40 ms·
I find it weird that China has a very tight information control and simultaneously over and over again has the weirdest "netizen" rumors that go mainstream. Wh
by lysace 2y ago
I find it weird that China has a very tight information control and simultaneously over and over again has the weirdest "netizen" rumors that go mainstream.
What's the explanation? That they are explicitly allowed for some strategical reason? Something else?
Edit: @dang: Sorry in advance. I do feel like we got some pretty good discussion around this explosive topic, at least in its first hour.
Folks, keep up the good behavior — it makes me look good.
- nuz 2y agoOne idea is that they're fake planted rumors. Certanily not the first time things like that happen
- lysace 2y agoIf people get to read shocking rumors, they don't feel that their information access is so censored, after all? I could see that at least partially working. "It's just some dangerous information that is censored."
- okasaki 2y agoWell that's what the Washington regime and its media lackies do anyway, "according to a confidential source at the Whitehouse..."
- erulabs 2y agoMy explanation is that their tight control is an illusion. Not to get political, but the illusion of power is power, and suggesting they control billions of peoples speech is certainly an illusion of power. China, and all other (supposedly) top-down-economies, survive only because their control is not airtight. If they were to actually have complete control, things would fall apart rapidly. “No one knows how Paris is fed” and all that.
- candiddevmike 2y agoIan Malcolm said it best: "the kind of control you're attempting simply is... it's not possible. If there is one thing the history of evolution has taught us it's that life will not be contained." Humans are clever and typically find workarounds given enough time/hope. Sure you could argue that this is some kind of authoritarian 4D chess/matrix scenario to let off steam for an unruly populace, or it's just the natural course of things.
- lysace 2y agoFrom my work visits and sort of guarded discussions with people there: I feel like they have just accepted the inevitable. Don't ask weird questions about things you're not supposed to ask about, be pragmatic, get things gone, get rich.
- erulabs 2y agoMy experience as well! Pragmatism over idealism is a fantastic virtue for everyone — but turns out a vital one for communists :P
- Liquix 2y agoIs pragmatism really a "fantastic virtue" when people are forced away from alternatives by an overbearing government?
- throwaway19972 2y agoIs there any culture on earth that prioritizes idealism over "pragmatism", if we must use that term? What does this even look like?
- whythre 2y agoThere are individuals and subcultures that prioritize idealism, yes. Often they are young people. Idealistic individuals can get ground down and turned into pragmatists, but some hold onto their hopes and dreams very tightly.
- Maxamillion96 2y agoChina isn’t really that centralized and Zhongnanhai has less control than the White House does. Local party bosses are basically little kings and the average Chinese citizen sees less of the government than the average American does, ie one of the factors of the Chinese illegal immigration surge last year was that China basically has zero social support for pensioners or people who lost their businesses in lockdown https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-08-14/china-economy-why-won-t-the-party-spend-on-citizens https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-08-14/china-...
- taurath 2y agoThe thing that stuck out to me the most in the west were the long string of articles about the social credit system & the fear around the surveillance state. The surveillance state is probably about the same level as the UK, and the social credit system doesn't run anyone's lives like its described.
- torginus 2y agoI've heard somewhere that the social credit system is really misrepresented in the West - it's designed to track financial scammers and people who set up fraudulent companies. It's meant to weed out untrustworthy business partners, just like how the Western credit system is designed to weed out untrustworthy bankers. (Weird how the only 'group' in the West who gets implicit protection against scams are the banks) It doesn't really concern the everyman on the street. The few high profile cases where it was used to punish individuals who ran afoul of some politically powerful person or caused some huge outrage are red herrings - if the system didn't exist, theyd've found some other way to punish them.
- taurath 2y agoThe articles functionally stated that you couldn't get an apartment, or pay for a hotel room if you were caught jaywalking or walking around with a scowl on your face.
- 2y ago
- kwillets 2y agoConspiracy theories are common in repressive regimes.
- lysace 2y agoBut it's relatively easy for China/CPC to squash them if they really want to. Western media is even reporting on changes in particular keyword censorship.
- throwaway48476 2y agoTight information control means that rumors are often the best source of information so people are more engaged in the rumor mill. Same thing happened in the Soviet Union.
- cwkoss 2y agoThe house just passed $1.6B spending bill for the production of anti-china propaganda. This isn't necessarily a result of that, but I'd imagine some of the weird rumors you hear are manufactured by US intelligence/state dept.
- testernews 2y agosource?
- slater 2y agoLooks like it might be this? https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1157 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1157
- bloomingkales 2y agoWhat in god’s name are you talking about? https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1157/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1157... Oh. Had to look it up. (6) to expose misinformation and disinformation of the Chinese Communist Party’s or the Government of the People’s Republic of China’s propaganda, including through programs carried out by the Global Engagement Center; and (7) to counter efforts by the Chinese Communist Party or the Government of the People’s Republic of China to legitimize or promote authoritarian ideology and governance models. ——- Feels like the defense sector is determined to make China a perpetual enemy.
- dr_dshiv 2y agoIt’s a real drag. We need to step up competence, not fight a war. Viewing China as an enemy vs a strategic competitor leads to bad policy. Like it is killing ASML right now…
- jabbany 2y agoI'd say China doesn't have particularly tight_er_ information control than other places, they're using the same tools everyone else is using (keyword/hashtag bans, algorithmic content demotion, "shadowbans" of responses, and outright content removal etc.)... It's mainly just that there's more politically motivated manipulation... versus in the west where those tools would be used on things like copyright infringement, pornography, and misinformation etc.
- lowkey_ 2y agoI’ve spoken extensively about this with people from China. If something is totally forbidden, that holds. However, the government doesn’t want people to feel oppressed beyond the explicitly forbidden. What happens instead is, if it’s unfavorable but not forbidden, it will be mysteriously downvoted and removed, but if it keeps bubbling up, the government says “okay clearly this is important to people” and leaves it up. This happened with some news cases of forced marriage in some rural mountain regions, and the revelation that a popular WeChat person (like YouTuber) was involved with one of the families.
- markus_zhang 2y agoChina does have a tight information control but it may not be what you think it is. All communication software (QQ/Wechat are the two most used) have sort of backend scanner that detects topics that are in the "in-season" blacklist and ban accounts accordingly. No one knows what the list is so people could get banned for random reasons, but in general bashing current policies or calling out names of the standing members of Politburo is the quickest way to get banned -- and in many instances also got the Wechat group banned. On the other side, surprisingly, there are many contents that are apparently inappropriate floating on the social media without getting banned. This also throws people off feet. What I gathered is: - Don't shit on current party leaders. Actually don't discuss current politics at all. AIs don't always recognize contents correctly so you could be banned for supporting one side or desisting it at the same time. - Don't ever try to call up other people to join whatever an unofficial cause, whatever it is. Like, even if it's purely patriotic, just don't do it. You do it and you might go to prison very quickly -- at least someone is going to call you to STFU. Grassroot movements is the No.1 enemy of the government and they don't like it. You have to go through official channels for those. This leads to the following conclusion: Essentially, the government wants as much control as possible. You want to be patriotic? Sure, but it has to be controlled patriotic. You can attend party gathering to show your patriotism, but creating your own, unofficial gathering is a big No. They probably won't put you into a prison if the cause is legit, but police are going to bug you from time to time -> IMO this is how the CCP succeed. It has successfully switched from an ideologic party to an "All-people" party. It doesn't really care about ideology. But it wants to assimilate everyone who potentially can be out of control. If you are a successful businessman, it will invite you to participate in political life. If you are an activist who can call up thousands of people, it wants you in. It is essentially, a cauldron of elitists. It has nothing to do with "Communism". It is essentially, GOP + DEM in the US.
- lysace 2y agoThanks. I felt like things must have progressed from my last sort of insider view from 12 years ago when my company's China subsidiary received weekly meetings from officials to discuss things that needed to be addressed. "Item number 12. We feel like this URL is hurtful to the Chinese people"
- krisoft 2y agoI turn the question back at you: why do you think it would be in the interest of the Chinese state to surpress this particular rummour? I don’t see any implication of this news which would undermine their society, or cause disruption, or make people riot. If anything it is a tepid warm “do your job correctly and don’t be too clever by half or else…” story. Why would they flex their muscles for this one?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- taikobo 2y agoAs someone who have lived most of his life in China, I can give you some perspective. 1. There is no such thing as a single entity of government, CCP is not a person, each individual member of the party and government has his/her own agenda. Each level of government has its own goals. But ultimately it's about gaining control and privileges. 2. It is impossible to control 1.3-1.4 billion people all the time, so you make compromises. 3. The main point is: the tight control is both for and rooted from hierarchical power. To put it plainly, anything goes if it doesn't undercut CCP's control. OSHA? WTF is that lol. Law? "If you talk to me about law, I laugh in your face" says the head of a municipal "Rule of Law Office". "Don't talk to me about law this and law that", says the court. But the moment you order a picture of Winnie the pooh carrying wheat (Xi once said he carries 100kg of wheat on his single shoulder) on Alibaba, your account gets banned. Off topic thoughts: Because CCP has total control, there is no split of power to speak of, so once they are right, they are so right; but when they are wrong, it is catastrophically wrong and there is no change of course. It's why you see 30-50 million people starve to death and an economy miracle within the same half century.
- lysace 2y agoI wish I could upvote your comment more than by +1. Thanks.
- dehugger 2y agoBoth can be true in a country with over 1 billion citizens, through shear volume of individuals talented/determined enough to bypass information control.