2 ms·

I have no doubts that most platforms have censored these keywords for whatever bizarre reason and it's nothing new. I refer it as 'noise' because people may hav

I have no doubts that most platforms have censored these keywords for whatever bizarre reason and it's nothing new. I refer it as 'noise' because people may have the wrong impression that all products related to Winnie and the whole thought have been banned. It is a bit different from reality. I don't like the idea of divisive labels such as wumao, gongzhi, fenqing (they are quite dated as well if you are old as me!) it will only reduce conversations to a low quality brawl. My view is as long as debates are open, rational, and logical, progressive thinking is preserved.

hkmaxpro 6y ago
I disagree that incomplete censorship is noise. Any ban is a ban, even if incomplete. Trivializing and rationalizing CCP censorship acts is why it can keep censoring so many for so long. (Case in point: H&M is just censored from all major platforms in China, including Apple Maps [0]. This is totally unacceptable in any free society, hence this article. If people think censorship like this is noise, that’s why you will see more censorship acts in the future.) https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/winnie-the-pooh-china-ban https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/winnie-the-pooh-china-ba... is an honest evaluation of cases where Winnie-the-Pooh is censored, and where it is not. This article still concludes Winnie-the-Pooh is censored (“China’s ban on that lovable fluff ball may indeed tighten”), despite many cases it is allowed. Censorship is not binary. Saying “Winnie-the-Pooh is not censored” is misleading and dishonest, when it is clearly censored today on major video sites. In a Time of Universal Deceit — Telling the Truth Is a Revolutionary Act [0] https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/26/22352357/h-m-western-brands-gone-apple-maps-china-nike-adidas https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/26/22352357/h-m-western-bran...
- dumb1224 6y ago
  Censorship is bad, no one is doubting that, the majority of chinese people would agree with you (and loathing as before). See the strong backlash from banning yyetss https://www.reuters.com/article/china-video-piracy-idINKBN2A31DV https://www.reuters.com/article/china-video-piracy-idINKBN2A... However it is like you said it's not so binary. I think there are differences between censoring posts and banning a whole commercial theme. No one is doubting the former but anyone who doesn't understand China would think it's a dystopia if they hear the latter (which is clearly not true in my opinion). It is actually quite logical that Winnie won't be banned because of the popularity and a universal ban is not practical. I didn't call it "noise" to play down censorship but in relative terms it is still trivial comparing to other concerning issues which are smothered by the amplification of sensationalism (IMHO). Simply ask any chinese person would they care if keywords of winnie are censored, and in comparison if MS word is banned. Such titles are more eye-catching than say 'the subtle difference in the agenda of the chinese congress' e.g My hope of removing the 'relative noise' is to reveal real issues that affect actual majority of the chinese population and what they really care about. Focusing on sensationalised news just leads to more meaningless us/them argument.

hkmaxpro 6y ago

I disagree that incomplete censorship is noise. Any ban is a ban, even if incomplete. Trivializing and rationalizing CCP censorship acts is why it can keep censoring so many for so long. (Case in point: H&M is just censored from all major platforms in China, including Apple Maps [0]. This is totally unacceptable in any free society, hence this article. If people think censorship like this is noise, that’s why you will see more censorship acts in the future.) https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/winnie-the-pooh-china-ban https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/winnie-the-pooh-china-ba... is an honest evaluation of cases where Winnie-the-Pooh is censored, and where it is not. This article still concludes Winnie-the-Pooh is censored (“China’s ban on that lovable fluff ball may indeed tighten”), despite many cases it is allowed. Censorship is not binary. Saying “Winnie-the-Pooh is not censored” is misleading and dishonest, when it is clearly censored today on major video sites. In a Time of Universal Deceit — Telling the Truth Is a Revolutionary Act [0] https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/26/22352357/h-m-western-brands-gone-apple-maps-china-nike-adidas https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/26/22352357/h-m-western-bran...

dumb1224 6y ago
Censorship is bad, no one is doubting that, the majority of chinese people would agree with you (and loathing as before). See the strong backlash from banning yyetss https://www.reuters.com/article/china-video-piracy-idINKBN2A31DV https://www.reuters.com/article/china-video-piracy-idINKBN2A... However it is like you said it's not so binary. I think there are differences between censoring posts and banning a whole commercial theme. No one is doubting the former but anyone who doesn't understand China would think it's a dystopia if they hear the latter (which is clearly not true in my opinion). It is actually quite logical that Winnie won't be banned because of the popularity and a universal ban is not practical. I didn't call it "noise" to play down censorship but in relative terms it is still trivial comparing to other concerning issues which are smothered by the amplification of sensationalism (IMHO). Simply ask any chinese person would they care if keywords of winnie are censored, and in comparison if MS word is banned. Such titles are more eye-catching than say 'the subtle difference in the agenda of the chinese congress' e.g My hope of removing the 'relative noise' is to reveal real issues that affect actual majority of the chinese population and what they really care about. Focusing on sensationalised news just leads to more meaningless us/them argument.