Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Cyber Watchdog Rejects Censorship Critics, Says Internet Must Be 'Orderly' (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on from the my-way-or-highway dept.

China's top cyber authority on Thursday rejected a recent report ranking it last out of 65 countries for press freedom, saying the internet must be "orderly" and the international community should join it in addressing fake news and other cyber issues. From a report: Ren Xianliang, vice minister of the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), said the rapid development of the country's internet over two decades is proof of its success and that it advocates for the free flow of information. "We should not just make the internet fully free, it also needs to be orderly... The United States and Europe also need to deal with these fake news and rumors," Ren told journalists without elaborating.

41 of 78 comments (clear)

  1. Translation by DaMattster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We must control content that would undermine our authority. I can't believe the Chinese Communist Party actually thinks people are dumb enough to believe the shit that they spew.

    1. Re:Translation by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Say what you like, the Chinese Communists took what had been arguably the pre-eminent power in the world (certainly the pre-eminent power in east Asia) but had become a joke in danger of dissolving entirely, and turned it into a world power again. That's bought them a lot of forgiveness from the populace on their methods.

    2. Re:Translation by AlanObject · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can't believe the Chinese Communist Party actually thinks people are dumb enough to believe the shit that they spew.

      I'm not sure why you would think this. There are plenty of people right here in the U.S. (and a more than a few spotted right here on /.) that would be perfectly OK with the government regulating the internet in this way. Check in with the anti-porn crusaders if you want an example but there are many more.

      If you have ever been to China, particularly in the well-developed industrial/financial centers, many if not most of them view the Communist party as ideological bureaucrats currently in charge, frequently annoying and sometimes dangerous, but an entity to be worked with and around. Bribed as necessary. They then get on with the work of being successful capitalists which they consider themselves.

    3. Re:Translation by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Neither the Chinese Communist Party nor our parties actually believe people are dumb enough to buy this shit.

      But they also know that people can't do jack shit against it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why not? The American people are. Interesting that he is quoting Americans (fake news) to justify censorship. All our rulers have to do is keep us arguing about partisan issues and they can do anything they want.
      Does anyone remember before the election that everyone was dissatisfied with both parties because they both want to rob us of everything and give it to big corporations?

    5. Re:Translation by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I know only one kind of people who are against internet porn. Those that sell porn and want to eliminate their worst rival. Because you can't really compete with free.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Translation by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      referring to the internet as the "Wild West" seems to be enough to end all debate or thought on the matter in the US

    7. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They control the information their citizens receive, and they don't care what other nations think. They're insular and authoritarian. They don't need people to be dumb to believe what they say. They just need to keep control and repeat what they want people to believe.

    8. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh please! If the Americans can fall for the republican/democrat bullshit, you shouldn't have any difficulty believing the same about the Chinese. If you want to see "dumb", look at who lives in the white house (part time) right now.

    9. Re:Translation by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Any entity that cannot stand strong in the face of criticism does not deserve to be empowered, for they are weak.

      The belief that criticism should be tolerated is a product of the Western Age of Enlightenment. That belief is not held by most non-Western cultures.

    10. Re:Translation by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that from their perspective, it doesn't matter if you believe it or not, because they'll just make you, your family, and everyone you care about disappear into some labor camp, where they'll be tortured, worked to death, and die, if you make too much trouble for them. Think of crap like this that they say as just an extreme form of sarcasm, if you like, it's functionally not much different.

    11. Re:Translation by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of people right here in the U.S. (and a more than a few spotted right here on /.) that would be perfectly OK with the government regulating the internet in this way.

      Sure, and I'll bet you cash money it's the same people that see nothing wrong with being monitored 24/7 from cradle to grave, having 'backdoors' into encryption methods, and that profiling people based on race or ethnicity is perfectly acceptable, and that many of those people should not only not be allowed to enter the country for any reason, but be forcibly removed from the country if they're already here, and sent back to wherever they came from -- even if that means going back there means they'll be killed (because it's 'not our problem'). In short, there are a lot of short-sighted, unintelligent people in this country, who can't see past the end of their own noses and don't realize the consequences of their poor decisions.

    12. Re:Translation by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      Well, too fucking bad for those cultures then.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    13. Re:Translation by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't live in the south. The religious fundies really hate the fact that you can see boobies on your phone any time you want. It turns you into a pervert who is going to hell for having impure thoughts. Only republican senatorial candidates can get away with that, as long as they marry that high school tail they were chasing.

    14. Re:Translation by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Which is why the West and especially the US has been more agile in its development over the last few hundred years.

      China has developed as much in 30 years as Europe did in those few hundred years.

      Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are all democracies, but most of their development occurred while they were repressive dictatorships.

      It is not at all clear that tolerance of political dissent is necessary for economic development or technical innovation.

    15. Re:Translation by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      (Citation needed)

    16. Re:Translation by gnick · · Score: 1

      I know only one kind of people who are against internet porn. Those that sell porn and want to eliminate their worst rival.

      My sister divorced the father of her children because he wouldn't give up Internet porn. She doesn't sell porn. She just has a special kind of relationship with Jesus. They're not alone; he was in classes to help him "recover".

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    17. Re:Translation by whyyisthissohard · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile you're turning a blind eye to the SAME THING but probably much worse here.
      Insightful???
      You are blind. China simply does openly and honestly what the people here are too 'dumb' to realize our government, which is simply an limb of the Bank (as are nearly all businesses), does openly and lies about.
      "But the politcal theatre/sandbox! The conflicts seem so real! They are so mean to each other!"
      The rule is simple: you can only disparage that which is replaceable.
      Go home and think some more.

      And even of those men
      themselves that in councils of the Commonwealth love to show their
      reading of politics and history, very few do it in their domestic affairs
      where their particular interest is concerned, having prudence enough for
      their private affairs; but in public they study more the reputation of their
      own wit than the success of anotherâ(TM)s business.

    18. Re:Translation by gnick · · Score: 1

      Everyone in the West agrees The Daily Stormer had to be taken down.

      If everyone agreed that it should be taken down, it would have been abandoned for lack of traffic. Not even everyone who hated it thought it should be taken down.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    19. Re:Translation by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      China's success was not the Chinese governments success, it was out and out US corporate greed, their failure, they myopic lusts and egos, their fuck everyone else, I want more, More, MORE, attitude. Not much at all to do with China and everything to do with US psychopathic capitalism, greed driving it's own self destruction.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    20. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, yes, I know - I've met "social justice" hypocritices before. But this article is about China.

    21. Re:Translation by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Why shouldn't they believe it works? It does! The people don't know what they don't know.

      I talked with a Chinese grad student quite awhile back, and eventually the topic of censorship came up. When I suggested that the Great Firewall was a problem, he contended that it wasn't and that the US did the exact same sorts of things. As you'd expect, he couldn't name a single example of the US actually doing so, he'd just been told that we did it too. And when I listed off a half dozen different terms, sites, and services that were censored in China and spelled out how a person's lack of access to them could shape their views or impede their ability to make informed decisions, he had no clue what I was talking about. He had either never heard of them, had been told that the nearest Chinese equivalents were the same/better, or else he was under the impression that the things I mentioned were far, far different than what they actually were, so he didn't see any harm in their removal.

      More or less, despite having been in the US for a few years at that point, he lived in a bubble, so he continued to believe what he had been told and filtered all new information through that lens. Or, putting it differently, he was living in ignorance and was—at least in some regards—blissful for it. It's the same reason North Korea is able to continue as it does.

      To say the least, when I invited him to spend Thanksgiving with my parents and my family it was an eye-opening experience for him. He was shocked to see the seeming opulence we enjoyed as a middle-class family, since despite having been in the US for three years, he had never been in an American home. Having five bedrooms for a four-person family? And keeping it after two of them had left for college and beyond? Having an entire cabinet merely to display curios that had been collected over the decades? Having decorative plants, both real and fake, that served no functional purpose, not to mention numerous other decorations? Eating a bird that was the size of a small dog and knowing that everyone else in the country was doing so as well that day? All of it flew in the face of the narrative he had been fed about the standard of living in China being just as good as it is in the US, and he made no attempt at hiding his continued astonishment.

      Mind you, nearly all large organizations, from businesses to nations, attempt to control and influence the narrative surrounding them for the benefit of their own self-interests (the US included, of course). The difference here, however, is the degree of direct influence the government exerts over all of the information that their citizens receive, as well as the degree to which they've succeeded in doing so up to this point.

      We can and should condemn it, but we can't say that it's proven itself to be ineffective. At least not yet. Hopefully that day will come.

    22. Re:Translation by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Say, why is it always the Republicans that are caught cheating on their wife with that 14 year old friend of their daughter? Or her boyfriend for that matter...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    23. Re:Translation by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Recover from being married to a Jesus freak? Yeah, I can see the need for a self help group there. That's mental torture.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Cuck Fhina - These are enimies of freedom by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

    They don't sound so superior when their 'stability' relies on censors and jackboots.

  3. At least the Chinese have clarity by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Chinese have no expectation of "real news" -- *all* of their mainstream news is filtered through the lens of their government, and they know it.

    In a small way this might put them at a better position than USA right now, where many people have a disconnect believing their news couldn't possibly be "fake news".

  4. When will Twitter use that excuse? by Jerry · · Score: 2

    I don't think it will be long before Twitter, Google and Facebook use that same excuse to justify censorship on their platforms.

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

    1. Re:When will Twitter use that excuse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      To an extent they already do.

  5. you don't get to "reject" criticism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    you don't get to "reject" criticism.
    People are telling you are a totalitarian, unfree government which controls the internet in a draconian way.
    You have been evaluated based on clear criteria and ended up last. Because you are a terrible disaster of a totalutarian government.
    You don't get to say "no" to it, it is not up to you!

  6. Free at last! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    "You are free...to view what we permit!
    You are free...to view what we permit!
    You are free...to view what we permit!"

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  7. Fuck the USA too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They don't sound so superior when their 'stability' relies on censors and jackboots.

    without net neutrality, verizon and comcast will be deciding what content is "suitable" for their subscribers

    it's the exact same thing

  8. Nobody cares what China thinks by boudie2 · · Score: 1

    A totalitarian communist regime like China doesn't have the moral standing to criticize any country or even the internet itself. Just STFU and keep making cheap shoes and smartphones while your citizenry slowly wakes up and kicks you to the curb like all other despotic rulers Learn your place..

  9. Chinese Overlords by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    We must control content that would undermine our authority. I can't believe the Chinese Communist Party actually thinks people are dumb enough to believe the shit that they spew.

    I don't know, I think we should appoint China the regulator of the entire Internet. It might be amusing to watch them try to play whack-a-mole with the toxic garbage that makes up a good 1/3 of the Internet. It will keep most of their population well occupied for the next few decades until they realize the utter futility of it all. In the meantime, once one or two well trafficked sites get shut down, a sizeable portion of the entire Internet would devote every waking moment to undermining the PRC and making life a living hell for every member of the government.

    I would be entertaining.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  10. "Orderly censorship" by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    They act like a bunch of commies! ... oh, wait

    Because they allow some capitalism, people forget they are a totalitarian regime. Early in my visit to the country, I was at a city park. I turned a corner to get a look at a new-looking relief mural. Suddenly looming before me was a 20 foot carved hammer and sickle. The hair on the back of my neck popped up. It was a definitive "we're not in Kansas anymore" moment.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re: "Orderly censorship" by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      I fear you're missing an important point. Communism is the good part. We don't have that in America. Authoritarianism is the bad part. We *do* have that in America.

      Bummer, right?

    2. Re: "Orderly censorship" by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      "Communism" is an overloaded term. My observation is that it's generally intended to mean a totalitarian gov't run by a central committee and possibly with a weak equivalent of a President. If the single leader becomes too strong, then it's a dictatorship.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  11. Well...they've got one point by HiThere · · Score: 1

    I disagree about the "orderly", as I feel that's a recipe for stagnation, but there needs to be some way to handle "fake news". Unfortunately, trusting someone in authority to decide what is fake has always been a bad idea.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  12. No Trump, No KKK, No Fasist USA! by wjcofkc · · Score: 1

    And we are supposed to want this instead? If you are clueless about this post, please ignore.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    1. Re: No Trump, No KKK, No Fasist USA! by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Trump supports most of the same policies Clinton supported. The modern-day KKK is basically fictional. Our regime is NOT fascist but it IS totalitarian financialist.

      NEXT!

  13. We'll probably try it. by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

    I have no doubt the suggestion has landed on receptive ears here in the US. Europe is already working on it, the US will not be far behind.

  14. Democracy is important because it is stable by aberglas · · Score: 1

    We may not get the best governments, but we get rid of the worst ones without bloodshed.

    Xi Jinping is truly frightening. He is very deliberately taking China back towards a very dark place. And he is very smart about how he is doing it. Keep the people well fed and they will not complain too much, until it is too late.

    A particularly chilling document is document number 9. Not because they were thinking that way, but because they actually wrote it up.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    And this time they have the technology behind them. Ever more intelligent software monitoring everyone, and becoming more interconnected every day.

    Interesting to compare the Chinese people to the British in the early 1800s, who had strong and very vocal calls for electoral reform, which were eventually successful. The Chartists were not complaining about specific laws, but about disenfrancisement. But then again, in the USA many people feel that is fine to disenfranchise other if it helps there side to win.