 10 p.m. Thursday on CBS.
George Soros blasts Fox News, Rupert Murdoch for misleading viewers
George Soros attends the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last month. Photo credit: Christian Hartmann/Reuters
Glenn Beck of Fox News Channel has repeatedly accused billionaire investor George Soros of being the puppet master trying to bring down the U.S. government.
Soros answered that criticism this morning on CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS.” The program repeats at 1 p.m. ET today.
“I would be amused if people saw the joke in it,” Soros told Zakaria. “Because what he [Beck] is doing, he is projecting what Fox — what Rupert Murdoch is doing, because he has a media empire that is telling the people some falsehoods and leading the government in the wrong direction. But, you know, by accusing me of doing that … it makes it rather hard to see that … he [Beck] is working for the man who is doing it.”
Zakaria charted how Soros has been portrayed in the media over the years, going from being the “ultra capitalist” who best understood markets to “this kind of left-wing iconic figure.”
Zakaria marveled: “It’s been quite a journey.”
Soros responded: “You just had the experience of speaking to the puppet master and the extreme left-wing manipulator. And you and the audience can make their own decisions.”
Beck also has accused Soros, who lost many people of the Holocaust, of helping round up Jews as a 14-year-old boy.
Soros offered this response: “Fox News makes a habit — it has imported the methods of George Orwell, you know, newspeak, where you can tell the people falsehoods and deceive them. And you wouldn’t believe that an open society and a democracy, these methods can succeed. But, actually, they did succeed. They succeeded in Germany, where the Weimar Republic collapsed and you had a Nazi regime follow it. So this is a very, very dangerous way of deceiving people. And I would like people to be aware that they are being deceived.”
He added that he hoped Americans would wake up and realize that they are being deceived.
In response to a Zakaria question, Soros weighed in on the Tea Party. “I think the people in the Tea Party are very decent people, hard-working,” Soros said. “They have been hit by a force that they — that comes from somewhere which they can’t fully understand. And they are being misled. And they are misled by people who are using it for their selfish purposes, namely to remove regulations and reduce taxation. So reduce taxation and regulation. And they are being used and deceived.”
What do you say to that?
Central Florida liked ‘Blue Bloods’ better than ‘20/20?
Lisa Nowak pleaded guilty in 2009 to burglary of a car, a third-degree felony, and misdemeanor battery. Photo credit: Red Huber/Orlando Sentinel
Giving Orlando viewers an Orlando story is no guarantee they’ll tune in.
ABC’s “20/20″ last night explored Lisa Nowak’s attack on a romantic rival at Orlando International Airport, and the show placed No. 9 in the market.
CBS delivered the three most-watched programs in the Orlando market: “Blue Bloods” with 165,600 viewers, “CSI: NY” with 130,500 and “The Defenders” with 123,300.
“Dateline NBC” averaged 108,000 viewers over two hours. But it was the No. 1 show with the 25-to-54 age group, which is most important to news advertisers.
ABC’s “20/20″ drew 57,000 viewers.
Nationally, “20/20″ placed third at 10 o’clock. “Blue Bloods” was tops with 11.1 million viewers. “Dateline NBC” averaged 6.8 million over two hours. And “20/20″ attracted 4.1 million.
CBS won the prime-time race by averaging 10.1 million viewers. Here’s how the other broadcast networks fared: NBC with 6.5 million, ABC with 4.1 million, Fox with 4 million and The CW with 2.2 million. CBS and Fox tied for the lead in the 18-to-49 age group and just edged NBC.
CBS had the most viewers at 8 with “The Defenders” (8.5 million) and again at 9 with “CSI: NY” (10.6 million).
Casey Anthony: WESH highlights family ties in list of witnesses
Caylee Anthony, the victim.
WESH-Channel 2’s Bob Kealing reported tonight that the prosecution’s new list of 25 witnesses in the Casey Anthony case includes her grandmother, uncle and sister-in-law.
To understand just how devastating her uncle’s testimony could be, take a look at Diane Fanning’s book “Mommy’s Little Girl.”
In an earlier review of that book, I highlighted this passage:
“Casey is the biggest liar in history,” wrote her uncle Rick Plesea, Cindy’s brother, in an e-mail to his mother. “She would rather spin lies than find Caylee. She thinks it is a game.” Rick wrote that Casey makes George and Cindy “look like the stupidest parents ever in the entire world.”
I also noted that his last name had been changed to Cuza, the book said, to protect the privacy of Cindy’s birth family. Fanning thanked Rick Plesea for sharing his personal experiences, a tipoff that the book wouldn’t go easy on the Anthonys.
Casey Anthony is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee. The trial is scheduled to start in May.
In my review of “Mommy’s Little Girl,” I wrote:Fanning, for the most part, sticks closely to the documented record, and she brings the book back to Caylee, the victim “who mattered the most.” She was a rambunctious child who could count to 45 in Spanish. And she’s still the reason that this story matters.
‘The View’: Denise Richards talks about Charlie Sheen’s lifestyle
Denise Richards, center, is a guest co-host on "The View" Friday. With her, from left, are Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar, Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Barbara Walters. Photo credit: Heidi Gutman/ABC
A day without a Charlie Sheen story would be like … Well, I don’t know what that would be like lately.
Here’s today’s Sheen story: Ex-wife Denise Richards will be a guest on “The View,” and she talks about his life.
Because the show is taped, we have excerpts of what she will say at 11 a.m. Friday on ABC (WFTV-Channel 9 locally).
Barbara Walters says she has to ask several questions. Richards jokes, “Really? Let me guess what they might be about.”
They are are about Sheen, the father of two young daughters with Richards. Walters asks if any of the Sheen news surprises Richards.
“No, I mean it doesn’t,” Richards says. “This is Charlie’s lifestyle. He makes no bones about it. And it is what it is.”
Joy Behar asks, “What’s wrong with him? Maybe you know what’s wrong with him.”
Richards responds, “You know what? It’s honestly not my place to judge this situation. It really isn’t.”
Behar presses on: “Well, I wouldn’t say judge, but do you have any idea? Is he an addict? He’s an addict, right?”
Richards replies: “I think that you should have him on the show and get into details of what’s going on. My concern is our kids.”
Walters wants to know what Richards tells her children.
Richards: “What can you say? It’s a very difficult situation in dealing with the subject. This has been something I have dealt with for years. This is not a new situation. There are times where his life is more colorful than others, more public than others, and as the kids get older, it’s a difficult thing. I’m learning as I go, too. I have never had to deal with this and this was a subject I had hoped to talk with my children about as they got older. But it’s hard. I mean there are books that are out there. One in particular, I’m blanking on the title, it explains addiction to children. There are images and pictures that a child can understand. I don’t know what they fully comprehend from these conversations. They don’t know what some of these things are. So I do the best I can and it’s not easy.”
So maybe this covers us for Sheen stories for today and tomorrow.
‘Jeopardy!’: Did man or machine win?
From left, "Jeopardy!" host Alex Trebek, Ken Jennings, Watson and Brad Rutter. Photo credit: Jeopardy!
Let’s hope we’ve seen the last of Watson.
SPOILER ALERT: “Jeopardy! The IBM Challenge” ended tonight.
Ken Jennings, who had gone against the IBM computer Watson, joked in answering Final Jeopardy: “I for one welcome our new computer overlords.”
I don’t think he was speaking for most viewers. Know-it-all Watson was monotonous. He also cleaned up, collecting $77,147 over two days.
Jennings earned $24,000 over the two days. Brad Rutter earned $21,600.
The winner receives $1 million, and all of Watson’s money will go to charity.
Jennings earned $300,000 for coming in second. Rutter earned $200,000 for placing third. Both men will donate half their winnings to charity.
“Jeopardy!” will bring on young contestants — all human — on Thursday’s show. “Jeopardy!” airs at 7 weeknights on WFTV-Channel 9.
Tuesday TV: from the sublime (Presidential Medal of Freedom winners) to the depressing (‘Jeopardy!’)
Maya Angelou receives the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama. Photo credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
I watch a lot of television, and yesterday, I saw some of the best of it ever and some of the worst.
CNN, Fox News Channel and MSNBC yesterday afternoon relayed the White House ceremony honoring the 15 recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
And that wasn’t simply feel-good television. That was lift-your-heart television.
Viewers are subjected to a lot of crud daily: crime, corruption, confusion. But the Medal of Freedom ceremony reminded us of the best of America. President Barack Obama gave stirring tributes to every recipient.
They included former President George H.W. Bush, civil rights pioneer John Lewis, businessman Warren Buffett, basketball legend Bill Russell and baseball great Stan Musial. (If you know Missouri, you know what a big deal Stan the Man is.) The pride was evident in the faces of recipients such as musician Yo-Yo Ma and civil rights activist Sylvia Mendez.
But the most touching moment was Obama’s praise for writer Maya Angelou, who couldn’t stand to receive her honor. He bent to give it to her, and the camera paused on her, as she bent over, the emotion hitting her.
Maybe next year the White House could move this ceremony to the evening so more Americans could see it. I’m all for more lift-your-heart television.
Which brings me to “Jeopardy!” and the battle between a machine and two human players. I had planned to write about this last night, but it was sink-your-spirit television.
IBM’s Watson, its data base for trivia blazing, cleaned up with $35,734 last night. The two humans were way behind: Brad Rutter with $10,400 and Ken Jennings with $4,800.
Watson had collected on both Daily Doubles, but was lost in Final Jeopardy! That category was U.S. cities. Rutter and Jennings both knew that Chicago is the city with the largest airport named for a World War II hero and its second largest for a World War II battle.
Watson’s answer was Toronto. The match continues at 7 tonight on WFTV-Channel 9. May the force not be with Watson.