Still More Chinese Fakery?

First, a link to the article:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/3082804/China-fakes-reports-from-space.html

I need to point out that I'm not sure if this is yet another report of ChiCom fakery, or if it is in reference to the earlier report. 

But in this report, they apparently faked reports from their first night in space even before they'd blasted off.

You'll remember that the earlier fakery was when the described the launch even before they'd lifted off.

Can we say "oops?"  But since this might be the second report of fakery about their space shot, perhaps we should say what Lt. Cmdr Data said in "Star Trek: Insurrection."  You know, when he said "Ohhhhh, sh*t."

"The Xinhua agency, which has sometimes been accused of carrying state propaganda, took down the story and blamed it on a "technical error"."

Well, let's take a look at this.  A State-run "News" agency, in a totalitarian regime, which also happens to be Communist.  Since we know that they routinely "disappear" their critics and murder some of them, do you really think that they'd be anything less than a standard-bearer for anything the regime wants to put out?  And yes, I'd call that state propaganda. 

The Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism) describes a totalitarian regime as "...a concept used to describe political systems where a state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life."  Indeed, among the examples they cite, they list "...modern China."

But that brings up a question I've long had.  In the book "True Stories of Great Escapes" they give an example of somebody crossing into East Germany in order to effect the escape of somebody else.  On one of the East German signs was the proclamation "You are now leaving the Democratic sector."  And Cambodia under Pol Pot had their name as "Democratic Kampuchea."  And their party during those dark years?  The Communist Party of Kampuchea. 

Here, then, is the question:  Why do Communists refer to themselves as Democratic?  Not all of them do it, to be certain.  But we now know of at least two instances where they have.  So why?

But to get back to the topic of this article, did the photograph that the ChiComs provided depict what really happened, or was it too staged (ie: faked?) 

ChiComs?  Anybody?