Slashdot Mirror


China Cuts 'Excessive Entertainment' From TV

An anonymous reader writes "Chinese broadcasters have axed two-thirds of popular TV shows in line with a government directive to curb 'excessive entertainment.' From the article: 'The rule, first announced in October, is targeted at what Chinese regulators have called "excessive entertainment and a trend toward low taste," to address the rise of talent shows, dating shows and other such programming aired by China's tightly regulated, but increasingly competitive, regional satellite broadcasters. Authorities also encouraged broadcasters to air more news and educational programming.' according to local media reports."

68 of 336 comments (clear)

  1. So, China wants to drive web use over TV? by jcr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the viewers can't find what they want on the tube, they'll get it somewhere else.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:So, China wants to drive web use over TV? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 2

      If the viewers can't find what they want on the tube, they'll get it somewhere else.

      -jcr

      If Chinese Idol isn't produced, they will be hard pressed to find it. And no, American Idol will not be a suitable replacement - after all Americans aren't watching the original either. Every country wants their own asshole judges and overconfident, untalented contestants. And hardly anyone cares about the winners for that matter.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
  2. Its hard for me to critisize this move. by Narcocide · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I had my own country, I would make reality TV illegal too.

    1. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by chilvence · · Score: 3, Funny

      I was going to say, if only we would legislate the x factor out of existence too... good on the chinese for using authoritarian government for good.

    2. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by Zibodiz · · Score: 2

      Can you please run for president?

    3. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have the right to hate any show you don't like and refuse to watch it. You don't have the right to tell other people what they like.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    4. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't like reality TV, either.

      However, I'd personally lead the rebel army that took down your fascist ass. :-)

    5. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by aztektum · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Are people actually choosing to like reality TV?

      Or are they choosing to simply watch what the media companies offer?

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    6. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by daid303 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sign me up!

      And can we take a TV camera with us, would make a nice show ;-)

    7. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      Are people actually choosing to like reality TV?

      Or are they choosing to simply watch what the media companies offer?

      yes, they are choosing to watch it. if they're choosing to like it is another matter, how can anyone choose what they like?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    8. Re:Its hard for me to critisize this move. by webheaded · · Score: 2

      I know you're being pedantic but yes, plenty of people actually do like reality TV. Many of them are, shockingly, not idiots as everyone seems to imply. Not every reality show is American Idol either...a lot of the cooking shows (eg: Top Chef) have reality things and aren't anywhere near as retarded as something like Big Brother or The Real World or whatever.

      I mean yeah, there's a lot of shit on TV. On the other hand, maybe people here are just being assholes. As it turns out, the fact you don't like something doesn't make it shit. It makes it something you don't like. Let's come down off our high horses for a moment, shall we? I'm sure everyone here is guilty of liking something that other people think is shitty. Hell, I listened to the new Limp Bizkit album and liked it. Is that "shitty" music? Yeah, pretty much...but I still enjoyed it, so how many fucks do I give? Some people think Weeds is a shitty show. Plenty of people think that the Big Bang Theory is a shitty show. Maybe, just maybe, we can all stop being dick heads and looking down on people for the entertainment they enjoy.

      But please, continue. Wouldn't want to interrupt everyone being giant gaping assholes. You are perfect in every way. Everything YOU like is the best that there is.

      Disclaimer: I actually hate most reality TV, but you guys are just being dickheads, honestly.

      --
      "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - BenF
  3. Yes, concerning, free speech, etc by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But after being pestered by so many Big Brothers and other related horrors, it's very hard for me to frown upon the chinese here.

    1. Re:Yes, concerning, free speech, etc by siddesu · · Score: 2

      This time around it doesn't look like a free speech issue, but more like a preparation for succession issue. The current leadership in China is already old (this is the Deng cohort, pres. Hu is already 70), and he seem to be getting China ready for a new generation of political leaders. When you do leadership change in this kind of regime, you do everything to ensure smooth succession to the people you chose.

      There was even an old Soviet joke about the perils of transition. If memory serves, Radio Yerevan was asked "What is bloody sex?". "Pulling out a member from the Politbureau", replied the radio.

      Without a smooth translation, the situation in China could get much more unpleasant than that.

    2. Re:Yes, concerning, free speech, etc by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 2

      I quit watching TV altogether ages ago, too much commercials for shit I don't want and far too few things actually worth watching. I'll buy/download the things I want to watch and I'll watch when where & how I want.

  4. Big whoop by Osgeld · · Score: 3, Interesting

    just go without cable and save yourself 100 bucks a month

    1. Re:Big whoop by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I tried to do that last month, because I had sold my big screen TV, there being nothing but crap on basic cable any more. Instead Comcast made me a 6 month deal to pay less for internet, and still keep TV service, even though I have no way to watch it. My bill is $20 a month less, so I really don't care how they split it, but it's interesting how hard they tried to keep me on TV service. I wonder if they get paid by advertisers according to audience as measured by subscriptions? Then it doesn't actually matter if I don't watch.

    2. Re:Big whoop by tsotha · · Score: 2

      The cable company has to pay for some channels (They pay a lot for ESPN), for some no money changes hands (the legacy networks, I think), and some pay the cable company (HSN). So yeah, that's exactly what's happening. If you're on the lowest tier they make money by having you as a customer (neglecting sunk costs) even if you don't pay.

  5. Irony by Ltap · · Score: 5, Funny

    So Big Brother shut down Big Brother?

    --
    Yet Another Tech Blog
    (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
    http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
  6. Re:FCC Should take note by kelarius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    TV doesn't make people stupid, it just keeps stupid people entertained and out of the public eye, so why is excessively entertaining media a bad thing?

    Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things...

    --
    Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
  7. Ummmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    After watching cable TV in the US over the holidays, could I ask that they do the same thing to American TV?

    (Only partially tongue-in-cheek).

  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Practical arguments against? by Cabriel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Beside the obvious "OMGFreeSpeech" and "OMG1984" arguments, in the face of garbage programming like American Idol, Survivor, Dancing with the Stars, The Bachelor, The Bachelorette, etc, what practical non-what-if arguments are there for this being a bad thing?

    1. Re:Practical arguments against? by Intropy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because being entertained makes people happy and being happy is better than not being happy.

    2. Re:Practical arguments against? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But watching most of these programs makes people miserable. Watching all the glamor and riches makes the dreary of reality impact all the worse. Unlike movies that are obvious fantasy these lie that this could be real. They have zero educational value, they will never make people feel better. They are just a drug that sucks people's energy and turns them into brainless trash.

    3. Re:Practical arguments against? by tsotha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When the people are active in a society they question things, get involved in things, and yes challenge things they feel aren't right.

      That's pretty condescending. What makes you think they can't watch a few hours of television and still be informed? When people refer to large groups of people as "sheeple" and wail they won't "wake up" it implies if only people were paying attention they'd think like I think. Well, and stay with me here, maybe they already question things, they're already involved, and they already "challenge things they feel aren't right." Maybe their vision of how things ought to be isn't the same as yours.

      I'm guessing from the way your post is written you're not from the US. I'm at a little bit of a loss to understand why you think we in the US would make our country just like yours if only we didn't watch so much television.

    4. Re:Practical arguments against? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2

      The number of "Gosh, I wish this authoritarian bullshit would happen here because I don't like what my neighbor watches on TV" posts is seriously disheartening. WTF happened to the geekverse?

    5. Re:Practical arguments against? by subreality · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I care when it's gotten to the point where there is literally nothing to watch that doesn't leave me feeling disgusted. I don't care what any individual is doing, but as a society it cannot be good that programming has gotten so low; filling our brains with this stuff is not going to advance us anywhere, so why are we wasting valuable spectrum on it?

      Wipe it out and replace it with something intelligent.

    6. Re:Practical arguments against? by horza · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's actually worse than you think. It's not just filling brains with mush and turning people into passive vegetables, it actually shapes the aspirations of society. Who wants to work hard and become an astronaut when you can just do nothing all your life then suddenly sing or dance on a stage and become the most desired person in the country? In the UK the contestants in this show "Big Brother" have actually become celebrities in their own right! It's ridiculous, they have contributed nothing of value.

      Phillip.

    7. Re:Practical arguments against? by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 2

      I don't know where you got your "facts" (from your ass maybe?) But the department of labor and statistics disagrees with you.

      http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.nr0.htm

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
  10. All power to China by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Excessive entertainment over the tube is one of the lead causes of the downfall of the Western nations.

    Turn on the tube if you don't believe me, flip some channels, see how many of the programs are of any value in the first place?

    No wonder over 90% of the American high school graduates can't even pinpoint their own country - the United States of America - on the world map.

    They have been dumbed down by the entertainment industry.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:All power to China by MattBecker82 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No wonder over 500% of Slashdot users post hyperbole without anything to back it up.

      Seriously, I don't know if you're joking or not, but your post is just false premises, non-sequiturs and made-up "facts". Analysis:

      Excessive entertainment over the tube is one of the lead causes of the downfall of the Western nations.

      You need to establish the premise of "the downfall of the Western nations" (whatever that means), then establish a cause-and-effect relationship between "excessive entertainment over the tube" and the former.

      Turn on the tube if you don't believe me, flip some channels, see how many of the programs are of any value in the first place?

      How are you establishing the "value" of TV programs exactly? By your own judgement as whether it's something you'd like to watch?

      No wonder over 90% of the American high school graduates can't even pinpoint their own country - the United States of America - on the world map.

      Citation needed. Or an admission that you just made this up.

      They have been dumbed down by the entertainment industry.

      Non-sequitur. Even if you establish two concurrent trends, it doesn't mean there is a connection or cause-and-effect relationship between them.

    2. Re:All power to China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not so, Only people who are already dumb watch this crap

    3. Re:All power to China by MattBecker82 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not looking for watertight scientific proof, but the GGP makes an extraordinary claim (i.e. that excess of "entertainment" TV shows causes the downfall of Western nations), and indeed it's possible this is right, just as it's possible the world is run by a secret society of reptilian fascists. However, the GGP presents it as fact, and with no supporting evidence and only an illogical argument and further extraordinary claims to back it up, I see no reason to accept the claim.

      If he had presented it as opinion (which it is), and had omitted the ridiculous reference to the level of geography fail among US high school grads, then I wouldn't have had any cause to challenge it.

    4. Re:All power to China by hairyfish · · Score: 2

      Maybe he doesn't support with links what he claims, but he is nevertheless right. We are all dumbed down by the entertainment industry.

      Perhaps if you watched Discovery instead of MTV, you'd be aware of the Flynn Effect

    5. Re:All power to China by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Flynn Effect (Link didn't work the first time)

      Errm, IQ Scores are always centered at 100 by definition. Ergo average IQ score can't go up or down, only the raw survey scores can. Who would have thought that the very channel you praise for not dumbing down the populace would dumb down that fact.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    6. Re:All power to China by TheLink · · Score: 2

      They may be more intelligent, but that does not mean they are better informed.

      The media industry gets more money giving people what they want rather than giving people what they "should" get. You want "mental junk food" all the time? Sure no problem. Even google has been known to change their search results so that each user gets more of what Google thinks the user would want.

      There are 24 hours in a day, you're not going to learn as much about the world if you spend most of it playing FarmVille (or Happy Farm which is more popular in China, and apparently the most popular MMOG in the world beating FarmVille).

      --
    7. Re:All power to China by LordKronos · · Score: 5, Informative

      Flynn Effect

      (Link didn't work the first time)

      Errm, IQ Scores are always centered at 100 by definition. Ergo average IQ score can't go up or down, only the raw survey scores can. Who would have thought that the very channel you praise for not dumbing down the populace would dumb down that fact.

      Erm, no, sorry. IQ Scores are NOT always centered at 100 by definition. As raw scores shift higher, IQ scores will likewise shift higher until the the raw-score-to-IQ-score conversion process is renormalized. How often are they normalized? It wasn't an easy question to answer, but I found one website that claims they are only normalized "every 10 or so years".
      http://www.psychpage.com/learning/library/intell/culture_iq_notes_5.html

      Also, it seems that before the Flynn effect was discovered, there was no such periodic renormalizaion (which makes sense...why would you renormalize before anybody has even discovered that they've become unnormalized). Therefore at the time the Flynn effect was defined, scores were not normalized, and the Flynn effect was indeed described as IQ scores increasing over time. Look around the web. Every single reference to the Flynn effect I can find, even those from reputable sources, describe it as an increase in IQ scores over time. For instance, here's a page on it from a Psychology Professor at Indiana University:
      http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/flynneffect.shtml

      But congratulations on getting a +5 Informative for posting incorrect information. Maybe you should watch more Discovery Channel.

  11. Re:That's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's true of geeks, but I wonder how true it is of most Chinese. We shouldn't underestimate how much the government can shift media consumption patterns by making access more difficult.

  12. Vice Taxes by Hadlock · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We tax the snot out of cigarettes and booze because they aren't healthy for society... we've had a TV in every home for 50+ years now, and parents are exposing their children to TV from birth... if you can't restrict people's use of TV, you might as well remove the incentive to watch it by making it more informational/educational, rather than an "opiate of the masses".
     
    We ended up with the evening news in a response to a federal mandate that X% be used for reporting the news, how much better off would we have been if we'd restricted entertainment to Y% of the total broadcast time? How would society be if we limited mass entertainment? Would local entertainment like playhouses still be much more successful?

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:Vice Taxes by Hadlock · · Score: 2

      Who was selling it to them? Google "opium war". The Chinese were trying to outlaw western opiates then, too

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
  13. You would think so, but not so much by pablo_max · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are several online services which offer loads of pirated TV shows and even movies. For example, my wife uses a streaming program called funsion to watch HIMYM, Big Bang and other popular American TV shows.
    As of yesterday, those show are no longer available. This was also the case on the two other alternative services.
    Granted, one can use a VPN tunnel, but most people will not be willing to pay money for a VPN which is fast enough to stream.
    I do happen to pay for premium VPN services, but as I was last in China, it was impressively slow. Enough for real google results and such, but not enough for netflix.

  14. Re:That's true by msobkow · · Score: 2

    You seriously underestimate the spread of technology in China.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  15. Oblig. Yakov Smirnoff by donscarletti · · Score: 3, Funny

    In China, you watch CCTV (China Central TeleVision), in Soviet Britain, CCTV watches you!

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    1. Re:Oblig. Yakov Smirnoff by donscarletti · · Score: 2

      You know what, since I'm blind drunk, I'm going to elaborate on my previous comment.

      I live in China, I am an Australian expatriate, I visited the UK last week. Now, my countrymen several years ago built a Supermax facility called Katingal, since it is in Australia you may snidely refer to it as "le prison de le prison", it was a twisted labyrinth of CCTV cameras that was demolished soon after completion because of complaints from the inmates of it being "too much like driving along the A1" or "akin to visiting St James Park".

      Oh, and another thing (while I'm ranting), my ancestors were British, not English/Scottish/Irish/Welsh, but British. I happened to stumble across London new year parade and saw nothing but Saint George's cross and was up to Edinburgh and saw nothing but St Andrew's Saltier, I went to a China-Britain friendship event and on every table was the Chinese 5 stars on red and the European 12 stars on blue, with no Union Flag in sight. It's one thing that you incompetent pricks can't keep the empire together and let Ireland slip through your fingers after 800 years but now you can't even uphold the Act of Union. I think the difference between a British man like me and the English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh like the dregs left on the home islands is that I am actually willing to get off my arse and work more than 6 hours a day without quitting my job to collect a dole check.

      My final gripe is that that why do those who's countrymen died to defend Britain from the last European Union (namely Canadians, Americans, Australians, New Zealanders, Indian Sikhs, etc.) have to queue for immigration at Heathrow while Germans, Austrians and Italians can just march through like the victorious armies of the Reich. Then the woman at immigration was asking me stupid questions like "you say you're a computer programmer?", "yes", "but you say you live in China?", "yes", "what do you do in China?", "I'm a computer programmer, it's on the form". "Do you have a problem answering questions sir?!?! Do you need to sit down there until I'm ready to speak to you again?!?". I have never had to answer such stupid questions from such a moronic jobsworth in any other country on earth and yet I seem to be one of the few people who have gotten through British immigration and left without conspiring to commit a mass act of terrorism. Seriously, I love Britain, I love it's beauty, I love its history and it is the home of my queen and my ancestors and I would never wish any more harm to befall it. But if you want to feel anything but hatred towards all that is British, get as far away from that island as you possibly can, things have just gone terribly terribly wrong.

      By the way, remember that "Airstrip One was always part of Super Happy Euro Fun Club", Oceania doesn't miss you and I assure you, Eastasia never knew you existed. To quote the Daoguang emperor "Where is England and why does it want to sell us opium?".

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  16. Just like in Star Trek by Rogerborg · · Score: 2

    Heck, I can't even remember anyone watching fictional TV in that documentary.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  17. Someone in the Chinese Communist Party... by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Funny

    Someone in the CCP must have seen Jersey Shore, and decided to stop the trend before it's too late.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  18. Re:Lucky Chinese by tsotha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why don't you just turn your TV off?

  19. Re:Right because if one place does it it is ok by KazW · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously I get real tired of the America basing some people feel the need to do whenever anything about another country comes up...

    2) Not everyone on the Internet lives in America. Maybe they are interested in news about other countries, ever think of that? Stop trying to steer everything back to your country. There are plenty of discussions on /. about the shit that happens in America. Don't hijack others.

    You do realize the GP didn't mention America at all in his comment, don't you? It was only you who mentioned America. In essence, you're doing exactly what you said shouldn't be done.

    I'm Canadian, and I had a similar sentiment as the GP. I think _you_ should stop steering the discussion towards America.

    --
    Geeks don't grock information, they grep it.
  20. Was that Future English? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 3, Funny

    You seem to have gotten there ahead of us.

  21. China is different. Don't you get that? by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The very fundamental ideals of Chinese society place family and the greater community at higher priority than the individual's wants or needs. I suspect the vast majority of the Chinese people actually don't mind this. Those that do can certainly access media from elsewhere in the world -- technology is wide spread in China.

    You really need to get the image of rice farms out of your heads.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  22. Re:China is different. Don't you get that? by msobkow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    State run TV means it's going to serve the priorities of the state. It's not a commercial enterprise out to win the greatest number of eyeballs, but a tool of the government first and the entertainment of the people second.

    It's not unlike the emphasis the CBC placed on their programming mix when state-run TV was the only option in Canada. I saw a lot of documentaries, docu-drama histories, and educational shows when I was young.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  23. Re:That's true by wisty · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Funny story - the spread of technology in China is almost guaranteed to topple the idiots running North Korea. Firstly, it's made most Chinese despise the North Korean government, which makes the Chinese - North Korean alliance a bit of a farce. Everyone except North Korea (who think China is still their friend) knows that China's only concern now is whether or not it suffer any collateral damage (i.e. bombs, shells, or fallout falling on Chinese soil), and how to deal with the refugees.

    More importantly, North Koreans buy black-market goods from China. This includes iPod clones, many of which will come sold pre-loaded with the best Korean entertainment videos, all of which come from South Korea. It's getting harder and harder to explain that they are so superior, when all the South Korean shows are about families which are 10X richer than the families shown in pro-North propaganda.

  24. Re:China is different. Don't you get that? by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if the vast majority didn't mind, they wouldn't need banning as they wouldn't have any viewers, while in fact these bans are a part of a war for viewers.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  25. You are misinformed by backslashdot · · Score: 2

    If a vast majority was like how you say the highest rated shows would be educational and news. Yet it seems the highest rated shows are entertainment based.

    Hmm, it seems that humans everywhere are the same .. who'd have thought?

  26. It's a sad, sad day by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...when you get better and more interesting TV programming in a communist country than in the free world.

    I weep for humanity.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  27. Re:Interesting... by thejynxed · · Score: 2
    --
    @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
  28. Re:Lucky Chinese by horza · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In England they have closed down most community centers, places that used to be used for playing football have been turned into office buildings or parking, nobody wants to go for a run as the air is polluted, the roads are so congested it makes cycling dangerous, travel is expensive, taking up a hobby like photography will probably get you arrested, and why bother learning an instrument as one day you will be able to karaoke to Robbie Williams on stage and become instantly famous without any of that icky hard work?

    People do just turn off the television where I live in France. But then they have put in cycle lanes everywhere, cheap transport so 1e will take you anywhere, there are free football pitches, basketball courts, tennis (nearly free), and the council is always organising events and spectaces. One of the biggest days of the year is "Fete de la Musique" where everybody takes to the streets and plays an instrument or sings in any style they want. There is a web site "On va sortir" where anybody can spontaneously propose an event (poker night, dance lesson, walk in the countryside, whatever) and anybody can register to join in, which is very successful.

    We could do worse than steal ideas from the neighbour across the pond.

    Phillip.

  29. And Yet by d3ac0n · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We still see video of people falling over themselves weeping when Kim-Jong "mentally" ill dies. Not to say that those videos aren't at least partially staged, but some "undercover" video has leaked out of NK showing that at least some of the weeping, wailing and carrying on was genuine. (I apologize for not having a link ATM. Search on YouTube. It's there.)

    Not to say that the new regime isn't weak, it certainly is. But not so weak that ipod clones are going to topple them anytime soon. We see how well "westernization" has "toppled" the communist Chinese government. (IE: Not at all) If Kim-Jong Un decides to modernize and westernize following the Chinese model, Korea isn't likely to see unification anytime in the next century.

    Sadly, there really is only ONE way to absolutely topple a government of any stripe. That's with violent revolution. The only way that Korea will unify is if SK invades and defeats NK. With NK's recent round of sabre-rattling, that's looking more and more likely every day.

    --
    Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    1. Re:And Yet by delinear · · Score: 2

      You can't necessarily believe even "undercover" video shot in a state with such a police state regime. That could still be faked grief for the benefit of snooping neighbours or secret police. And does anyone really believe China is still on board with communism? Authoritarian I get, but the two don't necessarily go hand in hand - they're very market driven these days, they may pay lip service to communism but they're actually about as communist as we are democratic (i.e. broadly so but happy to ignore the fundamental principles whenever it suits them).

    2. Re:And Yet by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      China knows how to topple a civilization just fine. Give them free fish for years until they have forgotten what a fishing rod is and their children have never seen one, then withdraw the fish. That's how they're beating the west.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    3. Re:And Yet by d3ac0n · · Score: 4, Informative

      The fall of the Soviet Union would seem to disprove this notion.

      No, it would not at all.

      Note that what happened to the Soviets was NOTHING like what happened in China. In the Soviet model, (Perestroika) over a century of oppression was simply dropped and a totally closed society was suddenly and without warning thrown open to the world. The ensuing reaction was almost predictable; Complete chaos and collapse of the Soviet regime.

      Let us not forget that there WAS some violence that followed. Unfortunately for the soviets, their military decided to side with the people over the government. Tanks showing up at the gates of the Kremlin to close down the government rather than defend it ended the revolution with a victory for Freedom rather quickly and mostly bloodlessly.

      The Chinese noted these events and decided that they wanted nothing to do with it. Remember that the Tienanmen Square incident was right around the same time. For a short time it appeared that Communism was collapsing all over the world all at once. (it was a great moment to live in, let me tell you.)

      Sadly, the Chicoms had no intention to go quietly. They had a very different relationship with their military, and the military rolled Tanks into the square to defend the government and drive out the protestors. The crackdown afterwards was BRUTAL.

      I had a college roommate who was in Tienanmen Square that day. Afterwards he fled China and was accepted into the US under political asylum. He told me how many of his friends "disappeared" before they could escape. That's how bad it was in those days.

      The Chinese later began to loosen things up, but only incrementally, and ALWAYS under government control. Even after foreign companies were allowed in China, it was always under very strict rules. If you didn't play along, they booted you out. (even McDonalds got kicked out.) Over time these rules have loosened, but control has always been in the governments hands.

      What westernization they have allowed has always been with a single goal: To keep the people COMPLACENT. Give them minor luxuries, allow them to keep a small modicum of their natural freedoms and let them get comfortable and lazy. Otherwise, keep them too busy working and living their lives to have time for revolution. (Why do you think they have essentially created an "Island" Internet via the "Great Firewall of China"? To keep revolutionary ideas out while still allowing controlled financial interaction with the rest of the world.)

      It's an ingenious formula and has worked very well to keep the Chicoms in power. If NK decides to follow this model, don't expect a revolution.

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    4. Re:And Yet by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      I have no problem accepting its genuine grief. In a state with tightly controlled media, no internet access, no travel, and a sophisticated propaganda machine, all those that don't live near the boarder quite likely don't know any better.

      From their perspective everything they have, what little they do, is a gift from Dear Leader, they have no idea what he has denied them. They don't know have abusive, and capricious his system of law is, because as far as they are concerned its either that or law of the jungle.

      Its all a matter of perspective.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re:And Yet by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 2

      I find it hard to believe that after years of oppression, removing TV shows would incite the people to revolution. But you know what I could actually see this happening. People want what they want. Since I'm for the US, I hear people complain all the time about stupid things like TV programming and the like.

    6. Re:And Yet by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is false. My parents were there.

      They cried, because in a tightly controlled country with government media, the loss of your leader is like losing a family member. It's like losing the person the entire country, and you yourself, relied on. They cried because they were at a loss as to what to do. It's losing the person running the country, the only person capable of doing so (or so they believed), and having certainty replaced by uncertainty. If you're a believer, it's like losing your prophet.

      That might not have been the situation for everyone, but for a big percentage of the population, it was entirely genuine.

    7. Re:And Yet by snookerhog · · Score: 2

      Thanks for sharing your experience. I totally agree with what you said about uncertainty. School kids in Shanghai were disciplined for not crying. That is first hand experience.

    8. Re:And Yet by sorak · · Score: 2

      This is false. My parents were there.

      They cried, because in a tightly controlled country with government media, the loss of your leader is like losing a family member. It's like losing the person the entire country, and you yourself, relied on. They cried because they were at a loss as to what to do. It's losing the person running the country, the only person capable of doing so (or so they believed), and having certainty replaced by uncertainty. If you're a believer, it's like losing your prophet.

      That might not have been the situation for everyone, but for a big percentage of the population, it was entirely genuine.

      Interesting. Simply knowing that there is one guy in charge, who could lead you to prosperity, or run your country into the ground, one who might have you arrested tomorrow, simply because he does not like your attitude, and that, under this guy, things are running smoothly. Now, he's dead and some stranger has that power. Considering how worked up people get about Presidential elections in the US, I could see how this uncertainty alone would make for a stressful situation.

  30. Like, WOW! A test cut for economic suicide. by meburke · · Score: 2

    There are 'way too many entry points to this discussion. The mass hypnosis of TV and movies undermined Japan's post-war program for a stronger Japan, by "Americanizing" Japanese values. American "reality" TV fosters a view of stupid, immoral Americans, but it also shows the vast difference in wealth between the two nations. This must be a threat to Chinese Government-approved values and economics. Now, 2/3 of the people in Chines TV may be "out-of-work" in whatever way a government-subsidized "production" can exist.

    This puts one of China's leading-edge economic industries about where the United States was in 1921.

    --
    "The mind works quicker than you think!"
  31. Re:TV is regulated everywhere by Miamicanes · · Score: 2

    > TV channels being a finite resource, a free market of channels couldn't exist, thus regulation is required.

    Except for the fact that in most countries, terrestrial broadcast TV is now commercially-irrelevant, and satellite capacity is mostly a function of available capital to launch satellites and how big of a dish customers will tolerate (bigger dish = ability to shoehorn more satellites into a given arc of equatorial orbit). A 75-ohm coax cable can carry several hundred HD channels, and thousands of SD channels. Upgrade to fiber, and you're basically talking about enough raw bandwidth to let every customer have multiple on-demand HD channels of his own. 25 years ago, orbital slots were in high demand. Now, with spot beams roughly 100km diameter, all you need is a more expensive satellite and/or bigger dish with greater selectivity & gain to make any perceived "shortage" of channels or orbital slots an academic abstraction.