Slashdot Mirror
China Closes 1,600 "Internet Bars"
Kujila writes "According to a Chinese Reuters article, China has closed close to 1,600 "Internet Bars" (probably the equivalent of 'Internet Cafes' stateside) and inflicted up to $12.1 million worth of fines upon the establishment owners. The Internet Bars were apparently letting young children pay to play violent and adult-only PC games. China inspected a grand-total of 1.8 million bars, and ordered about 18,000 of those bars to "to stop operation for rectification," It's estimated that 18% of China's Internet population is composed of minors."
Someone needs to start a "shut down by China" list so the rest of us can find the good stuff.
A huge nation with a corrupt, fascist, evil government run by one small party of old men who are all afraid of what would happen to them if they lost power.
That is .009% of all the bars checked. Maybe they were selling booze or crack also. Who knows. I'm sure .009% of any 1.8 million sites anywhere may need 'rectification'. This is much ado about nothing, unless we are concerned about the civil rights of minors in China not being able to play some video games. This is in China, where there are many more serious human right problems than this.
Again....so what!
i completelly agree with China's Government behavior. I support children and teenagers having contact and learning with the computer, but playing violent games is far from what the word learning really means.
This young kids should be learning to read source code and hack it, or how to use the internet to do interesting research. Playing this kind of game just alienate the kids making them dumbasses (all right, I know slashdot is also alienating and prejuciail to my health, but I can't avoid it).
Finally a country prepared to back up their words with solid actions. Most of the countries of the world have big voiced groups proclaiming that playing 'video nasties' breeds a generation of violent criminals. There are cases to back this up as well I'm sure. It would be interseting to see if crimes committed by young people reduce if this were enforced all the time without prejudice. May just settle the argument for once and for all.
It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
I remember Chinese government promotes Linux
m l?tid=102&tid=126&tid=163&tid=187
http://slashdot.org/articles/03/11/18/0219249.sht
"The Internet Bars were apparently letting young children pay to play violent and adult-only PC games"
From the people that brought us
"The official Xinhua News Agency issued a brief statement saying that the recoverable satellite touched down at 10:43 a.m. Beijing Time [0243 UTC] after spending 18 days in space."
Yea.....
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Wouldn't the exact same thing happen in other countries (including the U.S.) if businesses were making adult-only games available to children?
"Rectification" is a very scary word
But it seems that this is what happens when a country is allowed any sort of say in what constitutes "acceptable" use of anything. It's more or less well known that China's been firewalling off various chunks of the internet for years [ can't let those subversive ideas in, y'know, the citizenry might get a notion to revolt ] and this would just be more of the same.
Keep in mind, however, there are some parts of the United States that have a similar mindset. I mind me of the Maine library association....there were grants given out to give them internet access, but with a catch, that they had to have filtering software installed. Of course, many people cried "censorship!" and let slip the dogs of protest, but in the end, the puritans fought harder to keep all the corrupting influences from our youth, etc, etc.
Forgive my rambling...I'm not caffeinated yet. ^^;
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure dome decree
china's population is approx. 1.3 billion.
1.8 million internet bars means approx. 1 internet bar per 721 population.
to put that in perspective, a city of 30,000 would have 41 internet bars...
i'd like to know what counts as an "internet bar" though. anyone know what a typical chinese "internet bar" is like?
More likely young students were reading about interesting things like voting.
but did they really check 18000 outlets. Thats quite a considerable number.
Timang tinggi tinggi
parang sudah asah
alang alang mandi
biar sampai basah
18000/1800000 = .01 .01 * 100 = 1%
Isn't that right? I'd say 1% is a lot more significant. More than a few outliers. Less of a "struck by lightning" or "winning the lottery" type proportion.
With the dictators in Beijing bent on preventing access to independent (western) news, having smut as a pretext to close down internet cafes is pretty welcome. Probably the crime was actually to let customers read the New York Times. In China communists eyes, that is high treason. After all, they have their Great Firewall to prevent access to porn, haven't they?
I hear there is a considerable number of people in Chine these days...
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
I suggest that for an icon to represent the topic of China, we create an almagamation of subjects.
- Lack of freedom of speech
- Lack of freedom of assembly
- Lack of freedom of thought
- Lack of freedom of movement
- ...etc...
In general, create a hodge-podge of images that convey the impression of a dreary hell-hole of existence.This post encoded with ROT26. If you can read it, you've violated the DMCA. Handcuffs please, sergeant.
'Video nasties' were an 80's panic; the idea was that horror videos would corrupt youth. Please get you witchhunts, panics, and scares in the right order!
Since the video nasty, penny dreadful, sinful rock'n'roll song, three-volume novel (blamed for leading young ladies astray in times past) and comic book scares have all been and gone with amazingly little impact on anything, I think it is reasonable to have a fairly relaxed response to the current computer games scare
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
How the hell is stating the truth beeing a Troll?
Well, he missed by a bit tho. The US dont have one party, its one and a half.
Perhaps these kids shouldn't be doing a bunch of coffee either?
You've got to be kidding me? I dought there are more than 100 full time internet cafes in the entire US. Not counting the 6 that are opening and closing in any particular state at any giving moment. I've only ever seen one stable one in the entire down town Minneapolis area, and that one only makes money because they have a bakery.
BLAH BLAH BLAH Bush and Rove BLAH BLAH BLAH Patriot Act BLAH BLAH BLAH Police State.
That's sort of scary if you think about it, as the rest of the world matures, they will be poised to take over due to the sheer quantity of 'young adults' in their prime condition to fight a war.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
While 1'600 sounds like a pretty huge number, the closing and the fines itself doesn't sound so much special if it is really true that they let children play adult games. After all in germany similar things[1] have happened and I am sure that if young children would use internet cafe to watch porn the US authorities wouldn't be much pleased either.
[1] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/33234
The Unknown Protestor and other images related to those fateful days back in 1989....
We don't know why they shut them down. More likely because some of the users were finding their way around the government approved web sites.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Logic(French Version) = Our long time ally and protector is going to war with a thug? Get me that guy's number. I have some Roland Anti Aircraft missiles he might be interested in.
Or is China starting to get worst all of a sudden? The Chinese people need to stand up for themselves. A revolution is in order.
The difference is that they had the balls to shout it at Tiananmen Square. Here, we create "free speech zones" and arrest they anyway.
Maybe freedom isn't what token privileges the gov. gives you. Maybe freedom is a willingness to die for your belief.
I note the Tiananmen Mothers still speak out.
Not trolling, just having a laugh people. Sounds like a nasty situation for the Chinese populace.
[% slash_sig_val.text %]
China inspected a grand-total of 1.8 million bars, and ordered about 18,000 of those bars to "to stop operation for rectification"
That's Chinese for "bend over and spread 'em."
Not appointed by a popular vote, and pushing their own agenda on the Masses of Slashdot! Why does truth hate the Moderators?!
Blar.
If the govt of China has enough time to go around to Internet cafe's, to watch for kids playing video games that they don't deem approprate, they should re-direct their efforts on a real problem such as eliminating the LARGE amount of SPAM that comes out of their country!!!
More and more SPAM is originating in China, but they want to shut down internet cafe's because of what people are viewing on them? Talk about restriction on freedom of speech, then ignoring a major issue such as SPAM.
China is f'ed up.
They get to make their own rules of what is morally acceptable and what isn't.
We don't have the right to dictate our concept of morality to them. ( nor does it work in reverse.. )
Let them make their own decisions. Now, when you discuss the fact they restrict others from leaving that don't agree, we have something to talk about, but we don't have a right to demand they follow our values....
---- Booth was a patriot ----
How do you say Patriot Act in Chinese?
What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
http://houndwire.com
that they send via Chinese servers
http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/index.lasso
1,350,000,000 Chinese. (Give or take.)
...Porn, gambling, violence and similar problems..."
18,000,000 bars checked. (One for every 75 people.) That's not bad. That would be the equivalent of 3.9 million bars in the U.S.*
18,000 bars need "rectification." That probably means they were fined and told to do X, Y, and Z. Only 1% of bars needed to be rectified. These bars remained open.
1,600 bars were completely shut down. That means out of all the bars, 0.0089% were shut down. One out of every 1,000 were fined/rectified. 1 out of every 11,250 were shut down. Why were they fined or shut down?
"...allowing children to play violent or adult-only games and other violations...
So, the issue here is, not censorship, but that the Chinese Government regulates internet bars, and that some bars allowed children to do everything from play violent video games (admittedly not that big on an issue) to see explicit sex videos (not sure any parent would want their 7-yr old doing that).
Yes the parents should've checked the bars, but hey, so did the government. And now because of one parent's lousy parenting (not checking to see what their kid did), the government stepped in. And did this on very rare occasions.
Frankly, I don't see what the fuss is about.
BONUS NEWS@: The Internet Society of China recently released a blacklist of 112 internet protocol (IP) addresses of spam servers.
* Metric Conversion: 4.5 Libraries of Congress / Volkswagen.
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
While all I see is all this cringing about how horrid and totalitarian this is, it is easy to see from the figures that this is less than point one percent of the bars they checked which was a staggering 1.8 million. Holy smokes. Even if they just sell a coke or two, there's some commerce going on there.
And what were these guys shut down for? For allowing children to play adult games in public. Oh, that would be fine in the US right? Bullshit.
Now I think it is totally hypocritcal for Americans to get on a soap box about such a miniscule figure when the US puts content filters on millions of PCs in schools and libraries that prevent birth control and alternative political information from reaching students. And the US shuts down net cafes with just as much gusto as the Chinese. The double stardard is attrocious.
But you have to wonder. I mean didn't we just see an article in which hundreds of Slashdot posters defended in public the use of the term "ricer". Clearly there are some real double standards about what is appropriate when it comes to anything Asian.
William Randolf Hearst would be proud of all you asian haters making fools of yourselves in public. But remember, what you reap is what you sow.
China is huge. I am slightly more puzzled about the huge number of internet bars. Even with a billion residents it seems high. But then they might not have home internet so have a higher demand for internet cafes. Since most responsible goverments check bars anyway for food regulation and drink regulations checking them for internet regulations shouldn't be that much work.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Children should NOT be playing violent video games. Games that promote drug use, violence and crime are destroying the moral character of our youth, and this kind of thing MUST STOP. We need laws in the USA that also prohibit kids under 18 from playing such mindless idiocy. I hope during Bush's next term in office, he can do something about this and I will write my congressman about this issue as soon as possible.
If they cracked down on spam, they would lose all the hard currency they get from spammers in the West. This currency helps defray the cost of the powers that be to remain in power while the rest of China remains in various states of oppression and suppression.
Pink contracts are pink contracts no matter where in the world they are agreed to.
I'll just continue to delete my spam automatically with my own software as I have been since July, 2004.
Interestingly, the majority of Chinese support the actions of their government. Consider the fact that more than 50 percent of Hong Kongers prefer social order over democracy despite the fact that the Hong Kongers have full knowledge of the evils of China. More than 60% of the Hong Kongers enthusiastically supported the unification of Hong Kong and China.
The latest action by the Beijing is a thinly veiled attempted to use "smut" as a pretext to censor. Such is the nature of Chinese culture.
I spent July and August of this year in China probably frequenting those dens of vice which were shut down. A long time expat there explained it to me this way:
Alot of those internet bars are operating without a business license. First, from the governments perspective they are losing revenue they are "owed" for giving business the "right" to operate. Second, these now illegitimate internet bars certainly will not pay taxes. Faced with losing RMB, the government naturally wants to solve this and exert "control."
So do you go door to door and check to see if 1,600 internet bars have their license? Gimme a break. No, no, no; shut it all down. Then open them back up one by one. This time you know where they are and who has paid their dues.
It's business. It has little to do with free speech, violent video games, or porno firewalls (by the way, that firewall just means you have to click that link twice or three times before you can use the internet for what it was made i.e. to view porn.)
Its 1.8 million bars, not 18 million. 1 bar for every 750 people, equivelent to 390,000 bars in the US 1% of bars needed rectification (1 out of every 100) .089% were closed (1 out of every 11,250)
All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
You forgot to factor in the fact they have more citizens then any other country on earth. ( and one that has specifically stated they hate us all and want to take over )
Then throw in the 18%... You should then see my point.
Also, most developed countries are top heavy currently. You seem to have forgot that.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Should the government have the power to stop them? Would the cure be better than the disease?
In the USA long after the Patriot Act was enacted, huge numbers of demonstrators packed the streets to protest the Iraq War. The American government, reflecting the will of the American people, defended their civil right to protest.
By contrast, if huge numbers of demonstrators packed the streets of Beijing to protest the rape and slaughter of Tibetan nuns, then the Chinese police and the regular Chinese people would kill the demonstrators.
One additional point is worth noting. After a speech by a scholar from the Rand Institute, I went up to the scholar to give him a word of advice: "Never base your analyses about Korea, China, etc. on interviews with Chinese, Koreans, etc. They never admit the negative elements of their societies."
He agreed with me.
The regular Chinese will do just as much as the Beijing government to deny any wrongdoing by Beijing. Such is the nature of Chinese people.
Rectification in China usually means nothing more than a bullet in the back of the head in the alley.
Nice to see people would rather just shoot kids and decrease the surplus population.
China is not the USA and to say good job China is little like thanking Dr.Josef Mengela for his "wonderful" medical experiments and Ted Kuzinski for his manifesto.
"It's estimated that 18% of China's Internet population is composed of minors."
What a coincidence. 18% of China's *population* is a minor.
"The regular Chinese will do just as much as the Beijing government to deny any wrongdoing by Beijing. Such is the nature of Chinese people."
"The regular American will do just as much as the Washington government to deny any wrongdoing by Washington. Such is the nature of American people."
They closed 1600 bars, not 18000.
No, my observational might tells me that just under 50% of the American population (those about to vote for Bush) deny any wrongdoing by Washington. And in many states, like where I live, far, far less than 50%. We have an open society that tolerates debate and dissent - not that John Ashcroft wouldn't love to change that, but he hasn't succeeded on a large scale yet.
Oh please, it's not like spam revenues are significant in China's economy.
Jesus Christ, the post was infomative, not a fucking troll. What's wrong with you, you stupid cunt moderators.
There is a reaction that quickly happens every time Slashdot has an article on China's suppression of free speech and association. Apologists for China always trot out past transgressions committed by the USA government. How is that relevant? Does a bad act comitted by the USA give China a 'free' bad act? Aren't Tianenman Square and Kent State both wrong on fundamental moral principle? Why would anyone use one to excuse the other?
I think most people are uncomfortable making moral judgements these days. I'm not. I judge this action by China to be wrong. This is true whether you hate George Bush or not.
Can someone without a pro-usa axe to grind please mod this up.
Anarchists never rule
Don't you get it, this is exactly the reason why countries around the world dislike the United States.
Democracy is good, but its not for everyone.
If you're forcing democracy down its throat, you're only gonna end up harming yourself. Just like how the Bush Administration is trying to push democracy in the Middle-East.
The people are not ready yet!
Other forms of government can be just as effective. So they are different, well thats culture for you!
And China' ain't bad, they are opening up, I've been in China for over a month and it feels just like home, you get to eat, sleep, shop, work, freedom to choose your jobs, buy materialistic things. What more?
China has been living with far worst government for over 2-5k years now (read: Monarchy; Emporers) and if you take a step back, Communism is actually much less strict.
Let the country run itself.
We'll see pretty soon huh?
Then again, the election could be Diebolded.
And what were these guys shut down for? For allowing children to play adult games in public. Oh, that would be fine in the US right? Bullshit.
Wrong. We have allowed children to play CounterStrike in Internet cafes for years.
And the US shuts down net cafes with just as much gusto as the Chinese. The double stardard is attrocious.
Oh? Prove it. I've *never* heard of an Internet cafe in the U.S. being shut down by the government because children were playing violent computer games. (they may have been shut down for other reasons, e.g. trafficking child porn, but violent computer gaming? Never heard of it.)
China is still a totalitarian socialist state, and this is more proof that socialism and totalitarianism go hand in hand.
Stop trying to justify a totalitarian nation's destruction of freedom by dodging the issue and bringing out the red-herring of what the U.S. does. This article talks about China, not the U.S..
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
What? Not even close. Such a huge massive move to shut down small business would be political suicide against the official involved.
But you have to wonder. I mean didn't we just see an article in which hundreds of Slashdot posters defended in public the use of the term "ricer". Clearly there are some real double standards about what is appropriate when it comes to anything Asian.
"Nonononono. That's different. I made fun of them because they are from China. You see, it's not okay to make fun of an American because they're black, brown, or whatever, but it is okay to make fun of foreigners because they are from another country." -Chef "South Park"
"the rape and slaughter of Tibetan nuns"
"The regular Chinese will do just as much as the Beijing government to deny any wrongdoing by Beijing. Such is the nature of Chinese people."
This has NEVER happened in the US... has it?
Check your histories... we were not too kind to those in our territories either.
Most of this my country is better and those 'bad things only happen over there' sentiments come from those that dont uaually leave their own country. If they do leave, they take wonderful little tours.
Bush and Cheney are reading this article and saying to themselves "Why can't we do this?"
Here in the US, it is illegal in some states to have oral sex with your wife. Some conservatives, like Ann Coulter, believe that it is perfectly fine to pass a law that tells someone how to act based on her religious beliefs. And judging by the landslide victory the gay marriage amendment had here in Lousiana, there are plenty people who feel the same way.
Do the country a favor this Tuesday: Don't vote for Bush!
Congress didn't directly force content filtering in libraries - they threatened to take away federal funding if they didn't use it, and there were several library systems that did forgo federal funding in order to preserve freedom of speech. (I believe that before this, Congress did try to require filtering in all libraries, but the Supreme Court overruled it - can't remember for sure though.)
In the US, you can vote and petition the government to stop that. Do that in China and you "dissappear" you may eventually reappear, but you're not all in one piece.
Everyone looks at China with rose colored glasses because that's where the money is at. Who cares about all their crimes when we could make a dime?
It was just an excuse for him to spam us with his shitty product.
You both can't get it right... they INSPECTED 1800000 bars, and SHUT DOWN 18000 of these.
...probably had a lot to do with it.
profiling is no longer wise for law enforcement. any precinct caught doing it usually gets slapped with very expensive lawsuits these days.
I can't find which games, in particular, were banned. The original article is pretty poor.
/ 17/eng20020517 _95869.shtml
Here's a slightly longer perspective.
http://english.people.com.cn/200205
I was an English teacher in Nanjing from 1 year ago to about 6 months ago.
If you'd been to China recently, you'd know it isn't at all socialistic. Newspapers don't paint a very clear picture of things. It's somewhere between oligarchic, fascist and anarchic. But it's not socialistic at all. It used to be Maoist, distinct from Marxist Lenninist and also distinctly different from the socialistic governments of Europe. But China has changed a lot recently.
Anyway, if you're 16 you can do whatever you want in a netbar. Watch porn. Play CS. Whatever.
It's fair that the previous poster brought up the notion of standards. The US has to live by the same standards it applies to other nations. In China there's no age limit on alcohol or cigarette purchases. In the US, there is. Does this make the US a totalitarian state? I don't think it does. What has happened here is as 'totalitarian' as a rigid enforcement of the US movie rating system. And it's hard to tell from the article what the situation is on the ground. Sometimes, 'crackdowns' are ignored by business owners, who comply as superficially as possible. It's hard to tell how seriously people are taking this.
Of course, the US is more tolerant of violence than some cultures. Other non Judeo-Christian cultures are a lot more tolerant of sex.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
rectification is performed with a rectumfryer
Just a few months ago I had not one, not two, but three patrol cars come flying up on me and using their vehicles to practically push me off the road.
I pulled over as fast as I could and put my hands on the dash.
The cops all came out with guns drawn and pulled me out of the car. They said they had a report I had been beating my girlfriend who was in the car with me.
This was all totally out of the blue and had nothing to do with reality. They put me in one of the cars and then searched the interior of my car for about three minutes till a K-9 arrived. The dog went through the car and they found nothing.
Finally they let me go and said it was all a mistake. What kind of shit is that?
This is my first post, so please gentle. I am Chinese-American who emigrated to the US at a very young age and has since then returned as a study abroad student. I have been in many a "wangba" [Chinese for internet cafe] and I want to put all of this non-sense in perspective: 1.)Dissidents don't usually frequent wangbas because doing something politically insensitive in a wangba doesn't just endanger yourself, it endangers the owners and potentially the other patrons. 2.)It's mostly kids at these wangbas, doing exactly what the government says it's cracking down on: downloading porn and playing CS [and they were scary good at the latter; I'm a fairly competent CS player, but in this tiny ass village in Southwest China without even a single paved road I got my ass handed back to me by these 13 year old kids] 3.)The Great Firewall is about as effective as the regular Great Wall was, which is to say, it's not terribly effective. I would have to say I've been to two dozen different wangbas all over China, and it's hit or miss whether or not I can access the so called prohibited sites. New York Times was okay in most places, ditto with CNN. All the Tibetan Independence sites [I tried out of curiosity] were much more frequently blocked, and Amnesty Int'l is similarily more difficult to access. This leads into my fourth point... 4.)There are 1.8 million [that's million] of these wangbas all over China. 1.8 million. The way the Chinese government is set up, with it's extremly heirarchical (sp?), top-down, Central to Regional to Provincial to Local structure, the only way the government can manage to keep track of all of those 1.8 million internet bars is through one of those ubiquitious government "anti-something" campaigns, and even then only for a very short period of time before the various levels of the heiarchy return back to their normal state of resistance/grudging cooperation with each other. Basically, not only was the number of 18K bars shut down ridiculously small, there's a good chance, now that the government anti-smut/anti-video game violence/anti whatever campaign is over, that a good deal of those bars shut down would open themselves up, with the implicit approval of the local authorities, without so much as an iota of "rectification" carried out. This is just the way the Chinese government works, in all it's magnificently inefficient glory. 5.)Contrary to the generally libertarian impulse here in the US, I would have to say that a vast majority of the Chinese people would expect the government to creat and enforce morality laws. Whether you agree with it or not, or if you think that that isn't the "natural" and correct way for a government to act, it's what the Chinese expect the government to do for them. They have a very different set of implicit expectations for what a government does and what it's responsible for, and especially what its role in society is. I haven't been closely following this latest anti-violence/anti-smut campaign very closely, but I would hazard a guess that the campaign was mostly either received with a lukewarm welcome or total indifference. If the government goes over the bounds and uses this campaign as an excuse to shut down some wangbas or other internet meeting places for allowing access to politically sensitive information, then a great majority of the population would see that as an acceptable trade-off for dealing with the preceived problem of underage access to porn and violent games. This is simply how the society and the culture are in China. I'm not saying if it's right or wrong, but I'm just saying that's reality, and in reality, [here comes the really overextended metaphor] a boiling hot sulphur spring might seem like perfect hell for you but I bet the thermophile organisms that thrive there can't imagine any other way to live.
We have allowed children to play CounterStrike in Internet cafes for years.
Last I checked, CounterStrike was rated M for mature. The fact you allow children to play it does not necessarily make it a right or wise decision.
Oh? Prove it. I've *never* heard of an Internet cafe in the U.S. being shut down by the government because children were playing violent computer games. (they may have been shut down for other reasons, e.g. trafficking child porn, but violent computer gaming? Never heard of it.)
That's kind of missing the whole point isn't it? When your Internet access is shut down for whatever reason, it infringes on your right to use it for legitimate purposes. *THAT* is the source of your oppression. The double standard lies in the reasoning of "we have a better reason than you do". It is a double edged sword that cuts both ways no matter which sided of the Pacific you are.
China is still a totalitarian socialist state, and this is more proof that socialism and totalitarianism go hand in hand.
Excuse me, but how much do you really know about China? Your so-called proof is *poof*! China is no more a totalitarian socialist state than the US is a radical democratic state. How much air time has the third party candidates recieved in the upcoming presidential election? Do *you* even know who your third party candidates are? With all the spin put out by the two dominant political parties, straight facts are impossible to come by. Good luck excercising your democratic rights without genuine knowledge.
Stop trying to justify a totalitarian nation's destruction of freedom by dodging the issue and bringing out the red-herring of what the U.S. does. This article talks about China, not the U.S..
It isn't a dodge of anything. The grandparent post brings up a very good point by pointing out the hypocrisy of the American perspective. It's just another case of the pot calling the kettle black.
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
[quote]The regular Chinese will do just as much as the Beijing government to deny any wrongdoing by Beijing. Such is the nature of Chinese people.[/quote] You, sir, should be slapped with a wet fish. You just presumed to tell us all what the "nature" of 1.3 billion individual Chinese men and women is. Open your mind and you might see that the Chinese are people too, and that their feelings about their government are just as complex as our feelings about ours.
-sig removed for tax purposes-
Do that in China and you "dissappear" you may eventually reappear, but you're not all in one piece.
That is absolute nonsense. China has no death squad or secret police. You never disappear, much less end up in pieces. You have to remember, China is a big country. When anyone steps out of line, there are a lot of other who are(or could be) watching. The Ministry of Public Security (affectionately known as GongAn, pronounced "goon on") does the most effective thing possible and make an example of out of said individual. The charges may be trumped up, but I assure you, the trial is very public. *You* may assert a crime has been commited, but within the Chinese system, "justice" has been carried out.
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
while I agree whole heartedly with the spirit of your post, I think your lack of references diminish your arguement. What figures are available on the US crackdown on public internet access at cafes and such?
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
No, im not confused. Perhaps individual people may not care about the rest of the world, but the leaders do.
And the leaders are who cause invasions..
Distance? ICBM's dont care much about distance, nor do insane leaders.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You, sir, should be slapped with a wet fish.
can we make that a puffer fish? with poisoneous spines?
> Watch porn. Play CS. Whatever.
Umm, isn't the Chinese government paying people $500 to report porn sites? Don't you get in trouble for spreading anti-governmental messages via the Internet?
That's far from being Free...
My other car is first.
But not for the youth in America, though. That's why America's net cafe gets to stay.
The US govt never needs to shut down a opperation, they just need to get you on lots of small technicalities and send you to court so many times that you eventually go broke and need to sell your business, so to the outside, it looks like Bussiness-A never gets shutdown, but in reality it just changes hands to a more passive follower of 'regulations'.
:)
This is where China will slowly learn that there are tricky sly ways to achieve your goals without appearing as an evil dictator - lessons learned , from the USA
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
So how easy is it for me to petition to legalize cannabis in NY? I would only succeed in 2020AD once all the old farts die off and enough progressive thinkers that KNOW that attaching a criminal label on smokers is the wrong way to go about things...
Sometimes the MOB RULES mentalitiy ( ie voting ) can be the wrong way to go, because if 56% of the people (uninformed trolls) vote for criminalizing pot, does it mean they are really correct and right to punish the other 44%???
They should do TWO referendum, you only achieve success if you get a 75%+ vote;
ask for Pro Criminalization or
Pro Decriminaliztion
If both fail to get 75%+ then its obvious that democracy on a large scale is a failure, you have to have smaller regions of local laws. The concept of a common vote for rules for a large population that is massively diverse is SOO WRONG, it should be very localized with extremely few country wide laws or even state wide laws.
So either have smaller states, or have more counties/areas defining their own laws, so if you dont like one place, move to a place you like, that would be real freedom. No country wide DMCA.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
I mean didn't we just see an article in which hundreds of Slashdot posters defended in public the use of the term "ricer".
Oh come ON. If you're going to get all indignant about that term, at least learn where it comes from. HINT: adding rice alcohol to small engines for a small performance boost.
-Siggy!
MOD PARENT UP!
like everything else on the planet, this must be Bush's fault.
That's nearly one Internet bar for every 500 people in China! That would be the equivalent of 560000 Starbucks joints in the US. There are less than 30,000 starbucks shops in the WORLD, let alone more than half a million in the US.
My girlfriend was talking to me about Wang Bars just last night. Funny thing is, she can't play CS for shit.
I've been playing violent video games since I was ten. My father raised me to know the difference between reality and fantasy. I think my first FPS was Duke Nukem 3D. The government, any government, can't protect children from bad parenting forever. At some point, all governments must realize that these censorship programs for everything from erotica to swear words wouldn't be necessary, if they promoted programs to inform parents on successful methods for raising children. There is only so much the government can do the shield children from bad parenting.
I know this has "troll" written all over it, but just in case it's not, can you do three things, please?
1. Operationally define "moral character".
2. Show evidence to support your claim that the "moral character", as you defined it in #1, of our youth is being destroyed.
3. Show evidence for how the destruction of our youth's "moral character" is a direct result of violent video games.
Anecdotal evidence, being very unscientific and misleading, does not count for numbers 2 and 3.
Thanks.
Consider the fact that more than 50 percent of Hong Kongers prefer social order over democracy despite the fact that the Hong Kongers have full knowledge of the evils of China. With a population density like they have thats not so surprising. (Sidenote: If I recall right, there where similar opinions in iraqi polls.) Considering further the shining example of a democracy, oops sorry federal repulic ;), the US are right now, it might well add up to that.
Life has become the ideology of its absence - T.W. Adorno
Whew, just had a major Lewis Black moment after reading that steaming pile of dumb.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
(from http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715/
Wrong. We have allowed children to play CounterStrike in Internet cafes for years.
Over here in the U.K., the more realistic games are subject to the BBFC's scrutiny. The BBFC is the board that decides how old somebody should be before being allowed to watch a film.
If a net-cafe over here let under-age kids play games they weren't supposed to, and the authorities got wind of it, they would in all likelihood be fined and possibly subject to criminal prosecution.
I don't see how this is an indication of being a "totalitarian socialist state" or how it "destroys our freedom". As a society, we have decided that some material is unsuitable for children, we have enacted laws to that effect, and we enforce them. The only people "imposing" this law on us is ourselves.
You need to grow up and stop using any "China shuts down" stories as an excuse for xenophobic knee-jerk reactions.
- China sucks because it's Communist! This would never happen in the U.S.!
- The U.S. sucks! This is already happening here, and you're just being a hypocrite by ignorning it!
- I'm from Canada, you insenstive clod!
Repeat several hundred times.Last I checked, CounterStrike was rated M for mature. The fact you allow children to play it does not necessarily make it a right or wise decision.
:-)
Did I say it *was*? No...
It is my firm opinion that it is the responsibility of the parent to ensure that their child is not doing what they, the parent, do not want them doing. So long as the child cannot be liable for non-criminal offenses under the law (e.g. cannot sign contracts), the responsibility of a child's actions is on the parents.
When your Internet access is shut down for whatever reason, it infringes on your right to use it for legitimate purposes. *THAT* is the source of your oppression. The double standard lies in the reasoning of "we have a better reason than you do". It is a double edged sword that cuts both ways no matter which sided of the Pacific you are.
This much I actually agree with. I am a diehard free-speech advocate (my only real limitation being speech which poses a "clear and present danger" (and it must be a very-blunt, obvious, agreeable one at that, e.g. somebody giving nuke launch codes to known terrorists. I would not even ban yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater, although certainly whoever does that is fully-responsible for the harm that results)).
But again, I never said it was legitimate to shut down Internet cafes for trafficking child porn (although I do think the individuals doing it -- i.e., probably the patrons -- should be held accountable for it, just not the cafe owner, unless it is the owners themselves who are doing it)...
Excuse me, but how much do you really know about China? Your so-called proof is *poof*!
Proof of China's totalitarianism would entail me citing something indicating that China uses forced prison labor, unlike the U.S., and citing the fact that by economic definition, socialism is the ownership of the output of the economy.
Seeing as I have very-likely studied more economics than you have, I am probably more qualified to call it "socialist", because the truth is, even though it is called "communist", there has never actually *been* a communist state; in fact, the phrase "communist state" is an oxymoron, because under pure communism, there is no government. But under Chinese "communism" (now more of a socialist-leaning mixed-economy), there is a large government.
They are *far* more market-oriented than they were prior to 1978, that's true. But take a look at their tax schedule. Their income tax rates are fairly-similar to those in the U.S., with a wider variance (between 10-45%, rather than 10-38% as in the U.S. for singles). And their corporate taxes, ranging from 18-33%, are similar to the U.S. range of 15-39%. But unlike the U.S., China imposes a "Value-Added Tax" (VAT) of anywhere between 0-17%. They also impose real estate taxes, land-appreciation taxes, and land-use fees, among a raft of others...
All totaled, these taxes can easily add up to over 50% of the income of the average individual in the Chinese economy. That means that China is, by definition, still more socialist than capitalist (whether that's a good thing in your mind is your own opinion).
How much air time has the third party candidates recieved in the upcoming presidential election? Do *you* even know who your third party candidates are? With all the spin put out by the two dominant political parties, straight facts are impossible to come by.
Thanks for the lecture. Yes, I know the third-party candidates, and I've already voted for mine:
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
Socialism and communism are not interchangeable. socialism is anti-captialism, while communism is post-captialism. (well actually it's captitalism, then a brief period of socialism, then communism).
Japan also has a high population density, but the Japanese fully support the civil right to lobby, to demonstrate, and to speak in public. The Japanese are Westerners, but the Chinese in Hong Kong are not.
The population density in Iraq is substantially lower than that Hong Kong. The Iraqis prefer Islamic fascism and have demonstrated their preference by holding demonstrations condemning the Americans for liberating (!) the Iraqis from Saddam.
Anyway, if you're 16 you can do whatever you want in a netbar. Watch porn. Play CS. Whatever.
:-)
In that respect, yes, China is less totalitarian than the U.S., as they allow things like porn at a lower age than we do...
But how about free-speech restrictions (can you talk about Tianenman there?)? Forced prison-labor camps? Childbirth restrictions (1 child per woman, last I checked)? These are not the policies of a non-totalitarian society.
In China there's no age limit on alcohol or cigarette purchases. In the US, there is. Does this make the US a totalitarian state? I don't think it does.
Depends on how you define "totalitarian." I would argue that yes, these are traits of totalitarianism -- it's the responsibility of parents to ensure that their children are not doing the things they ought not do.
I think there can be room for cultural differences in how certain things which are both socially and physically affectatious are treated though (e.g. drinking alcohol often leads to accidents with previously-uninvolved people, so we restrict that from children, but political speech on the Internet hurts nobody, no matter how repulsive, because it still requires actions on the part of an individual somewhere to turn those words into harm).
The U.S. is far from free of totalitarian influence, even on such things we tend to hold dear as free-speech, but relative to other nations, the U.S. is still less-totalitarian than most (though Bush has been working overtime to change this...).
Of course, the US is more tolerant of violence than some cultures. Other non Judeo-Christian cultures are a lot more tolerant of sex.
Exactly; I think there can be room for cultural differences in the treatment of some issues. Sex is the classic U.S. vs. Europe example...
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
Socialism and communism are not interchangeable. socialism is anti-captialism, while communism is post-captialism. (well actually it's captitalism, then a brief period of socialism, then communism).
This is an oversimplification, and from a purely economic perspective, not quite correct. Respond if you want to know why...
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
As a society, we have decided that some material is unsuitable for children, we have enacted laws to that effect, and we enforce them.
/. without a WAG (Wild-Ass Guess) about the reality of somebody else's situation, would it?
But does *everybody* agree with those laws? No. Perhaps only 80-90% do. What about the other 10-20% who do not? Are they to be subject to the whims of "society"? Why? Is that fair to them?
Perhaps they have children who are mentally-competent to handle more-mature subject matter than other children. Why should they be restricted by the whims of lesser people?
The same argument about wine can be made thusly: in the U.S., one must be 21 to drink wine. But over in Europe, the drinking age is lower: 18, 16, and even lower. Why? Because Europeans believe their children are more competent to drink responsibly than we in America do.
But let's say Europe's laws were written by the U.S. (not so far-fetched a hypothesis, really). Would it be fair to you to have to wait until you're 21 to drink? Up until that time, you had been drinking with no life-threatening ill effect (else, you would be dead!). So why should the whims of American society be placed on your own?
Now scale this hypothesis back down to the national British level, or even scale it further to the provincial/state level, etc. This is the fundamental flaw with letting "society" decide how the individual may lead their own life.
We only accept it because we feel as though we haven't found a better solution...
You need to grow up and stop using any "China shuts down" stories as an excuse for xenophobic knee-jerk reactions.
You need to grow up and stop making assumptions about what I think of the Chinese.
I am not xenophobic. I have absolutely nothing against Chinese people. Some of the best people I have ever met are Chinese.
But this wouldn't be
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
First... people don't typically go to net bars to 'spread anti-governmental messages.' I don't know how hard the government would work to track you if you did, provided you weren't trying to organize some kind of protest. Criticism on the local level is just fine. You don't want to threaten the boys in Beijing, of course, but Beijing is a long ways away from most things and not really a very present force in the average persons life. It's a felony, for that matter, to threaten the US president, even as a joke. (yes, I know we can vote him out of office.)
I haven't heard the $500 for a porn site quote, but that seems like an awful lot. They could get away with offering $50 and it would be half many people's wages. The Teachers I worked with made $125/month plus free housing, and still managed to dress decently. It doesn't sound accurate. There was very easy access to all kinds of porn when I went there.
Second... There still is some fascist element to China. Rights of the state above the individual, and all. You don't want to pose a credible threat to the boys in Beijing. But things aren't as bad as most folks outside seem to imagine, and the government just isn't as organized as most outsiders tend to portray. People are a little edgy about talking politics, despite the relative calm considering Mao's "let so and so many flowers bloom" statement back during the CR, etc. But they do.
The government controls things like the mass media, but more through censorship than outright violence. I was on TV once while there, and it was interesting to hear things spelled out very explicitly. Don't criticize the government. Don't suggest that China has any racial problems. Don't talk about sex or use profanity. It will be edited out... can't remember if there was anything else...
Just don't trust ANY statistics that come out of China. There's no attempt made at either honesty or accuracy.
And when it comes down to it, rule of law is a little shaky for Chinese citizens. What you can get away with depends on your money and your connections. If you know the right party members, you can literally get away with murder.
I was told stories about well connected folks who did. It's an open secret apparently.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
i completelly agree with China's Government behavior. I support children and teenagers having contact and learning with the computer, but playing violent games is far from what the word learning really means.
It makes you yearn for the good old days when we played reasonable games at the arcade like Punch Out!, Sokoban, and Street Fighter.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Laws are fuzzy in China. There's a one child policy, so a lot of kids just weren't reported. Government isn't that well organized. Rules are flexible. There's a saying; "The mountains are high and the emperor is far away." People can question local government, but you don't want to make personal enemies or piss off Beijing in the same way that you don't go into downtown Chicago and start using gang signs. Beijing seems to focus more on control of the mass media through censorship, but it's all a matter of respect in the end. You can criticize the government personally, but to be safe, you should do it carefully, respectfully and indirectly. Sure, thats a lack of freedom, but things CAN be said. Of course, just because things can be said doesn't mean they will be, same as in the states. Things happen more on a personal, rather than professional level in China, so you don't want to piss your superiors or neighibors off and rely on rules to save you.
If a totalitarian society is lax in enforing its laws, especially if you're well connected, is it really "totalitarian"? Family and friends mean a lot more in China, in terms of personal freedom. Power isn't quite so 'rules' based. People are flexible. It's a slightly different mindset.
The scary thing about the US is that it's so much better organized than China. It could do a much better job of being totalitarian if it really put it's mind to it.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Norway is a socialist state. Sweden is a socialist state. Denmark is a socialist state..
e =11710
Here is a list of the countries with most press freedom in the world:
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_articl
The european socialist countries are above US.
It seems I've misscommunicated. Your knowledge of economics is impressive, but I don't see what relevence it has to a discussion about the political nature of policy and regulation regarding Internet access. My appearantly ineffectual reference to the current presidential election was an attempt to illustrate the rediculous relationship you draw between socialism and totalitarianism. China may still be economically socialist to some degree, but it is hardly politically totalitarian in the mold of Stalinistic Russia. In China, even at it's worst during the Mao era, there weren't much of a thing comparable to the Soviet secret police. In fact, the worst excesses of the cultural revolution was carried out in the gory glory of public spectacles.
The point I wanted to make was supposed to be that political information in the US is heavily filtered. As it happens, such is also the case in China. In other words, they're not that much worse off than we are in regards to freedoms and choices. Just as democracy doesn't prevail in it's purest form here in the US, control in China is not as rigid as you believe. *How much* worse off they are we would likely disagree. I'm intrigued actually and would welcome that discussion.
Now, your comments about journalism and reporters I find truly perplexing. While your perspective on bias carries some element of truth, I seriously doubt a self-respecting journalism professional would condone or support such a perspective. Because beyond a certain threshold, the media consuming public wouldn't stand for it. No one enjoy being swindled, lied to, or otherwise tricked with half truths and exagerations. The fact it is sometimes tolerated does not mean it should be emulated or promoted. I'm fairly confident most in this profession aspire to a grander ideal and only bends to the extent necessary to apease advertisers and sponsors.
I'd also like to address the source you cite for forced prison labor. While the article resides under the prestigious banner of CNN, it should be emphasized the piece is presented as an OPINION. Harry Wu, the author, is a social activist of significant notoriety and as such, can not make much claims to journalistic integrity. In the body of the article, he fails to mention that he has been incarcerated via the LaoGai system and has a bone to pick with the Chinese regime. To take him seriously as a proper reporter presenting reliable information would be like asking SCO to arbitrate a dispute between Microsoft and Linux. For what it's worth, the article itself links to a counterpoint that disects Wu's assertions point by point.
Your response to the charge of hypocrisy doesn't make much sense. The nature of the criticism levied against the Chinese is based on a relative comparison between the two systems. If the US turns out not to be what it is cracked up to be, what does that say about the subject of comparison? You can not make a good case against China without declaring where you're coming from. To use your job interview analogy, The project of my employer is emphatically relevent to my own past project because it would likely have a direct relationship with my reason for interviewing for the job in the first place.
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
But does *everybody* agree with those laws? No.
The same applies to every law. What gives the government the right to exert power over people who would prefer the state of nature is a philosophical question that has no "correct" answer. Trying to apply this argument to specifically denounce one particular law is absurd.
Perhaps they have children who are mentally-competent to handle more-mature subject matter than other children. Why should they be restricted by the whims of lesser people?
Because our democratically elected representatives passed a law on our behalf.
But let's say Europe's laws were written by the U.S. (not so far-fetched a hypothesis, really). Would it be fair to you to have to wait until you're 21 to drink? Up until that time, you had been drinking with no life-threatening ill effect (else, you would be dead!). So why should the whims of American society be placed on your own?
They shouldn't. But you are attempting to use the false analogy fallacy. The situation you describe is not analogous as it is one society imposing their rules on another. The situation I describe is one society imposing their rules on themselves.
Now scale this hypothesis back down to the national British level, or even scale it further to the provincial/state level, etc. This is the fundamental flaw with letting "society" decide how the individual may lead their own life.
So your argument isn't that China is wrong to impose this law, your argument is that all governments everywhere are wrong and that the only right state is the state of nature, a lawless society. I don't see why China should be singled out for criticism in this case.
I am not xenophobic. I have absolutely nothing against Chinese people. Some of the best people I have ever met are Chinese.
You are making some very harsh judgements against a government when the same logic applies to every other government, including your own. If the reason isn't an irrational bias against foreigners, what is it?
Well, Japan maybe democratic formally, just how comes they have never changed the ruling partyin the last 40 or so years? And to call them westeners is really hilarious. To me it seems more that they had to adopt somehow after WWII and that of course has deeply changed their society, nevertheless if you take a look at their traditional values I dont think they're an example to rebute my thesis really. Btw I didnt say a word about Iraqs populaion density, I just found it odd that Iraqis shared that opinion. By connecting Islam and fascism you show exactly the sort of ignorance that led to disaster. How about America changed their life from purgatorium to hell? Waisting breath here. Anyway, last one: they demostrated, they exercised their freedom of speech, now you dont like it. Oh... its FREEDOM(TM). IC
Life has become the ideology of its absence - T.W. Adorno
I live in china right now, and I can talk about any subject I want. But that does not mean I should dwell on sensational topics during social occasions, right? However, I get a kick out of telling chinese who have been force-fed their government's stance on Taiwan that noone else in the world sees it their way. A bit amusing, perhaps foolhardy.
:P
As for the population control... There are so many fucking people- EVERYWHERE. Really, some population control here would not be so bad. As I see it, a major problem is that the use of birthcontrol is not widespread enough to help fix the situation.
Gee wiz, I hope the chinese government doesnt track me down from my slashdot post and deport me
A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
whos that William Randolf Hearst?
Why does yahoo do this
Governing a large nation is like cooking a small fish
I'll force-feed your ass with some shlt, dumb ss. Ask Collin Powell to see if he agrees with you
Putting totalitarianism and socialism in the same sentence doesn't consist as proof that they go hand in hand. One might be able to say the same thing about our capitalist economy and the patriot act.
it is easy to see from the figures that this is less than point one percent of the bars they checked which was a staggering 1.8 million.
True enough. If all dissenting voices were equally informed, equally well-written, and equally dangerous to the established order then I'd believe that argument.
If Tom Paine were shut down in the 1700's, a similar argument could be made that his voice was only a small proportion of the total dissenters.
But it is also true that his propaganda was enormously influential.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
> Anyway, if you're 16 you can do whatever you want in a netbar. Watch porn. Play CS. Whatever.
Read about Falun Gong. Criticize the government.
Oh yeah.
Falun Gong sites are blocked but if you could access them, I don't think folks will show up on your doorstep.
You can be Christian in China if you choose. There's a fair bit of religious freedom now. Falun Gong is considered a cult accused of a number of murders; killings of street bums and so forth. I don't know if the accusations are true or not. It's hard to tell.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
We'll see what happens after the election, won't we?
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
I would suggest that America's better organization of law is both a blessing and a curse.
A blessing, because when you want to know if X is illegal or not, it's spelled out in black-and-white, and you can be reasonably-sure that with a competent lawyer reading it that you will have a safe interpretation. From your description of China, it sounds like a coin-toss.
But it's a curse, because as you say, it allows for rigid control eminating from the legislative bodies. Still, that's what our Constitution and Bill of Rights protect against (or are *supposed* to protect against -- Bush has done much to run roughshod over this American institution of limiting govn't power, in particular, those who might use that power for personal gain).
All in all, I still favor the U.S. system; I'll take my relative legal certainty (and the attendant predictable likelihood of winning in court) over a vague system like China's.
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
As for the population control... There are so many fucking people- EVERYWHERE. Really, some population control here would not be so bad. As I see it, a major problem is that the use of birthcontrol is not widespread enough to help fix the situation.
Meh, let the market sort it out. If it becomes too expensive to feed/house/clothe/educate children, people either won't have kids or they'll call for the govn't to save them from themselves (more likely, since people tend not to like being told "don't have children")...
But yeah, more birth-control promotion (condoms, etc.) would help immensely, I think.
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
Now, your comments about journalism and reporters I find truly perplexing. While your perspective on bias carries some element of truth, I seriously doubt a self-respecting journalism professional would condone or support such a perspective. Because beyond a certain threshold, the media consuming public wouldn't stand for it. No one enjoy being swindled, lied to, or otherwise tricked with half truths and exagerations. The fact it is sometimes tolerated does not mean it should be emulated or promoted. I'm fairly confident most in this profession aspire to a grander ideal and only bends to the extent necessary to apease advertisers and sponsors.
Well, in fact, in the 1800s in the U.S., most newspapers explicitly stated their bias on the front page. We still have remnants of that era; one of my town's local papers is the "Republican", for example (in an area which has usually voted strongly Republican).
I don't believe I ever promoted a media which lies or deceives its audience (I don't normally advocate such deception; actually, one of my biggest pet-peeves is a chronic lack of honesty in America. Call me old-fashioned, but I truly despise being lied-to).
But all sources of media are biased; it does not matter which source you cite, for they have a bias (the NYTimes and SFGate are liberal, the WSJ and Chicago Tribune are conservative, Reason and The Economist magazine tend to be libertarian, and so forth).
The only question is *how* are they biased... Looking again at TV media, I would argue that FOX is a fairly-staunchly conservative channel, CNN is moderate to slightly-left, MSNBC is all over the place depending on what polls show people think of their shows, and CNBC is business/financial news with an economically-conservative (but socially-moderate to slightly-conservative; i.e., this is basically TV for the WSJ crowd) slant.
There is no such thing as unbiased media. Many people dream that there is such thing, but throw a source at me -- *any* source -- and I will detect a bias for you, no matter how subtle (as long as it's in English or uses very-basic Spanish, i.e. I can read it)...
I'd also like to address the source you cite for forced prison labor. While the article resides under the prestigious banner of CNN, it should be emphasized the piece is presented as an OPINION. Harry Wu, the author, is a social activist of significant notoriety and as such, can not make much claims to journalistic integrity. In the body of the article, he fails to mention that he has been incarcerated via the LaoGai system and has a bone to pick with the Chinese regime. To take him seriously as a proper reporter presenting reliable information would be like asking SCO to arbitrate a dispute between Microsoft and Linux. For what it's worth, the article itself links to a counterpoint that disects Wu's assertions point by point.
Just because he has a bone to pick w/ the Chinese govn't does not mean he is wrong.
Still, if (for some reason) you cannot believe CNN's quoting of a Chinese guy with an anti-China bias, you can try the BSR.
Or Freechina.net.
Or Thefreedictionary.com.
Surely you don't believe China to be a beacon of human rights...
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
It's clear that murder is illegal in China. But if you know the right people, that doesn't matter. The one child policy isn't ambiguous. But it's like drug laws in the states. People know what the laws are, but don't always abide by them. And if you have good connections you can even get off entirely.
It's not a matter of constitutional or legislative branches, so much as influencing judges and law inforcement. I guess you could say it's a problem with separation of powers, or just plain corrutption due to a few people having a lot of power and being willing to use it in an openly vengeful way.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Well, in fact, in the 1800s in the U.S., most newspapers explicitly stated their bias on the front page. We still have remnants of that era; one of my town's local papers is the "Republican", for example (in an area which has usually voted strongly Republican).
Perhaps your neck of America still retain old world charms, but I seriously doubt it can be considered the pulse of the country. Names, in and of themselves, don't always have much meaning behind them. For example, the "Christian Science Monitor" is an extremely well respected secular newspaper which, since it's birth, has had no relations with the religous institution that is it's namesake.
But all sources of media are biased; it does not matter which source you cite, for they have a bias (the NYTimes and SFGate are liberal, the WSJ and Chicago Tribune are conservative, Reason and The Economist magazine tend to be libertarian, and so forth).
I don't believe I ever said the media is *not* biased. My point was that political agendas are not the primary motivations for news professionals. They may lean one way or another, but they all adhere to journalistic ethics to some degree. You may not be able to trust them completely, But they are also not raving propagandist. The good ones make exceptional efforts to present balanced coverage/reporting. For example, the "Philadelphia Inquirer" publicly endorses Kerry, but over 21 days, the Repubicans were granted a matching voice in the form of an opposing column to address specific issues as if in a formal debate. To get the discussion back on track, my belief is that this kind of strive for balance is the kind of thing we should hold most news outlets responsible for. Perhaps I'm missing your point, but by emphatically stressing the bias present in our media, you seem to strongly condone it despite professing dislike for dishonesty. The reason I mentioned the media at all in the original post was stress the point that the american society is not the supreme beacon of democratic process from which China can be criticized. The news media plays a significant hand in stifling the free expression of ideas and information. You seem to acknowledge the shortcomings of the media by presenting skewed information in terms of bias in reporting, so I'm no longer sure what our disagreement is.
Just because he has a bone to pick w/ the Chinese govn't does not mean he is wrong. Still, if (for some reason) you cannot believe CNN's quoting of a Chinese guy with an anti-China bias, you can try the BSR. Or Freechina.net. Or Thefreedictionary.com.
Now, about Harry Wu, is it appropriate to characterize him as being right or wrong? Remember, CNN is presenting his comments as OPINION. Opinions are not right or wrong - you either agree or disagree. As with anyone with an agenda, he exagerates what he can show and conveniently ignores what he doesn't want you to know. However, Harry made a few fatal mistakes in presenting "facts" that are easily debunked. As the rebuttal to his piece reveal, film footage of alleged organ harvest from condemed criminals showed the surgical opening on the wrong part of the body. He lied. and *THAT* is why I can't trust him. The other sources you cite, I can not deconstruct with the same detail, but it is obvious they all have specific purpose and present a highly skewed and misleading charicterization of China. For you to look at China and see only a human rights problem is like looking at the United States and see only drug addicts, hookers, and christian fundamentalists. It is xenophobic and it is wrong.
China may not be a beacon of human rights, but with the Patriot Act now backed by an even more republican federal government, neither are we. So it's time we got of our high horse and stop harassing China for problems we are no better at eradicating ourselves.
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.