Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Takes Its Already Strict Internet Regulations One Step Further

Posted by samzenpus on from the watch-what-you-say dept.

New submitter DaveS7 writes with this story about new regulations from the Chinese government designed to further crack down on online media. Chinese authorities have released a new set of regulations for online media, raising concerns about tightening control over freedom of expression by the Communist regime. Contained in the ordinance, released on April 28 by the Cyberspace Administration of China, is a clause saying that persons responsible for managing flagged sites will be summoned by state personnel in case of violations. Internet censorship in China is mostly managed by individual websites, which are encouraged to toe the Party line before the Party steps in to rectify things for them. The new ordinance increases the number of conditions that, if met by online media, result in automatic state intervention.

49 comments

  1. Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Be nice.

    1. Re:Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nope, enslaved people want to be subjugated and controlled much like poor people want to be poor.

    2. Re:Let's not judge others by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 0

      Ahhh, victim-blaming. Never gets old.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    3. Re:Let's not judge others by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      That reminds me "The Sand Pebbles" is on TCM this month..

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    4. Re:Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called Stockholm syndrome, in reference to a city in another country that seems to enjoy its socialist pacification.

    5. Re:Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fail.

    6. Re:Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You poor sad wingnut. Maybe you'd be more comfortable at a propaganda site like Breitbart or Fox.

    7. Re:Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says the wingnut who prefers msnbc, cnn, washington post, or the nyt..

    8. Re:Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woosh

    9. Re:Let's not judge others by sexconker · · Score: 1

      They certainly want to be able to have food, clothing, and shelter even if they have to indenture themselves to a master for it. Many would also like to try to earn a name for themselves by fighting to the death in the arena. Have you not kept up with Game of Thrones?

    10. Re:Let's not judge others by Shakrai · · Score: 2

      Stockholm syndrome got its name from a bank robbery that occurred in Stockholm; it has no real or perceived reference to Swedish soceity. Incidentally, that society is a social democracy and there's a huge difference between that and socialism by most definitions. Despite what you may have "learned" from cable news there's plenty of capitalism going on in Sweden....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    11. Re:Let's not judge others by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Only cowards censor.

      If you feel facts are judgements then ... good luck with Real Life TM

    12. Re:Let's not judge others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be nice.

      Until its time to not be nice.

  2. Tough choices... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Give up billions of customers or side with the tyrants? I wonder which choice the investor class supports?

    1. Re:Tough choices... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who controls who can and can't do business in China

      it's a fine line to straddle

  3. China ~ Europe by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, us Europeans and our left-wing "anti-discrimination/racist/nationalism/etc" gag laws... oh, sorry, it's about communist China...

    --
    Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    1. Re:China ~ Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps it's time to fix some of that. Maybe you need freedom of speech in your constitutions (or equivalent documents).

    2. Re:China ~ Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're perfectly fine with that, thank you very much. "Freedom of speech" is useless and downright dangerous. Words carry weight. We know that. We have learned that. People need unity and purpose, not meaningless platitudes.

    3. Re:China ~ Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unity and purpose, eh? Sounds a lot like what the fascists were saying about 80-90 years ago...

  4. Rectify? by digitalPhant0m · · Score: 1

    Internet censorship in China is mostly managed by individual websites

    Nice to know it's voluntary.

    ... toe the Party line before the Party steps in to rectify things for them

    I wonder just what "Rectify" means in these cases?

    1. Re:Rectify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice to know it's voluntary.

      You misspelled "delegated".

    2. Re:Rectify? by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      I wonder just what "Rectify" means in these cases?

      You'll probably get removed, or jailed or better yet shot.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    3. Re:Rectify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re-education camps.

    4. Re:Rectify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That makes no sense in or out of context. Fail.

    5. Re:Rectify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And organs harvested. There is a lot of organ harvesting going on in China from executed prisoners.

    6. Re:Rectify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hard to say, can you really trust a chinese narrative? Do google "chinese culture of lying" and "saving face at all cost china". I've learned to never trust a chinese person ever and never do business with them where I can't have a non-chinese arbitrator, if you do, you will loose money and they gain "positive" reputation for fooling "white pig".

  5. Capitalism does not create freedom by plopez · · Score: 3, Informative

    In the 80's and 90's there was a common wisdom that introducing capitalism into a country would create liberty and democracy. But China is proof that it does not work that way. Other data are Imperial Rome (Eastern and Western branches as well), Nazi Germany, Imperial China, The British Empire, Fascist Italy, and the Ottoman Empire. All of them had market economies at times in some cases very wealthy and vibrant. But none of them could be considered democracies either due to central autocratic rule, or through restriction in franchise based on wealth e.g. land ownership) or gender.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is communist china though

    2. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh. A free market is a system of commerce, not a system of government. Socialism certainly does not encourage democracy, despite the newspeak laden titles its proponents give their countries (People's Democratic Republic of Hell #119).

    3. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by sexconker · · Score: 2

      In the 80's and 90's there was a common wisdom that introducing capitalism into a country would create liberty and democracy. But China is proof that it does not work that way. Other data are Imperial Rome (Eastern and Western branches as well), Nazi Germany, Imperial China, The British Empire, Fascist Italy, and the Ottoman Empire. All of them had market economies at times in some cases very wealthy and vibrant. But none of them could be considered democracies either due to central autocratic rule, or through restriction in franchise based on wealth e.g. land ownership) or gender.

      You forgot the biggest example of all - the US of A.

    4. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Socialism can be implemented with or without a democracy. Same goes for capitalism. I don't think either has been used alongside democracy as the system fell in disfavor as it couldn't scale past a city-state without modern communication tech.

    5. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 3, Insightful

      China was a struggling third world country before they wisely began to adopt capitalism, It's far from a free market, operating more like a nation sized corporation, but to call it communist is off the rails. It still has a caste system for example. It's operating pretty much along the lines China has operated for quite a long time, except without an obvious emperor.

      Imperial Rome was sort of similar, but it's worth noting that the public had a strong voice in politics, as indicated by the bread and circuses they were provided to keep them happy, a fully operational social welfare system that existed thousands of years ago.

      Nazi Germany was never capitalist, for example Hitler in 1927: "We are socialists. We are enemies of today's capitalistic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions." Goebbels: "The worker in a capitalist state - that is his greatest misfortune - no longer a human being, no longer a creator, no longer a shaper of things. He has become a machine."

        In 1941, former Nazi boss of Danzig, Hermann Rauschning, wrote that the last part of the German Revolution was Nazism, which was just as much a realization of Marxist as of nationalist ideas, and he notes that the only ones who refuse to admit this are supporters of Marxist theories and Nazis themselves. Rauschning also writes in his book that Marxism itself was part of a single great revolutionary movement which included Marxist Socialism, Nazism, Communist Bolshevism, Fascism and nihilism. Rauschning knew Hitler well and repudiated him and his movement at great risk before the rest of the world recognized the full danger of Nazism.

      Much the same could be said of fascist Italy.

      The only group in your list that could credibly be called capitalist were the British Empire, and during its height (mostly mid 19th century to the start of the 20th century) liberty and democracy did indeed bloom, culminating in universal suffrage and the outline of what we today call a modern democracy appearing. Not so much in the colonies of course but that was the Imperial part of the equation

    6. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by youngone · · Score: 1

      I have always wondered if the CCP keep such a tight grip on power because they know the history of China, and they know that when China does not have a strong central government millions of people die. I looked at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... and of the top ten deadliest wars in history, 8 involved China, and huge death tolls. Just looking at WWII, the US lost about 400,000 dead, China lost 15 - 20 million. I wonder if the CCP just want to prevent any sort of repeat of this, and figure that a tough authoritarian central government is the only way to achieve this.

    7. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by plopez · · Score: 2

      I'll take issue with you on a number of points. Rome was first a Republic; by the rich, for the rich, and of the rich. If you were poor, landless, a female, or a slave you had no voce. This seems to be the model the modern Republicans would like to embrace. After the Caesars took over, the Senate was often mostly advisory or a rubberstamp. The Causer usually had the last word.

      You don't have to be rich to be a democracy. See Costa Rica.

      Germany was Capitalist. Hitler's biggest supporters were the industrialist, bankers, and conservative Christians. He called the party "Socialist" as it was a trendy word at the time. By no means was he Socialist. It was the industrials who wet themselves over the cheap slave labor the Nazis provided and the Nazis also broke the union for the industrialists. This resembles a certain right win US party in some ways.

      Centralized power and dehumanization is a natural consequence of Capitalism.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    8. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nazi Germany was never capitalist, for example Hitler in 1927: "We are socialists..."

      Pro-worker movements were big in Europe back then. Hitler, political genius he was, adopted the "Socialist" name for the political points.
      Don't take everything a politician says at face value. Look at their actions instead. Capitalists made a lot of money working together with the State (unless they were Jewish and without the necessary connections), to the point many international players like Ford had a big boner for everyone's favorite Fuhrer. As the State was a big driver behind the economy they also implemented social policies after the initial "fuck everything, let's create some industry" phase. Look up corporatism as it's a less biased name and the same on the important parts.

    9. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      "Much the same could be said of fascist Italy."

      But not by Benito Mussolini: "Fascism [is] the complete opposite ofMarxian Socialism...Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect. " So only did Mussolini say fascism was not socialism, he also says it is not capitalism.

    10. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Benito Mussolini was a socialist and earned the title “Il Duce” as the leader of the socialists in Italy. When he founded the fascist party, its program called for implementing a minimum wage, expropriating property from landowners, repealing titles of nobility, creating state-run secular schools and imposing a progressive tax rate. Mussolini took socialism and turned it in a more populist and militaristic direction, but remained a modernizing, secular man of the left.

    11. Re:Capitalism does not create freedom by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure you fully understand the scope of the social welfare programme in question - for much of its existence, it supplied around a third of the citizens of Rome with what they needed to exist. It didn't do so for the fun of it, costing Rome an absolute fortune as it did, but rather because said citizens would otherwise revolt.

      While Nazi rhetoric consistently attacked the rich, the well born, the war profiteers, and the industrialists and while Nazi rhetoric consistently championed the working poor, the old, and the unemployed, how did the Nazis act once they had acquired actual power?

      If anything, Nazis in power were more hostile to business and to the "rich" when they ran Germany then when they were seeking power through democratic means. In 1937, four years after the Nazis gained power, Freund wrote of Hitler in Zero Hour that "Only in domestic affairs did Hitler follow his original plan to the letter."

      Graf von der Golz, the Deputy Commissar in the Ministry of Economics in a speech to businessmen reported in the Nazi periodical Völkischer Beobachter on July 15, 1934: "Any organization that represents the interests of the employer will be regarded as illegal and disbanded and the guilty parties will be prosecuted."

      Fritz Thyssen, one of the industrialists who did help bring the Nazis to power, said in 1940: "Soon Germany will not be any different from Bolshevik Russia; the heads of enterprises who do not fulfill the conditions which the ‘Plan' prescribes will be accused of treason against the German people, and shot."

      The Nazis on October 16, 1934 raised the highest income tax rate from 40% to 50%, and on February 17, 1939 raised that highest rate again to 55%. A decree of September 9, 1939 again increased income taxes, but exempted incomes of 2,400 Reichmarks a year or less.

      Comparative Major European Governments, a 1937 book, notes that through several new laws on December 4, 1934 banking, credits, and stock exchanges passed under complete government control and that the Loan-Stock Law limited stock company dividends to six percent in some cases and to eight percent in others, with profits over that required to be transferred to the Gold Discount Bank, which was in turn required to invest them in government loans or municipal debt service bonds.

      Nazi hostility to individual wealth was matched by its hostility to big business. The same act of October 16, 1934 removed the exemption on business taxes for many types of businesses and it increased the progressivity of the business taxes; an act of August 27, 1936 raised the general business tax rate from 20% to 25% and to 30% for each year thereafter; then on July 25, 1938 corporate profits of more than 100,000 Reichmarks per year were subjected to an additional tax of 35% with that rising to 40% for each year thereafter; and on March 20, 1939, the Nazis imposed an excess profits tax. In four years, Nazis had raised taxes to approximately one fourth of the national income.

      Stephen Roberts, in his 1937 book, The House That Hitler Built, noted that compulsory loans had been extracted from banks and insurance companies, and that these grew to such an extent that armament firms complained that they no longer could bear this in addition to all the other assessments like the eight percent Labor Front charges assessed.

      The Nazis passed legislation to make it difficult to form or maintain corporations and to limit the authority of directors of corporations or of stockholders in corporations. Directors of corporations, for example, were allowed to grant bonuses only upon condition that they were directly tied to profit and upon condition that the board of directors authorize "voluntary social contributions" to employees, granting employees effectively an automatic share in corporate profits.

      Later, the tax on directors' fees was increased from 10% in March 1933 to 20% in February 1939. The capital market in Germany was almost completely closed to private issues and banks were subject to a succ

  6. So, essentially, by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    It's the same kind of self-censorship going on that we have here. With the difference that here you're just being inconvenienced 'til you go out of business or bend over instead of being shot, of course. So, yes, we're still "more free" than them.

    But it's also a reminder that "more" is not necessarily more than "much"...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. China isn't communist by Theovon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Technically, China is a capitalist dictatorship. People often conflate the economic system with the system of government, because in our experience, most capitalist counties are also democratic (although typically republics), while most communist countries are also dictatorships. China has a heavily regulated economy, but the government doesn't own all wealth and resources, so it's not communist. That being said, I'm sure there are aspects that are heavily socialist, but no country is completely polar in these regards. I mean, the US isn't totally capitalist; there are high taxes, and there are a lot of centralized resources in the government.

    1. Re:China isn't communist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a dictatorship, at any time, any business can be nationalized and it would be perfectly legal.
      Private property is an illusion. The Chinese understand this very well, that's why they move so much wealth outside the country whenever they can.
      Watch the news sometimes, and see how many companies are suddenly subjected to all kinds of investigations and probes, even if nothing changed in they years they've operated, individuals in sensitive positions get in all sorts of trouble. and so on.

      In capitalist China, every business has the state as a silent partner with a 95% share..

    2. Re: China isn't communist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right because it is realistic that Chinese will seize trillions of dollars of western ownership in Chinese corporations. Idiot.

  8. not wii be, in fact already been by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they are just getting regulations written down. not a law and no clear definitions of violations. Summoning is no more another way asking for briberties...

    by another Chinese.

  9. Thats just a security issue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, if CIA stops using social media to penetrate and influence other countries then China wouldn't have to worry about it much. But then when you read it in news US is always the good guy promoting freedom of speech.

    1. Re: Thats just a security issue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we are not much fearing about CIA because our military computers are not internet connected. our government guys are fearing about the angry citizens and news from foreign media, like what happened in September 2014 in HK.

    2. Re: Thats just a security issue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to target military computers. Influencing citizens and creating pressure on government through news and social media is one way to threaten other countries like China. Propaganda has always been a powerful weapon and I do not think organizations like CIA are ignoring it.

  10. Chinese DMCA 20 years too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    American exceptionalism FTW!

  11. Seems that by no-body · · Score: 1

    tight-asses are bubbling up to the top - or manifest themselves automatically in this area while other's just obediently serve in their allotted slots of existence.

    Needs two - one part to give up their freedom by choice, subduing into being robots obeying written - with soldiers this seems to happen or not written with corporate ants and the demanding jerks being the counterpart and everyone is happy to live their life to the fullest?

  12. For one brief shining moment ... by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    I misread 'Internet' as 'environmental'.

    We can dream, right?