What's new

Science: Chinese have the freedom to criticize the state, its leaders, and their policies

aliaselin

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Messages
1,532
Reaction score
-2
Country
China
Location
China
Reverse-engineering censorship in China: Randomized experimentation and participant observation

Censorship has a long history in China, extending from the efforts of Emperor Qin to burn Confucian texts in the third century BCE to the control of traditional broadcast media under Communist Party rule. However, with the rise of the Internet and new media platforms, more than 1.3 billion people can now broadcast their individual views, making information far more diffuse and considerably harder to control. In response, the government has built a massive social media censorship organization, the result of which constitutes the largest selective suppression of human communication in the recorded history of any country. We show that this large system, designed to suppress information, paradoxically leaves large footprints and so reveals a great deal about itself and the intentions of the government.



The Chinese censorship decision tree. The pictures shown are examples of real (and typical) websites, along with our translations.

Rationale
Chinese censorship of individual social media posts occurs at two levels: (i) Many tens of thousands of censors, working inside Chinese social media firms and government at several levels, read individual social media posts, and decide which ones to take down. (ii) They also read social media submissions that are prevented from being posted by automated keyword filters, and decide which ones to publish.

To study the first level, we devised an observational study to download published Chinese social media posts before the government could censor them, and to revisit each from a worldwide network of computers to see which was censored. To study the second level, we conducted the first largescale experimental study of censorship by creating accounts on numerous social media sites throughout China, submitting texts with different randomly assigned content to each, and detecting from a worldwide network of computers which ones were censored.

To find out the details of how the system works, we supplemented the typical current approach (conducting uncertain and potentially unsafe confidential interviews with insiders) with a participant observation study, in which we set up our own social media site in China. While also attempting not to alter the system we were studying, we purchased a URL, rented server space, contracted with Chinese firms to acquire the same software as used by existing social media sites, and—with direct access to their software, documentation, and even customer service help desk support—reverseengineered how it all works.

Results
Criticisms of the state, its leaders, and their policies are routinely published, whereas posts with collective action potential are much more likely to be censored—regardless of whether they are for or against the state (two concepts not previously distinguished in the literature). Chinese people can write the most vitriolic blog posts about even the top Chinese leaders without fear of censorship, but if they write in support of or opposition to an ongoing protest—or even about a rally in favor of a popular policy or leader—they will be censored.

We clarify the internal mechanisms of the Chinese censorship apparatus and show how changes in censorship behavior reveal government intent by presaging their action on the ground. That is, it appears that criticism on the web, which was thought to be censored, is used by Chinese leaders to determine which officials are not doing their job of mollifying the people and need to be replaced.

Conclusion
Censorship in China is used to muzzle those outside government who attempt to spur the creation of crowds for any reason—in opposition to, in support of, or unrelated to the government. The government allows the Chinese people to say whatever they like about the state, its leaders, or their policies, because talk about any subject unconnected to collective action is not censored. The value that Chinese leaders find in allowing and then measuring criticism by hundreds of millions of Chinese people creates actionable information for them and, as a result, also for academic scholars and public policy analysts.

Censorship of social media in China
Figuring out how many and which social media comments are censored by governments is difficult because those comments, by definition, cannot be read. King et al. have posted comments to social media sites in China and then waited to see which of these never appeared, which appeared and were then removed, and which appeared and survived. About 40% of their submissions were reviewed by an army of censors, and more than half of these never appeared. By varying the content of posts across topics, they conclude that any mention of collective action is selectively suppressed.

====================================================================
These Harvard and UCSD professors should be Chinese Five Cents party members:omghaha:
 
Last edited:
If that's the case, then the censorship is next to pointless, and shouldn't even exist at this point.
 
Anyone who reads what Chinese people say on the internet (or those who have actually talked to Chinese people in real life) will have figured that out after a few minutes. :D

Criticizing your government and your leaders/politicians is human nature, it's unavoidable.

Just walk down any street in China, and ask any random person, for their opinion on any local or provincial or national politicians. You'll get an earful.

If that's the case, then the censorship is next to pointless, and shouldn't even exist at this point.

Many people do get their news from social networks rather than from the official media.

However they must have a reason behind maintaining this policy, and personally, living in a city like HK with some extremely irresponsible free media outlets (like the Apple Daily) I don't necessarily disagree with them.
 
they conclude that any mention of collective action is selectively suppressed.
Inciting mass action that could turn ugly would put costs on the society/nation. Like in a representative parliament, representatives can argue as much as they want, but unruly action would not be welcomed.

China is a populous nation, and some Chinese can be pretty hotheaded/hot blooded. The government would definitely prefer to have such things under control.

Censorship has a long history in China, extending from the efforts of Emperor Qin to burn Confucian texts in the third century BCE
Emperor Qin united China after about 500 years of constant war, with at least few hundred of nation states coming and going and incessantly warring with each other.

Emperor Qin went about solidify/unify his rule of China.
He conduct administrative reform to put China under one single centralized rule.
He standardized unit of measurement like weights and measures, the currency, the length of the axles of carts to facilitate transport on the road system.
He built extensive canals and roads system that join up the whole nation.
He built the Great Wall of China.

And, he unified/standardized the written form of the Chinese language.

In another word, he did what the pro-europeanist can only fantasize in their wet dream in China, two thousand years ago in 221 BC.

His empire collapsed after a mere 15 years. And yet what he started has survived in various shape and form in China till today.

What he failed is his attempt at unified thought and political opinion.
With Burning of books and burying of scholars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The burning of books and burying of scholars[1][2][3] (traditional Chinese: 焚書坑儒; simplified Chinese: 焚书坑儒; pinyin: fénshū kēngrú; literally: "burning of books and burying [alive] of [Confucian] scholars") refers to the burning of texts and slaughter of scholars during the Qin dynasty of Ancient China, between 213 and 210 BC.[4]

"Books" at this point were writings on bamboo strips bound together.[note 1] The event caused the historical loss of many philosophical theories of proper government (known as "the Hundred Schools of Thought"). The official philosophy of government ("legalism") survived.

His method might have failed, but that does not mean that subsequent Chinese dynasty do not see the value, and make the same attempt by some other means. In another word, the method has failed, but the idea lived on.
 
Last edited:
Finally, westner find something. Its not a good news to them, maybe.

Researching negative things find freedom? I just cant imagine.
 
Back
Top Bottom