In a recent poll conducted by the popular ifeng.com, close to 80 per cent of those surveyed believe that the departure of Hu Shuli would have catastrophic consequences on the magazine, and it may never recover. It is undeniable that Hu Shuli has nurtured Caijing from its cradle into its maturity and left indelible imprints along the way. It is also fair to say that Hu’s intimate relationship with Caijing can be described as being like Siamese twins joined at the hip, with the removal of one potentially resulting in the death of the other.

However, there is an off-side chance that both may survive the painful operation of separation and continue their distinctive existence into the future. Although Caijing’s extraordinary achievements owed much to Hu’s leadership and vision, the support of its publisher, SEEC (Stock Exchange Executive Council), also played an important role. SEEC was involved in the formation of China’s nascent capital market and the founding of the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges. The people behind SEEC are certainly reform-minded people who are beneficiaries of China’s opening up to the world, and their influence and economic clout ensured much of Caijing’s editorial integrity during the past decade despite intermittent disagreements over coverage.

In his first ever letter to readers, new editor-in-chief Wang Boming vowed to continue Caijing’s professed journalistic motto of ‘independence, exclusivity and uniqueness’. There is little reason to doubt his sincerity, as much of the commercial fortune and reputation of Caijing is founded upon these unique traits in the Chinese media landscape. He has a quite extraordinary task in front of him to rebuild Caijing’s strength and its tattered reputation in the aftermath of the exodus fiasco. Even more so, he has to navigate a delicate balance between upholding Hu’s legacy and probing the tolerance threshold of Beijing’s jittery censors.

Perhaps as a sign of official support and endorsement, the latest issue of Caijing published a letter from the former head of the news bureau at the Propaganda Department of the CCP. He commended Caijing’s past success and urged it to continue its pioneering reporting in the field of corruption, wealth disparity, and the encroachment of state power into the market. Furthermore, he suggested that Caijing broaden its horizon and increase its international coverage. He reserved his most interesting question for the end, challenging the readers and editors with questions such as whether a democratic and constitutional system of government is a necessary and indispensable path in light of international and Chinese experiences.

Without reading too much into an endorsement letter penned by a retired senior media censor, it is perhaps a glimmer of hope that Beijing is encouraging and enlisting more independent media to fight China’s social and political ills.

There is speculation that Hu Shuli might soon form a new rival publication with her former teams from Caijing, and we can look forward to that with much anticipation. If Wang Boming and his new team at Caijing can deliver his promise of upholding journalistic integrity, there is no reason to doubt why this great publication may not continue in the future. If we can be a little optimistic here, we might be able to see two competing publications in China based on Hu Shuli’s pioneering style of investigative journalism.