【新唐人2013年04月18日讯】美国波士顿马拉松爆炸案发生后，迅速成为大陆各大媒体的头版头条，关注程度甚至超过了正在中国大陆肆虐的H7N9禽流感事件。于此同时，大陆微博上则出现了大量关于中美两国处理同类事件上不同态度的热议，越来越多的中国网民认为，美国的信息和言论透明度让中共当局望尘莫及。网民设想，如果爆炸发生在中国，将会出现完全相反的处理方式和舆论导向。
当地时间周一下午3点，美国波士顿正在进行的马拉松赛现场，发生了爆炸案，有2枚炸弹被引爆。造成3人死亡，176人受伤，其中17人伤势严重。
爆炸案发生后，美国向全世界展示了全民反恐的精神和意志，其中，政府、媒体、企业、公民的良性互动及凝聚力，令中国民众为之震动。
美国各大网站、电视台滚动直播，没有宣传口径和媒体禁令；官方立即召开新闻发布会，并频频更新，反应快捷信息透明，因而也就没有谣言和恐慌。
美国纽约市民沈先生：“这件事情发生以后，全国的媒体都做了第一时间的报导，把人民的安全和社会的安定是作为第一考虑的，而且不管事情发生到怎么样一个严重程度，总是通过媒体通过电视明明白白告诉给全国人民的，也告诉世界人民，所以中国人民也马上也就知道这件事情了。”
网友指出，同类事件如果发生在中国，中共则会有完全不同的处理方式和结果。
美国纽约市民沈先生：“它（中共）会把这个事情拖的很久很久，然后说我们一直在调查中，然后它再给你一种似是而非的一种说法了 中共会按照它的逻辑思维来考虑，怎么样把这件事情说的圆满，对它有利而给以评述、给予结论，是以党的利益为首要的。”
郑州市民侯先生：“它肯定会封锁消息、保密的，然后在那个城市里面派大量军警去戒严，即使是公共事件也不会大幅的报导，它怕引起社会的恐慌，”
中国网友无忧：“他们可能会控制这个消息的发布，避免老百姓来指责政府处置的不利。即使报导，恐怕按我们的经验还是突出党和政府怎样的积极，所谓的把坏事当好事来报导，肯定还是这种思路。”
对待受难的民众，美国总统欧巴马在第一时间发表声明，升级全国安保措施，誓言缉拿凶手；美国国会大厦立刻降半旗，悼念爆炸案死难者。在危机时刻，国家与公民第一时间联系在一起。
郑州市民侯先生：“美国政府要为美国老百姓负责，出了这种事情他一定要给老百姓一个交代。”
美国纽约市民沈先生：“美国也以国家的安全考虑，但更多的是考虑全体人民的财产安全的问题。”
而在中国，每次发生重大的公共事件，中共当局处理方式和对百姓的态度上，都让民众很不满意甚至感到心寒，政府公信力和地位在民众心中也每况愈下，直到跌入谷底。
中国网友无忧：“他们对受害者并不会真正去将心比心去体谅，而是把他们作为一种道具来展示党和政府光辉形象的道具。”
郑州市民侯先生：“在中国就不一样了，中国这种官民对立，老百姓仇视政府，政府也从来不考虑老百姓。”
原河北人民广播电台编辑朱欣欣指出，造成这一系列差别的根本原因就是两国政治体制的不同。
原河北人民广播电台编辑朱欣欣：“民主制度是首先是选民的政治，一切事情都要为选民服务，要为人民负责，所以很多事情它得公开，同时媒体也不是执政党控制，也有自己的独立性。在中国不行，中国各方面言论媒体都是一党专政控制，报导的时候媒体没有自主权，完全没有自己的权力，所以中国的媒体完全不是真正的媒体，就是个宣传的工具，这一点中共自己都承认。”
受访者一致认为，中国的专制政治制度是以中共利益为最高原则，所有的资源都要为这个体制服务。中共官员的权力来源不是来自于百姓，因此不会考虑民众的利益，只会更加关注如何巩固权力和控制社会。而民主国家的权力来自于人民，民意的约制代替了集权专政，这就是中美两国的最大不同。
采访/易如 编辑/张天宇 后制/
Suppose Boston Marathon Bombings Had Occurred in China …
Bomb explosions at the Boston Marathon quickly became
major media headlines in China.
The news has diverted public attention from
the raging H7N9 bird flu.
Meanwhile, China’s netizens began a heated discussion
on how differently authorities’are dealing with the incident
in the U.S. and in China.
More netizens hold that in information transparency,
the U.S. beats the Chinese Communist Party hollow.
Netizens believe that if the explosions had occurred in China,
the media coverage would be totally the opposite.
On April 15 at 3pm local time,
two explosions occurred at the Boston Marathon.
Three people were killed, 176 people were wounded,
with 17 seriously injured.
After the bombings, the U.S. showed anti-terrorism resolve.
What was demonstrated was positive interaction and
cohesion by the government, media, business and citizens.
Major US web portals and TV channels
kept updating news on the issue.
There were no restrictions on news report,
and neither had bans on media reports.
The U.S. official news conference
was held immediately.
The public have been kept informed with the latest news.
Being quick and transparent, there are no rumors or panic.
(New Yorker) Mr. Shen: “After it happened, national
media broadcasted the incident as early as they could.
People’s safety and social stability
was prioritized.
No matter how severe the situation has evolved,
the media has informed the public clearly and precisely.
So the Chinese people could also
hear the news immediately."
Netizens commented that if a similar incident
had occurred in China,
how the CCP authorities dealt with it
would have been totally different.
Mr. Shen: “It ( the CCP ) would have put off dealing with it.
Next, it would have claimed the investigation had started.
And then, it would give the public a specious statement.
The CCP would have focused on how to exploit
the incident so as to serve the Party’s interest."
(Zhengzhou citizen) Mr. Hou:
“Firstly, it would definitely have blocked the news.
Then, a large number of police would have been sent
to the city to implement martial law.
It wouldn’t have permitted massive reporting
on the issue, for fear of causing public panic."
(Chinese netizen) Wu You:"Media reports on the news
would have been restrained, so as to avoid public criticism.
If news reporting had been allowed, I’m afraid media would
have highlighted how the Party and the government had positively reacted to such an emergency.
The media would have used the incident to
eulogize the authorities, this is their normal way."
U.S. President Barack Obama declared the
upgrading of domestic security measures and the seeking out of the perpetrators.
The U.S. flag was lowered at the U.S. Capitol to
honor the bombing victims in Boston.
At times of crisis, the state takes the side of its citizens.
(Zhengzhou citizen) Mr. Hou:"The U.S. government is
responsible, and will surely give an explanation to the American people."
(New Yorker) Mr. Shen: “The U.S. government
cares about national security.
But is even more concerned about citizens’
property and safety."
In China, when any major public event occurs,
the CCP authorities’ way of handling the issue and
the official attitude towards civilians is chilling to the public.
As a result, in public minds, the regime’s credibility
and status are getting worse.
(Chinese netizen) Wu You: “They won’t
sympathize with the victims in their hearts.
Instead, they use those victims as stage props to
display the glorious image of the Party and government."
(Zhengzhou citizen) Mr. Hou:
“In China, it would be different.
There exists an opposition between
the officials and ordinary folks.
Civilians are hostile to the government, and
the government has never cared about the people."
Zhu Xinxin, ex-editor at Hebei state radio station, comments.
The reason behind such a contrast is the different
political systems in both countries, he says.
Zhu Xinxin:"First of all, democracy is voters’politics,
Everything should serve the voters.
The government should work for the people,
and make public any information.
Meanwhile, media should exist independently,
and cannot be controlled by a political party.
Today in China, the Party completely controls media.
So China’s media isn’t media in a real sense,
but a propaganda tool, which the CCP has openly admitted."
The interviewees all agree that China’s authoritarian
political system prioritizes the CCP’s interests.
All resources serve this political system.
The CCP officials are not empowered by the people,
so they won’t speak for civilians’interests.
Rather, they have become more concerned about
how to cement the power in their hands, how to control society.
Whilst in democratic countries,
state power comes from the people,
and a public watchdog replaces a totalitarian dictatorship.
This is the biggest difference for the U.S. and China.
