Slashdot Mirror
Censorship of Chinese Social Media Is Real, Comprehensive
chicksdaddy writes "Threatpost has a write-up of a study by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University that provides the first conclusive evidence that Chinese government censorship extends to social media sites like Sina Weibo, the popular micro blogging Web site that many have likened to a Chinese Twitter. 'The study ... found that censors in China delete around 16 percent of the messages submitted to Sina Weibo ... The study, released in March, concludes that "soft censorship" in China — the removal of controversial subject matter from blogs and Web pages — is at least as popular as hard censorship, like the blocking of offensive sites. The result is suppression of news about events or individuals that are deemed threatening to the ruling Communist party.'"
Why is any news of censorship in China a front page news story on slashdot? It's not news for nerds, and certainly not relevant to anybody not in China.
Anyway, its a fact of life that the Chinese government censors, its not newsworthy or new to anybody. Why slashdot continues to naval gaze at China's censorship policies is a mystery. Stay out of their internal policies and affairs.
I am glad there is finally proof. I wasn't quite sure that the PRC would be censoring websites. Now if we can just get proof of that moon landing thing...
Flexible bare-metal recovery for Linux/UNIX
There is a certain poetry in the fact that this article appears immediately after the TSA/Schneier hearing article in which the TSA's silencing of Bruce Schneier's testimony against it in Congress is discussed.
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
By the way:
Net censorship in china is not specifically nationwide. It is done by province. So in Beijing you can read "x" but not in Chongqing and versa vice.
And again most of the censors are just "kids" really. No Older than 30 most of the time. So a bit more tuned in - and prob better at their job than adults would be.
I always heard it was between 5 mao or 1 kuai per post deleted. As there was an attempted coup last week of imagine some kids are getting PAID this week....
---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
...just asked someone who works at a Chinese IT company. I live in Beijing and have a friend at a local social networking site - they receive a list of words every month, anonymously, and they know what they have to do with it. I imagine it involves an SQL query featuring "DELETE FROM".
But Chinese netizens always find a way around it, whether through homonyms, synonyms or even numerical trickery (see May 35th).
Freedom of speech doesn't mean much when your political leaders don't listen to it. In China, they simply delete information they do not want to address. In the United states they ignore it, or more often then not, drowned it out by creating fake controversies. I know, lets drag some athletes in front of congress to talk about steroids as if anyone cared. Or pretend like they have the power to ban some music. How about we get some hedge fund managers to take the 5th over and over again while congressmen pretend like they aren't taking money under the table from them at the same time? It's ridiculous. And now the president can even order a US citizens death without judicial review. How are we all that different than China? Oh that's right, we're in debt up to our eyeballs, have no potential for future growth and want to fund free healthcare, free internet and trains no-one will ride with money we don't have... that's how we're different.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean much when your political leaders don't listen to it. In China, they simply delete information they do not want to address. In the United states they ignore it, or more often then not, drowned it out by creating fake controversies
This is the dumbest conception of Freedom of Speech that I've heard in a while.
You have freedom of speech, you don't have the right to force people to listen. Which is good because otherwise I might have to read the rest of your post, where you draw a false-equivalency with China, sprinkled freely with fact-free pessimistic predictions of the future. You fail at the basic logic fallacies Richard Feynman warned about
Freedom of speech doesn't mean much when your political leaders don't listen to it.
The freedom of speech is MOST important when leaders don't listen, because with it one can spread his/her thoughts, create ripples in society, and begin a movement. When that movement changes society, government has no choice but to follow. Perhaps in this case of your pet causes you can make the argument that society changes too slowly for your liking, but that's not a criticism of the value of the freedom of speech.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Reading your post again, it seems as if you believe the purpose of the freedom of speech is to beg government to do what you want. I think if you believe that, you've already thrown your hands up in defeat. Defeatist thinking like this is already endemic in the Chinese populace, you can call it the Mei Ban Fa syndrome -- when you speak to Chinese people about politically charged issues, the most common answer is "mei ban fa" (can't be helped), as in "we're just the rabble, government won't listen" Americans would do well to not infect themselves with it.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Then you have a serious problem in terms of your perception.
I am not saying in any way shape or form that I think congress's choice is a good one. However this is NOT silencing the man. He is free to speak his mind on and off line and he does, with great eloquence. He is free to testify in any other venue he is asked to testify in, including the lawsuit by EPIC against the TSA. He is free to write his congressman about how fucking stupid it is that he was invited and then uninvited, and to do so without fear of repercussion. He is free to (and hopefully will) go on the news and out this to the country.
What it comes down to is congress is having the hearing, they can listen or not listen to who they want. That is their right, it is their hearing. They owe it to their constituents to get the best available testimony and I encourage everyone who is represented by someone who is involved in removing him from the witness list to do what is in your power to ensure your congressman does not return next term. However it is their right to listen to who they want, or to just not have a hearing at all.
This is real, REAL different than the government suppressing political speech on the Internet. If they'd had his blog shut down, or blocked Slashdot from linking to it, then hell yes it would be the same. As it is they are doing what all to many people do, including you and I: Listening to what they want to hear, not the whole truth. That is poor job performance, it isn't censorship.