5 ms·

Looks like the Chinese government would like to ensure that its citizens do not fall victim to 'fake news' and has thus taken on the responsibility of 'fact che

by mbgaxyz 10y ago

Looks like the Chinese government would like to ensure that its citizens do not fall victim to 'fake news' and has thus taken on the responsibility of 'fact checking'.

plussed_reader 10y ago
China's been 'fact checking' far longer than the internet has existed.
- WildUtah 10y ago
  The internet started in 1969 and the Chinese Communist Party forced the legitimate government to retreat to Taipei in 1949. So China has been fact checking for twenty years longer than the internet has existed.
  - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    What precisely makes Maoist China less legitimate than Nationalist China? I don't recall either of them winning any kind of fair and free elections.
    - unchocked 10y ago
      Your recollection is profoundly wrong. FYI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Taiwan https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2016/taiwan https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2016/taiwan
      - gohrt 10y ago
        That article says that Taiwan didn't have democratic elections in 1990. How is that responsive to a claim that Nationalist China was undemocratic?
        unchocked 10y ago
        I'm under the impression that Taiwan is Nationalist China.
        mikeash 10y ago
        I think you missed the implied "as of 1949" in the claim you attempted to rebut.
        xiaoma 10y ago
        It's not. Taiwan is fully democratic, has elected a president from the Democratic Progressive Party and has very few people who self-identify as Chinese.
        xiaoma 10y ago
        Everything I wrote above is true. Here is more detail: Ruling party: Taiwan's president is indeed from the Democratic Progressive Party. [1] Self identification: More than 80 percent of respondents self-identified as Taiwanese, compared with 8.1 percent who identified themselves as Chinese and 7.6 percent who identified as both. [2] Fully democratic: Not only does Taiwan have open elections and tolerate political demonstrations even the US wouldn't, but people have had referendum powers since 2003. This power was used stop the building of casinos in Penghu despite the moneyed interests pushing for them: [3] 1) http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35336411 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35336411 2) http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/05/28/2003647291 http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/05/28/20... 3) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-15/casinos-rejected-by-outlying-taiwan-islands-in-referendum-vote https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-15/casinos-r...
      - dogma1138 10y ago
        His recollection is not wrong, Taiwan didn't had a public election until the mid 90's, and even the 1996 one was a bit iffy, until 1987 Taiwan was under martial law, and until 86 you couldn't form political parties. The Republic of China was a unitary state before and during the "communist rebellion", it continued to be a unitary state after it until 1991 (and until 2000 technically the KMT still "ruled" Taiwan) when the National Assembly which hasn't been (re)elected since 1948 voted itself out of office finally after about 10 years of some liberalization. Today Taiwan has a ridiculous number of political parties (nearly 300) with 3-4 of them actually having seats in the house, tho effectively Taiwan is a 2 party country with sweeping swings in number of seats and leadership between the Democratic Progressive Party and the Chinese National Party.
    - elastic_church 10y ago
      Everyone that left or escaped Maoist China has an opinion of the mainland that is fixed in time, and is used to shape perception and policy towards the mainland that is completely incongruent with the sentiment on the mainland. Thats the only difference.
      - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
        Well, China reinforces its Maoist image from time to time with goose stepping military parades that seem archaic today; then there is the bizarre censorship, and have you ever seen the cult of personality news cast at 7PM on CCTV? China does itself no favors in trying to shape a more modern updated perception of itself on the outside.
        elastic_church 10y ago
        The only people that care live in a SAR or America. Okay that was an exaggeration, I would say the mainland sentiment isn't greatly concerned with the game of nations and are content with the role the grand administrators have assumed. I think it is a preoccupation of western minds, more so than of the minds of the people that actually live there.
        seanmcdirmid 10y ago
        If they do care, they definitely are messing it up. But you are right: almost all of China's posturing is for domestic consumption and thye are probably very unconcerned with their international image. china presents an image that is almost North Korean to the rest of the world, even though this is far from the truth. The current leadership, which came of age during the cultural revolution, is even worse than the previous leaders in this regard, and they probably don't realize how bad they look (with the fake hair dye, but everything else also).
argonaut 10y ago
If you're trying to make fun of fact checking fake news, that is a totally facetious comparison. The whole point of fact checking is that the fact check / rebuttal is put side by side or preceding the original claim, with evidence and its own citations. You're not prevented from seeing the original claim, even if statistically fewer people see the original claim. If the Communist party decided to replace all online censorship with modals saying how wrong the website was, and you could just click through the modal, I would consider that progress in China.
- jwtadvice 10y ago
  Nah, the "fake news" filters make it hard to post the content, make it hard to reshare the content, make it less likely to show up in feeds, and mark it so that it is less likely to be read.
  - argonaut 10y ago
    I hold governments to a higher standard than companies.
    - tajen 10y ago
      Unless you see the government as a company that has grown to a monopolistic size compared to the other ones. It's just an image to explain the rationale of those who don't trust it more than companies.
    - jwtadvice 10y ago
      Given that the same people circulate between them, and they work together on a regular basis, and they both are critical to the survival of the society that exists today: I hold them to the same high standard. I don't give breaks to golden parachutes or to lobbied appointments.
- lupin_sansei 10y ago
  That would be a brilliant solution to have the fake news rebutted side by side. But I fear the gatekeepers will just block what they see as fake news.
dmix 10y ago
The US congress recently funded a mild version of Ministry of Truth. So they aren't the only one. > Introduced by Congressmen Adam Kinzinger and Ted Lieu, H.R. 5181 seeks a “whole-government approach without the bureaucratic restrictions” to counter “foreign disinformation and manipulation,” which they believe threaten the world’s “security and stability.” http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-24/obama-signs-countering-disinformation-and-propaganda-act-law http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-24/obama-signs-counter... But instead of controlling the media they want to fund their own "fact-based" counter propaganda by building centralized media strategies with input from across the government, including the intelligence agencies, department of energy, state, etc. Additionally they want to partner and fund private firms, NGOs, and local journalists to help them. > The first priority is developing a whole-of-government strategy for countering THE foreign propaganda and disinformation being wages against us and our allies by our enemies. The bill would increase the authority, resources, and mandate of the Global Engagement Center to include state actors like Russia and China as well as non-state actors. The Center will be led by the State Department, but with the active senior level participation of the Department of Defense, USAID, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the Intelligence Community, and other relevant agencies. The Center will develop, integrate, and synchronize whole-of-government initiatives to expose and counter foreign disinformation operations by our enemies and proactively advance fact-based narratives that support U.S. allies and interests. > Second, the legislation seeks to leverage expertise from outside government to create more adaptive and responsive U.S. strategy options. The legislation establishes a fund to help train local journalists and provide grants and contracts to NGOs, civil society organizations, think tanks, private sector companies, media organizations, and other experts outside the U.S. government with experience in identifying and analyzing the latest trends in foreign government disinformation techniques. This fund will complement and support the Center’s role by integrating capabilities and expertise available outside the U.S. government into the strategy-making process. It will also empower a decentralized network of private sector experts and integrate their expertise into the strategy-making process. It's not clear how explicit this will be. Hopefully it will be obvious, so the public doesn't have to then invest in identifying the US propaganda, which is countering Russian/China propaganda.
- sedachv 10y ago
hota_mazi 10y ago
In the US, we are dealing with the problem of fake news and in China, they are dealing with the problem of real news.
- jwtadvice 10y ago
  In the US we are dealing with the problem of real news. So is China.
seanmcdirmid 10y ago
It actually sends the opposite signal: news sites, books, etc...aren't taken seriously until they are banned. The communist party hasn't heard of the Streisand Effect yet. If Wen Jiaobao's family didn't accumulate so much wealth, why would they have blocked nytimes in the first place? It must be true, they never even tried refuting the facts presented in theat seminal article.

by mbgaxyz 10y ago

Looks like the Chinese government would like to ensure that its citizens do not fall victim to 'fake news' and has thus taken on the responsibility of 'fact checking'.

plussed_reader 10y ago

China's been 'fact checking' far longer than the internet has existed.

WildUtah 10y ago
The internet started in 1969 and the Chinese Communist Party forced the legitimate government to retreat to Taipei in 1949. So China has been fact checking for twenty years longer than the internet has existed.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  What precisely makes Maoist China less legitimate than Nationalist China? I don't recall either of them winning any kind of fair and free elections.
  - unchocked 10y ago
    Your recollection is profoundly wrong. FYI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Taiwan https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2016/taiwan https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2016/taiwan
    - gohrt 10y ago
      That article says that Taiwan didn't have democratic elections in 1990. How is that responsive to a claim that Nationalist China was undemocratic?
      - unchocked 10y ago
        I'm under the impression that Taiwan is Nationalist China.
        mikeash 10y ago
        I think you missed the implied "as of 1949" in the claim you attempted to rebut.
        xiaoma 10y ago
        It's not. Taiwan is fully democratic, has elected a president from the Democratic Progressive Party and has very few people who self-identify as Chinese.
        xiaoma 10y ago
        Everything I wrote above is true. Here is more detail: Ruling party: Taiwan's president is indeed from the Democratic Progressive Party. [1] Self identification: More than 80 percent of respondents self-identified as Taiwanese, compared with 8.1 percent who identified themselves as Chinese and 7.6 percent who identified as both. [2] Fully democratic: Not only does Taiwan have open elections and tolerate political demonstrations even the US wouldn't, but people have had referendum powers since 2003. This power was used stop the building of casinos in Penghu despite the moneyed interests pushing for them: [3] 1) http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35336411 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35336411 2) http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/05/28/2003647291 http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/05/28/20... 3) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-15/casinos-rejected-by-outlying-taiwan-islands-in-referendum-vote https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-15/casinos-r...
    - dogma1138 10y ago
      His recollection is not wrong, Taiwan didn't had a public election until the mid 90's, and even the 1996 one was a bit iffy, until 1987 Taiwan was under martial law, and until 86 you couldn't form political parties. The Republic of China was a unitary state before and during the "communist rebellion", it continued to be a unitary state after it until 1991 (and until 2000 technically the KMT still "ruled" Taiwan) when the National Assembly which hasn't been (re)elected since 1948 voted itself out of office finally after about 10 years of some liberalization. Today Taiwan has a ridiculous number of political parties (nearly 300) with 3-4 of them actually having seats in the house, tho effectively Taiwan is a 2 party country with sweeping swings in number of seats and leadership between the Democratic Progressive Party and the Chinese National Party.
  - elastic_church 10y ago
    Everyone that left or escaped Maoist China has an opinion of the mainland that is fixed in time, and is used to shape perception and policy towards the mainland that is completely incongruent with the sentiment on the mainland. Thats the only difference.
    - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
      Well, China reinforces its Maoist image from time to time with goose stepping military parades that seem archaic today; then there is the bizarre censorship, and have you ever seen the cult of personality news cast at 7PM on CCTV? China does itself no favors in trying to shape a more modern updated perception of itself on the outside.
      - elastic_church 10y ago
        The only people that care live in a SAR or America. Okay that was an exaggeration, I would say the mainland sentiment isn't greatly concerned with the game of nations and are content with the role the grand administrators have assumed. I think it is a preoccupation of western minds, more so than of the minds of the people that actually live there.
        seanmcdirmid 10y ago
        If they do care, they definitely are messing it up. But you are right: almost all of China's posturing is for domestic consumption and thye are probably very unconcerned with their international image. china presents an image that is almost North Korean to the rest of the world, even though this is far from the truth. The current leadership, which came of age during the cultural revolution, is even worse than the previous leaders in this regard, and they probably don't realize how bad they look (with the fake hair dye, but everything else also).

argonaut 10y ago

If you're trying to make fun of fact checking fake news, that is a totally facetious comparison. The whole point of fact checking is that the fact check / rebuttal is put side by side or preceding the original claim, with evidence and its own citations. You're not prevented from seeing the original claim, even if statistically fewer people see the original claim. If the Communist party decided to replace all online censorship with modals saying how wrong the website was, and you could just click through the modal, I would consider that progress in China.

jwtadvice 10y ago
Nah, the "fake news" filters make it hard to post the content, make it hard to reshare the content, make it less likely to show up in feeds, and mark it so that it is less likely to be read.
- argonaut 10y ago
  I hold governments to a higher standard than companies.
  - tajen 10y ago
    Unless you see the government as a company that has grown to a monopolistic size compared to the other ones. It's just an image to explain the rationale of those who don't trust it more than companies.
  - jwtadvice 10y ago
    Given that the same people circulate between them, and they work together on a regular basis, and they both are critical to the survival of the society that exists today: I hold them to the same high standard. I don't give breaks to golden parachutes or to lobbied appointments.
lupin_sansei 10y ago
That would be a brilliant solution to have the fake news rebutted side by side. But I fear the gatekeepers will just block what they see as fake news.

dmix 10y ago

The US congress recently funded a mild version of Ministry of Truth. So they aren't the only one. > Introduced by Congressmen Adam Kinzinger and Ted Lieu, H.R. 5181 seeks a “whole-government approach without the bureaucratic restrictions” to counter “foreign disinformation and manipulation,” which they believe threaten the world’s “security and stability.” http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-24/obama-signs-countering-disinformation-and-propaganda-act-law http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-24/obama-signs-counter... But instead of controlling the media they want to fund their own "fact-based" counter propaganda by building centralized media strategies with input from across the government, including the intelligence agencies, department of energy, state, etc. Additionally they want to partner and fund private firms, NGOs, and local journalists to help them. > The first priority is developing a whole-of-government strategy for countering THE foreign propaganda and disinformation being wages against us and our allies by our enemies. The bill would increase the authority, resources, and mandate of the Global Engagement Center to include state actors like Russia and China as well as non-state actors. The Center will be led by the State Department, but with the active senior level participation of the Department of Defense, USAID, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the Intelligence Community, and other relevant agencies. The Center will develop, integrate, and synchronize whole-of-government initiatives to expose and counter foreign disinformation operations by our enemies and proactively advance fact-based narratives that support U.S. allies and interests. > Second, the legislation seeks to leverage expertise from outside government to create more adaptive and responsive U.S. strategy options. The legislation establishes a fund to help train local journalists and provide grants and contracts to NGOs, civil society organizations, think tanks, private sector companies, media organizations, and other experts outside the U.S. government with experience in identifying and analyzing the latest trends in foreign government disinformation techniques. This fund will complement and support the Center’s role by integrating capabilities and expertise available outside the U.S. government into the strategy-making process. It will also empower a decentralized network of private sector experts and integrate their expertise into the strategy-making process. It's not clear how explicit this will be. Hopefully it will be obvious, so the public doesn't have to then invest in identifying the US propaganda, which is countering Russian/China propaganda.

sedachv 10y ago

hota_mazi 10y ago

In the US, we are dealing with the problem of fake news and in China, they are dealing with the problem of real news.

jwtadvice 10y ago
In the US we are dealing with the problem of real news. So is China.

seanmcdirmid 10y ago

It actually sends the opposite signal: news sites, books, etc...aren't taken seriously until they are banned. The communist party hasn't heard of the Streisand Effect yet. If Wen Jiaobao's family didn't accumulate so much wealth, why would they have blocked nytimes in the first place? It must be true, they never even tried refuting the facts presented in theat seminal article.