From the paper I linked, section "Content of Censored and Uncensored Posts", here's one example: > we now highlight the obverse condition by giving examples of

From the paper I linked, section "Content of Censored and Uncensored Posts", here's one example: > we now highlight the obverse condition by giving examples of two posts related to events with collective action potential that support the state but which nevertheless were quickly censored. During the bombings in Fuzhou, the government censored this post, which unambiguously condemns the actions of Qian Mingqi, the bomber, and explicitly praises the government’s work on the issues of housing demolition, which precipitated the bombings: > “The bombing led not only to the tragedy of his death but the death of many government workers. Even if we can verify what Qian Mingqi said on Weibo that the building demolition caused a great deal of personal damage, we should still condemn his extreme act of retribution.... The government has continually put forth measures and laws to protect the interests of citizens in building demolition. And the media has called attention to the plight of those experiencing housing demolition. The rate at which compensation for housing demolition has increased exceeds inflation. In many places, this compensation can change the fate of an entire family.” --- A more recent example. Jerry Grey is a Canadian who lives in China and who opposes the Xinjiang narrative in western mainstream media because he has travelled to Xinjiang and saw a different reality than described in the media. On Chinese social media he posted a criticism of Adrien Zenz, one of the people pushing the genocide narrative. Grey's criticism was that Zenz has never been to Xinjiang, and Grey says that Zenz should go and take a look. This was then censored, because "it's not China's place to encourage other's to change their minds". https://twitter.com/Jerry_grey2002/status/1318729179773296641 https://twitter.com/Jerry_grey2002/status/131872917977329664...