方舟子的Blog

中国的揭丑者遭袭，凸显揭露腐败欺诈的风险

中国的揭丑者方舟子在批评了其国内的一所医院之后被袭击。他说：“此前我接到过恐吓电话和电子邮件，但这是第一次受到袭击”。

By Peter Ford
  美国《基督教科学箴言报》2010年8月30日

（翻译：ziren）

在北京刚刚发生了一起针对揭丑者、以曝光欺诈和伪科学著称的方舟子的袭击。这次袭击虽未能完全得逞但还是引起了对中国学术腐败和公众轻信、易于蒙骗这样困扰人们已久的问题的新关注。

方舟子是一位科普作家和博客作者。星期天傍晚当他步行回北京的家时遭到两名男子袭击；一个往他脸上喷洒化学药品，另一个用铁锤砸他。所幸他只受轻伤，当晚即出院。

方先生在电话采访中说：“此前我接到过恐吓电话和电子邮件，但这是第一次受到袭击”。

作为反腐败的活动人士，方舟子最近涉入一系列引发广泛关注的事件，其中最引人注目的是质疑前微软中国总裁唐骏声称曾从久负盛名的加州理工学院获得博士学位。

唐骏曾将获得博士学位作为一项成就列在叙述他商业成功的一本书中，但后来他不得不承认他的博士学位出自西太平洋大学。根据美国总审计局2004年的一份报告，这所大学实际上就是只卖文凭不开课的文凭制造厂。

方舟子最近的一些博客文章集中质疑了著名道长、自称拥有超能力的李一，他的弟子当中不乏娱乐明星以及商界精英。不过在受到强奸和逃税的指控之后，这位李道士不得不在星期六辞去了其公共职务。

谁袭击了方舟子？

方舟子的律师彭剑认为这次袭击最有可能是河南郑州一家私立医院幕后指使的。这家医院专门实施一项用于改善小便失禁但存在争议的神经系统手术。

今年6月一位撰写过质疑这种手术成功率文章的中国记者遭到袭击。方舟子在3个星期前的一篇博文中引用了一份美国杂志上批评这项手术的文章。接受这项手术的一批病人认为手术给他们带来的损害大于改善，彭剑作为他们的代理律师将这家医院告上法庭。就在这个月的晚些时候，郑州的一个法庭即将开庭审理这起不当治疗案件。

针对中国国内猖獗的欺诈还有很多要做

去年中国教育部要求各大学从教工队伍中扫除抄袭剽窃者。这意味着通报抄袭剽窃者，拒绝其申请科研经费，开除公职甚至可能提请法律制裁。当时有官员宣称这些措施为了“保持学术界的干净”。

但是今年新曝光度丑闻——包括在国际上受到尊重的政治学家汪晖被控抄袭以及一名能源动力领域内的顶尖教授因涉入30余起抄袭而被开除——使得官方《中国日报》在上个月发表社论称“截至目前，很显然国家需要更为有效的制度来制止学术界的腐败行为”。

方舟子表示赞同地说道：“政府做得还不够”。

学术界既不是唯一遭剽窃荼毒的领域，也不是唯一不愿正视它的领域。今年1月，当被证实提交他人作品参赛后，中国最高摄影奖的获得者桑玉柱被剥夺了所获奖章，也丢掉了在摄影家协会的职务。

但中国摄影家协会并不承认存在剽窃行为。桑的行为仅被官方指作是与另两位摄影家“合作完成”，因而违反竞赛规则。

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2010/0830/Attack-on-China-whistleblower-shows-risk-of-unveiling-corruption-fraud

Attack on China whistleblower shows risk of unveiling corruption, fraud

China whistleblower Fang Zhouzi was mugged after his criticism of a Chinese hospital. ‘I’ve had threatening phone calls and e-mails before, but this was the first time I have been attacked,’ he says.

By Peter Ford, Staff writer / August 30, 2010
Beijing

A bungled attack on a whistleblower famous for his exposés of fraud and pseudoscience has drawn fresh attention to the vexed issues of academic dishonesty and popular gullibility in China.

Fang Zhouzi, a popular science writer and blogger, was assaulted by two men as he walked to his Beijing home Sunday evening; one sprayed a chemical in his face, the other beat him with a hammer. He was only slightly injured and was released from hospital later Sunday night.

“I’ve had threatening phone calls and e-mails before, but this was the first time I have been attacked,” Mr. Fang said in a telephone interview.

The anticorruption activist has been involved recently in a number of high profile cases, most notably questioning a claim by a former president of Microsoft China that he had earned his PhD from the prestigious California Institute of Technology.

Tang Jun, who had listed his degree as an achievement in a book recounting his success in business, later acknowledged that his PhD actually came from Pacific Western University in California. That institution was a diploma mill that sold academic credentials and required no classroom instruction, according to a 2004 report by the US Government Accountability Office.

In a number of recent blog posts, Fang also poured skepticism on celebrity Taoist sage Li Yi, who claims extraordinary feats of prowess and counts pop stars and business luminaries among his disciples. Mr. Li stepped down from his public positions Saturday, in the wake of accusations against him of rape and tax evasion.
Who attacked Fang?

Fang’s lawyer, Peng Jian, said he thought the attack was most likely ordered by a private hospital in Zhengzhou, the capital of Henan Province, which specializes in a controversial operation on the nervous system to control urinary incontinence.

A Chinese journalist who had written an article raising doubts about the operation’s efficacy was assaulted last June. Fang, in a blog posted three weeks ago, cited an article in a US magazine criticizing the operation. A court in Zhengzhou is due later this month to hear a malpractice suit brought by Mr. Peng against the hospital on behalf of a group of patients claiming the operation did them more harm than good.
More to be done on fraud in China

Last year the Ministry of Education urged universities to weed out plagiarists from their faculties. This meant reporting plagiarists, denying them research funding, sacking them, and possibly suing them. The measures were designed to “keep the academic field clean,” an official said at the time.

New scandals this year however, including plagiarism accusations against an internationally respected political science scholar Wang Hui and the dismissal of a top professor of energy and power studies found guilty of over 30 cases of plagiarism, led the state-owned “China Daily” to editorialize last month that “it is by now evident that the nation needs better regulations to counter the practice in academia.”

“The government is not doing enough,” agrees Fang.

Academia is not the only field to be plagued by plagiarism, nor the only one reluctant to face up to it. Last January, Sang Yuzhu, the winner of China’s highest photography award, was stripped of his medal and his post in the Chinese Photographers’ Association when it was shown he had submitted other photographers’ work to the competition.

The CPA did not acknowledge the plagiarism, however. Officially he was accused only of “joint collaboration” with the two other photographers, in violation of competition rules.