After an interview failed to come through, I thought I’d be left red in the face. But if you were a betting woman, you’d place a yuan or two on China coming up with the regulation goods.
And so, it’s official:
“China’s regulation on the Internet industry is in line with the laws and should be free from unjustifiable interferences.”
A spokesperson told Xinhua (the official press agency of the government) in an exclusive interview, that China is regulating the Internet legally to build a more reliable, helpful information network that is beneficial to economic and social development.
Such regulation, the spokesperson said, are based on laws and regulations such as the Constitution, the Law on the Protection of Minors, and the Decision on Internet Safety pass by the National People’s Congress Standing Committee.
So, all in all, very much in keeping with my previous blog. Don’t get me wrong, I am fully in support of the regulation of pornographic materials, violence and of course the prevention of terrorism. Particularly at a time when the threat level in the UK has been increased to ‘severe’. But what I am not in favour of, is censorship and repression at the detriment of it’s own people.
Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, caused a bit of storm in a recent speech as she called on the Chinese to conduct a “thorough investigation of the cyber intrusions” that hit Google and other Western companies in recent weeks. Not only has she been accused of stirring up already tense Chinese-US relations but also of meddling in China’s affairs.
One big question is whether ordinary Chinese will, to any large degree, accept China’s arguments. Although urban, middle-class Chinese often support government policies on sovereignty issues such as Tibet or Taiwan, they generally disagree when it comes to media censorship. That feeling is especially pronounced among Chinese who refer to themselves as netizens.
This netizen, a professional citizen journalist no less, has an interesting take on the effectiveness of social media and it’s potential benefits for the future of China.
According to the Foreign Ministry’s website, The Chinese internet “is open”. Is that like the bank at 1 pm on a Saturday? We really believe it should be, but it never is.
Following on from my post the other day… I touched on the ethical implications of the freedom we “enjoy” on the internet. Laws, such as contempt of court, may apply to reporting wherever an article’s published, but once illegal material gets on to the internet it can spread, and fast, regardless of whether the original publication is removed.
This week saw the start of the retrial of the death of Khyra Ishaq. A seven-year-old girl who died of starvation. Her mother and step-father are being tried for murder.
What’s interesting about this case, with regards to what we’re discussing, is the following statement as reported in The Guardian online:
“Before the prosecution opened the case, Mr Justice Roderick Evans, the trial judge, instructed the new jury not to search on the internet to find out details of the previous trial.”
Now if I was a juror the first thing I’d be tempted to do is look on the internet. Whether I would or not is a different matter… I’m not on the jury, but I have had a look on the internet.
Taste and decency
There are obviously numerous court reports from the original trial and, as the law allows a reporter to publish what they’ve heard in court, evidence is accessible. But then archived newspapers are also available, so if you were really keen to get your hands on details of the previous trial you could.
Evidence, as reported, aside. What would happen if a member of the previous jury decided to wage war against the defendants? Should they be so inclined, they could publish anything they wanted on a blog or on Twitter, and the rules of taste and decency won’t apply.
It’s great that we have the opportunity to express ourselves in the way we see fit. But if our freedom on the internet starts to interfere with the course of justice (and, in some cases, our physical freedom), then maybe the alarm bells should be starting to ring.
Kylie Wows China
Right, so I want to talk about the regulation of online news in China, in 400 words or so. Hmmmmmm …. I’d Google it, but it may prove a bit tricky right now.
I can give you 4? 
WOW, WOW, WOW-WOW. (Many thanks, Ms.Minogue)
Hu Jintao, we have a problem ….
Perhaps the best place to start is with the People’s Republic of China’s Constitution. (Don’t worry, we won’t stay long.)
Article 35 states that citizens enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.
This however conflicts rather dramatically with Reporters without Borders who rank China at number 168 out of 173, in the press freedom index.
Despite China having the world’s fastest growing economy, its media is still tightly controlled by the country’s leadership. Described as the “world’s largest prison for journalists, bloggers and cyber-dissidents”, and with long jail sentences for those attempting to defy the state, this is definitely not a country you want to be caught breaking the rules in.
China ‘Dislikes’ Facebook
All computers sold in China – even those that are imported – have to be pre-installed with the ‘Green Dam Youth Escort‘ or ‘Blue Shield Software’.
The Great Firewall of China, as it’s known, is obligatory, not optional, as the authorities had reportedly promised. Designed supposedly to protect children from pornographic sites and increase parental control, critics have complained that it could also stop Chinese internet users searching for politically sensitive information.
The BBCs Chinese language website, Youtube, Twitter and Facebook are just some of the more popular sites currently inaccessible throughout China. A protest group in support of Xinjiang Independence, was the catalyst for the Chinese Government’s ‘dislike’ of Facebook.
Chinese censors periodically and inexplicably block and unblock foreign news sites that inquisitive surfers may try to access. There is a special task force of some 30,000 “cybercops” who patrol the World Wide Web, block select foreign news sites, and terminate domestic sites with politically sensitive information.
More repression than regulation, I’d say.
The Umbrella Effect
In researching this subject, it has been made clear to me that China are keen to ‘keep up appearances’, even if those appearances are far from subtle. This clip demonstrates the difficultly facing one journalist attempting to report on the 20th Tienament Square anniversary.
Internet sites were also forced to close down; for maintenance, obviously.
Health Warning
There are so many examples of ‘regulation’ within Chinese online news and it is most definitely not just the anniversaries of these horrific events that are censored. News of the Urumqi Riots, the Sichuan earthquake and the Bejing Olympics suffocated in the hands of the hierarchy, violence ensuing for those journalists not following the State’s orders.
But the SARS outbreak in 2002 was particularly worrying, as officials were accused of censoring information about the spread of the life-threatening disease. The authoritarian Government’s insistence of complete media control, not only put its own citizens at risk but also, essentially contributed to deaths worldwide.
Google It? Google Out.
More recently, on 14th January, internet giant Google has said it may end its operations in China following a “sophisticated and targeted” cyber attack. It said it was no longer willing to censor its Chinese search engine – google.cn. This could result in closing the site, and its Chinese offices.
Reporters Without Borders reiterated its support for the Global Online Freedom Act following this revelation and praised the Google executives in standing up to the Chinese authorities.
Just scratching the surface of this vast beast has unearthed atrocious security, health and human rights issues. A country which has had the world’s most sophisticated system of online censorship and surveillance for years, is going to take a whole lot of taming.
tamingthebeast.wordpress.com 