Slashdot Mirror


85% of Chinese Citizens Like Internet Censorship

cynagh0st writes "A Pew Internet & American Life Project report indicates that of an overwhelming majority of Chinese people that believed the Internet should be 'managed or controlled,' 85% want the government to do this managing. This is resulting from surveys on Internet use over the last seven years in China. 'The survey findings discussed here, drawn from a broad-based sample of urban Chinese Internet users and non-users alike, indicate a degree of comfort and even approval of the notion that the government authorities should control and manage the content available on the Internet.' The report goes further into describing the divide in perspective between China and Western Nations on the matter and discusses the PRC's justifications for Internet control."

30 of 609 comments (clear)

  1. the other 15% by prgrmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    are in jail

    1. Re:the other 15% by snl2587 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      85% of Chinese Likes Censorship

      That's not what they were asked because the Chinese government did not approve of the question. They were asked if they approved of government control. The two are very different, especially in a socialist state where the government controls everything.

    2. Re:the other 15% by Scrameustache · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They were asked if they approved of government control. The summary says they were asked if they liked control, and if they did, if they preferred it were done by the government.

      That is kinda like asking Americans if they think terrorism should be fought, and if so should it be done by the US DoD.
      It's a loaded question designed to get a specific answer from a select group.
      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  2. Look! by callocx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Look, a censored survey!

  3. Real News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    85% Chinese is afraid of the government.

    1. Re:Real News by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not that simple. There are a fair amount of Chinese - both inside China and outside of China - who do not share my belief in the necessity of free speech. That's part of the reason why the Chinese government is still in place: according to a good chunk of the population, it's doing a good job. There are significant philosophical differences between China and the West (as nebulous a region as that is). This is one of them. Belittling them, dismissing them or otherwise ignoring them will not help in dealing with them. One of the biggest strength of the Chinese government right now is that it can leverage a massive and widespread feeling in the population that the West is treating China unfairly and more like a stupid dog than an equal nation. Then again, another useful item to keep in mind is that 0.1% of the population amounts to 1 million people. In other words, Chinese crackpots are about as big a group as certain European nations.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  4. Accurate? by MiKM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I were living in China, I'd be wary (and probably afraid) of speaking out against gov't censorship and control of the Internet.

  5. Shocking~ by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You mean people that spend all their life being managed and controlled want the internet to be managed and controlled?

    I'm shocked I tells ya, shocked~

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Shocking~ by WindowlessView · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean people that spend all their life being managed and controlled want the internet to be managed and controlled?

      This is one manifestation of a larger question: how realistic is it to assume that a society that is quickly growing richer wants to rock the boat that has raised their living conditions? It always seemed naive to assume that a richer China would necessarily demand more freedoms. When you consider the effort and sacrifices required to overcome the odds in securing a middle class lifestyle in China today it seems preposterous to assume that these very same people are somehow going to form the vanguard demanding change. Most of these people aren't going to give up their comfortable high rises or prized automobiles for anything or anyone. This may change in time but that time is a long ways away.

      --
      Leave the gun, take the cannolis.
  6. Skewed results by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How did they perform this survey? I would have a feeling that the majority of people in China are in three or more similar categories:

    1. Afraid to answer anything "anonymously" as they know better.

    2. Afraid to answer anything other than what they think the State wants them to say (see #1).

    3. Are so ingrained in the sheep mentality that they just don't know any better.

    4. Are just like Americans and don't really care but don't lie about it.

  7. If you gave the same survey in the US or UK... by thatseattleguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...or another ostensible democracy, and asked the same question, I wonder what percentage would say "yes" here as well?

    I think it might me much higher than most Slashdotters would believe.

  8. It isn't skewed voting... its skewed teaching. by PC+and+Sony+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When people are raised in a certain way, they think a certain way. Often, children in abusive households become abusive themselves...

    so... what about children raised in a red china communism 'I love the government' household? ...

    To add to that problem, how can 85% of chinese vote for an option they've never experienced - if they are living 'well' enough, by their standards, and don't know differently, then why would they change?

  9. Hmm, by kabocox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd go as far to say that 99.99% of humanity thinks that censorship is a good thing as long as they get to pick what is censored from the rest.

    Everyone wants the government to be their censorship tool. The government will happily censor stuff. It's just various groups want different things censored and want to be allowed to view their chosen content.

  10. Unless it's a unanimous 100%, by JesseL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it's not enough to justify the infringement of a human right.

    There is no majority large enough that stripping even one person of their rights against their will is justified.

    --
    "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
  11. Issues. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In a repressive government people will public speak party lines, most of them say it so much they start to beleave it. So the stats are not that unbeleavable. But I am sure if you can find a non-repressive government I bet you will still find a good number of people pro-censorship. Just as long as it is blocking information they don't want to hear.
    Even on Liberal anti-censorship slashdot. Oposing view points are often quickly modded down just because people don't want agree with it or beleave it to be true. While it is not censorship in true sience of the word, it is a way for the moderators to say Hey I don't want people reading this, and if they do I don't want them to think it is a valad argument.

    People are humans and humans feel threntoned by different ideas then their own, it doesn't matter if you have just a GED or a PHD you will feel threantoned by different ideas. When people feel threntoned they will try to move to higher powers to prevent the threat.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  12. Is it really that big of a divide? by tool462 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there was a poll among Americans asking if they felt that terrorism needed to be "managed or controlled" and if they wanted the government to do this managing, I bet the numbers would be similarly high. People aren't magically different across the globe. As long as the average individual isn't too badly off, they tend towards maintaining the status quo. In China this apparently gets translated to "I'm happy now. An influx of radical new ideas may upset this happiness. I'd rather things stay the way they are. The government needs to protect me from this." In the US this is "I'm happy now. An influx of radical terrorists may upset this happiness. I'd rather things stay the way they are. The government needs to protect me from this." You can substitute the fear du jour from almost any point in modern history with similar results.

  13. Its not always where you live by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it also is the question your asked and who asks it.

    Take voting in the DNC primary, by all accounts and polls one candidate should be getting even more votes than they are getting yet once behind the privacy of the voting booth they don't get them.

    Some questions make people uncomfortable whether their freedom is in jeopardy or not. It is also instinctive in some people to give the answer that they believe the questioner wants regardless if its a true one.

    While I do agree China is a special case I have seen friends answer complete strangers in what I knew wasn't what they believed but instead what they wanted the questioner to believe.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  14. How different are we? by cozziewozzie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How many people in Europe and the US want the net to be censored?

    Including child pornography, illegal material, the anarchist cookbook, DeCSS, Nazi propaganda sites, etc?

    The level of censorship in China is obviously leaps and bounds beyond anything else in the world, and I'm not suggesting otherwise. but I think that people overestimate the meaning of free speech to the average citizen. As long as it doesn't bother them, most people don't have any problems whatsoever when extremists, deviants, weirdos, and the like are censored, as long as it doesn't directly concern them and the stuff they're interested.

    The majority of people in China are not interested in politics, both traditionally, and because it's been a bad idea to be involved in politics for the last 50 years. So if they don't read Dalai Lama's speeches, Japanese version of history, or Germany's take on political freedom in China, they don't particularly care, as they're not interested in it in the first place.

    Even here, people clap happily as the FBI and similar agencies in Europe freely read our emails, search our computers, confiscate hardware, all in the name of counter-terrorism. Make a Pew poll in Europe and let's see how many average people have a problem with this?

    The situation in China is obviously far worse, but instead of patting ourselves on the back and going on about evil Chinese and how much better we are, it would be wise to draw some parallels.

  15. I do not believe polls from communist countries by kyknos.org · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I live in a post-communist country and I remember the communism very well. Most people in the Czech Republic, before the fall of communism, would probably answer "yes, we agree with the goverment" in any poll, regardless of the question, if they just weren't absolutely sure that the authorities wouldn't know their answer. Because free expression of opinion, in such a country, may mean anything from financial loss to death.

    --

    SHE does throw dice.
  16. A simple solution... Test question, maybe? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Question 1. Do you believe that there should be a way for Law Enforcement officials to identify those on the internet who engage in illegal activities, for the sake of protecting the naive or easily prayed upon?

    Question 2. Do you want us to have the power to know what you buy online, what your daughter looks like in a bikini, and read the email you sent to your working-away-from-home husband (Paul) with that photo of you(?) in the black and scarlet red corset (and not much else)?

    If you answered differently to both of those questions, your opinion is not valid for this survey.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  17. Read the report. by urcreepyneighbor · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Read the report. It isn't as black-and-white as the summary makes it out to be.

    The findings for one type of online content -- politics -- may seem more puzzling. Since 2005, the percentage of users who say that online content about "politics" should be controlled or managed jumped from 8% to 41%, by far the biggest increase of any items tested.

    Guo said that the explanation for this increase probably lies in the spate of widely publicized incidents of fraud, blackmail, sensationalism, and other abuse of Chinese citizens via the internet. The Chinese word used for "politics" in this survey, zhengzhi, is not confined simply to political rights or competition for political control but may be understood to include larger questions of public morality and social values. While I love bashing Communists, the report simply doesn't allow it. It appears to be more of a cultural, rather than political, difference.

    Pretty damn interesting, actually.
    --
    "The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
  18. Unless they are older than 65... by Tavor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unless the Chinese asked were older than 65, they are unlikely to even know what it's like without government "control". It's akin to asking a wild mustang if he likes horseshoes.

    --
    Windows has detected an undetectable error.
    1. Re:Unless they are older than 65... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only problem is we elect greedy educated idiots now.
      There, fixed it for ya.
    2. Re:Unless they are older than 65... by kthejoker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First off, yes, American children as American citizens do have the exact same First Amendment rights as adults. Period. Truly offensive shirts (ie hate speech) are not protected by the First Amendment. "Content-free" offensive shirts ("EAT SHIT", "MOTHERFUCKER", etc.) are also not protected. Not going to class is not a First Amendment right. Your straw man and your incorrect interpretation of the First Amendment are damaging and should be called out as such. By the way: not through censoring, but through accountability.

    3. Re:Unless they are older than 65... by mog007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is no such thing as a "free-speech zone". Public schools are not free-speech zones, but neither are libraries, or the steps outside the Capitol building in the District of Columbia. If you're on government controlled property, you are free to say whatever the fuck you want, and nobody else has any authority to make you stop. They can bitch about it until they're blue in the face, much like I can say whatever I wish, but they can't stop me from offending them anymore than I can stop them from offending me for attempt to suppress my rights.

      Since only Congress may pass laws which have any influence, and since Congress is forbidden to stifle free speech according to the First Amendment, the government has no authority in limiting what a person says. Just remember the old adage "actions speak louder than words" and you'll realize that stifling free speech is only a method of controlling how a person thinks. I think the idea of murder is quite undesirable, but I should be free to talk about the mass slaughter of lawyers all I want.

    4. Re:Unless they are older than 65... by jeffmeden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tell that to Tibet... or this guy... Yes, a lot of China is prospering, but not all of it, and it's doing so at an incredible price. For one, the ecological impact of their "awesome 10% growth" is absolutely mind boggling to any western nation. Yes, China has it's good points and bad points, just like the US, the EU, etc. The one thing the "popular" nations have going for them is they freely let the people speak out in protest. This does not happen in China, there is widespread retribution on anyone who dissents, and no matter how you spin it this is a bad thing since if the government were to become untrustworthy (assuming it is even trustworthy now,) they would have no way of knowing. At least in an 'open' nation the cards are on the table and the people are free to hate on the poor leadership skills of their government; illegal detentions, poorly written and poorly enforced laws, and economic disparity aside.

    5. Re:Unless they are older than 65... by cbreaker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you fucking kidding me?

      Do you know how many civil rights violations that happen in China every day? Do you know how many people have been forced out of their homes because the government wanted a new office complex? Do you know how many people are shuttled away to prison (or to their deaths) for saying the wrong thing in public, or for a petty crime?

      The Chinese can trust their government to do one thing: Fuck it's citizens.

      Huge populations of Chinese live in poverty. No chance for reparation either - because they don't vote, they have no say in their government..

      Don't even say "works for the vast majority" of the Chinese. It fucking doesn't. Just because a few protesters were out there doesn't mean the Chinese love their system.

      The problem is, too many of them know no different, and the Government makes sure it stays that way.

      Just because something is different doesn't mean I have to accept it. "Western" governments are BETTER, and I have no problem saying that.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    6. Re:Unless they are older than 65... by manifoldronin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Truly offensive shirts (ie hate speech) are not protected by the First Amendment.
      Is advocating for women's right to choices "truly offensive"? How about burning the American flag? How "truly" an offensive would have to be to lose the protection from the 1st Amendment?
      --
      Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
  19. Modding is not censorship by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oposing view points are often quickly modded down just because people don't want agree with it or beleave it to be true. While it is not censorship in true sience of the word, it is a way for the moderators to say Hey I don't want people reading this, and if they do I don't want them to think it is a valad argument.

    Oh please. Stop this. Seriously. This gets regularly trotted out by people who have no concept of what censorship actually is. Do you know who actually does the "censoring" in Slashdot? You do. You, by setting your preferences to filter out comments under a certain threshold, you remove someone's ability to be read. As a result, you're the censor on slashdot. Not CowboyNeal, not the moderators, but you - and you alone. So stop blaming others for your actions.

    Not to mention that telling others that an opinion is worthless is not the same as censoring. Sometimes, I wish people would spend some time in a country that actually does censor speech, so that they understand the difference. Censoring speech: someone breaks your fingers or throws you in the slammer for propagating illegal/unwanted opinions. Moderating: a mark that tells others "Warning - stupid person talking."

    Normally, confusing the two is a sign that the person is 13 and hasn't gotten to political science in high school yet, but that'd make your UID too low. I can only assume you're just confused.

    I also have no idea how you managed to misspell "threatened" like that.
    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  20. Re:BAD MOD (insightful) by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are being sent there because they were allegedly captured as illegal combatants and/or provided support to a terrorist orginization

    FTFY. Everyone in Gitmo is an innocent man according to our laws.