China Sets New Rules On Internet News 340
auckland map writes "China set new regulations on Internet news content which ban the spreading of any news with content that is against national security and public interest. Established news media needed permission to run a news Web site, while new operators had to register themselves with government information offices. This move further widens a campaign of controls Chinese government has imposed on web sites, communication, leisure and businesses." From the article: "The state bans the spreading of any news with content that is against national security and public interest ... [internet news sites] must be directed toward serving the people and socialism and insist on correct guidance of public opinion for maintaining national and public interests."
How primitive (Score:2, Interesting)
History in the making (Score:4, Interesting)
Wonder how long they can stand up to the onslaught of information not controlled by the state?
Looks like they're getting confident. (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, they seem to be getting more confident over their control - or else just want to send the message that they are confident. Is this confidence real, is it a false message, or could they be fooling themselves? I for one can't know - but it seems fairly conservative compared to the controls they could exert. It remains to be seen how they will enforce this, or try to make these new rules matter in the minds of their citizens.
The other source of confidence, of course, would be in the inability for outside forces to act against the growing market importance of China. China has done a great job of controlling the markets they act conservatively to control - now they get to reap the growing political benefit of that control. Perhaps eventually, their sheer political mass may allow them to finantially eliminate critics afar... I for one fear the day they begin to truly adopt intellectual property laws. Not because they are an especially malicious force compared to other governments, but because they are humans concentrating a great ammount of power, who may begin to assert ownership of ideas more powerfully than ever before.
Re:No, not reall (Score:3, Interesting)
all words and no meaning.
Re:Shouldn't the category be (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm reading (and writing this) from Shanghai, without using any proxy server.
Cuba... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:"National security" is the antithesis of freedo (Score:3, Interesting)
Free speech zone (Score:3, Interesting)
China is becoming one big free speech zone, [baltimorechronicle.com] George Bush style [washingtonpost.com]
I've spent a bit of time in China (Score:2, Interesting)
yep! She was also (Score:3, Interesting)
So she hasn't strayed too far, politically. ;)
Re:Holy crap! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:"National security" is the antithesis of freedo (Score:4, Interesting)
This is often overlooked by the "freedom fighters." They try to fight the system itself rather than fight under the accordance of the system. Take the open source versus proprietary war for example. There may exist open source extremists who would run around erasing copies of Windows and install Linux. However, some open source developers also make their software available for Windows, so even Windows users have choice. The difference is that, when you're promoting choice using open source software, you have to recognize that those who are using proprietary software also have a choice.
The goodie bag stuff for freedom defender is that, although you promote whatever you believe, freedom of speech or what not, there are people who choose to live happily under the current system of the state and the constitution. You simply shouldn't cause disturbance to other people's lives in the name of freedom. You have to find a way to defend your rights while preserving the unity of state.
This has been necessary for China in the past century due to extreme poverty and scacity of resources. It had been too costly to tear down a system and build a new one. If you want to improve the system, you must find a way to do that without disruption. That's the historical background of this constitution.
And think about why even Linus wouldn't approve some radical changes to the Linux kernel.
Re:"National security" is the antithesis of freedo (Score:3, Interesting)
That guy [wikipedia.org] didn't get run over by the tank. I'm using the very same resource you just linked.
He was ordered to be run over, but the tank driver refused to follow those orders. (The tank driver was later arrested.)
You wrote: "Be very happy if you live in a country to whom rights are more than words on a sheet of paper."
I recognize that our rights are more than words on a sheet of paper. But I'm a little more interested in what people will do.
In this case, the tank driver resisted an order to kill.
I frequently wonder: Would an American do the same? I remember WACO, and I note many places where our media is clearly subserviant to the US government.
We must take refuge in more than just our rights, we need to think about the spirit behind those rights.
In this respect, I think Americans are much weaker.
Chinese know that they resist their government. Americans do not.
Re:"National security" is the antithesis of freedo (Score:3, Interesting)
Given his odd word choice through the post, I'm thinking the author is at least native mainland chinese, probably immigrated to the US. Within that context, I think his post is an attempt to explain Chinese thought on China's system and not the way the world in general should be.
It is interesting to compare the part about some people just being happy with the way things are and not wanting to rock the boat. I read somewhere (probably here) recently that 70-80% of the colonial population were not interested in breaking with the British. It was only the 'agitators' who wanted to form a new country. That such a small proportion of the population could drag the rest along into such a huge change in direction is interesting, and probably terrifying to the chinese goverment.