Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship China Communications Government Social Networks The Internet Your Rights Online

China Calls For Even Firmer Internet Control 119

Posted by Soulskill
from the you're-doing-it-wrong dept.
eldavojohn writes "Chinese state media has published a long article detailing why China needs to take even firmer stances on sites like Twitter and the internet as a whole, or risk backlash to the Communist Party from 'Internet opinion.' The commentary warned, 'Unless administration is vigorous, criminal forces, hostile forces, terrorist organizations and others could manipulate public sentiment by manufacturing bogus opinion on the Internet, damaging social stability and national security.' China seized upon the London riots recently to justify tighter internet censorship. The article, of course, ends with the conclusion that 'Clearly, in the future when developing and applying new Internet technologies, there must first be a thorough assessment, adopting even more prudent policies and enhancing foresight and forward thinking in administration.' While this provides China with their Emmanuel Goldstein and his Brotherhood, it should be noted that the People's Daily is often over the top."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Calls For Even Firmer Internet Control

Comments Filter:
  • It's already a police State. Leave China's people alone!
  • that the worldwide million geek army disagrees. If they should choose to fight them, well , good luck.

    • by Ranguvar (1924024)

      that the worldwide million geek army disagrees. If they should choose to fight them, well , good luck.

      A million geeks versus ~619 million "fit for military service" in the People's Liberation Army?
      Sorry, but I'm buying Chinese on that one, despite my personal feelings about their government.

      • by drodal (1285636)
        they can't swim or have a navy.......
      • I don't know... a protracted internet guerilla war could make the Chinese lose alot of face, while giving the People's Liberation Army no cohesive army to fight. This "firmer stance" is intended to prevent exactly such a war.

        So I'm not sure who I'd bet on.

  • by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Friday September 02, 2011 @03:34PM (#37290246)

    ...criminal forces, hostile forces, terrorist organizations and others could manipulate public sentiment by manufacturing bogus opinion on the Internet, damaging social stability and national security.

    I wasn't aware that they got FOX News in China... :-)

  • v. "manipulate public sentiment by manufacturing bogus opinion on the Internet"; see Tienanmen Square

  • "Everyone loves us. See? There's nothing negative said about us online."

    "What about this right here."

    "Hold on a second. *delete* What right where?"

    "You're right. The people love us!"

  • It is long past time that we put on the ability to control access. If you look carefully at China's internet controls, they can be used EITHER way. It can be used to control their outbound, but it can also be used as a wall. With this approach, China is building a wall, but will have first strike capability on Western Computers. Now, if it only took out simply company and personal computers, no big deal. HOWEVER, it is not. Even our seperate networks are done virtually. Some ppl say that vlans are secure,
    • by Tomato42 (2416694)
      Internet is not considered a strategic asset.
      Quite ironic for a network that was designed to survive nuclear country-wide attack on US...
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I was recently trying to get some Hurricane Irene damage information from China.

    It was hard to do.

    An incredible number of links are blocked, often for no apparent reason.

    * Any host with "blog" as a substring of the name seems to be blocked.
    * Most, but not all, URLs with "video" in them are blocked.
    * Youtube is blocked.
    * Restricting a Google search to "past week" or "past month" somehow triggers blocking.

    Note, that all this is stuff that is (presumably) unintentionally blocked. I wasn't trying to get
    informa

  • Ok so Anonymous goes after BART for shutting down a few privately owned cell phone repeaters. But does nothing against China and all of the Free Speech bs that they pull?

    Protesting/hacking BART only inconvenienced the train riders that had nothing to do with the shutdown; however, Anonymous could look like they're doing something usefull by going after China...

    A bit of Robin Hood if you will..

    • Ok so Anonymous goes after BART for shutting down a few privately owned cell phone repeaters. But does nothing against China and all of the Free Speech bs that they pull?

      This implies that they are American; normal American citizens stand to gain no political victories by attacking China. By attacking the US government, however, they can at least have the warm feeling of shitting on the people who are shitting on them.

      • by Dan541 (1032000)

        Anonymous violated the privacy of BART customers.
        They are attacking American citizens, because they can.

    • by Dan541 (1032000)

      Anonymous opposes freedom of speech by censoring websites. Why would they be against china?

  • The Chinese government has always been interesting. On one hand they try to maintain an image as a normal, 21st century non-totalitarian state while on the other they are running a dictatorship. What I've always found to be impressive is that even with fairly loose travel restrictions people still return from western countries back to China.
    • What I've always found to be impressive is that even with fairly loose travel restrictions people still return from western countries back to China.

      That's because most people care about quality of life more than they do about political freedoms. Many disagree in words, but when you look at how they actually behave, it becomes evident.

      That, and - how easy do you think it actually is to emigrate from China? You can't just refuse to fly home, you have no visa. You can apply for refugee status, but "China is an oppressive state" is not by itself considered a good enough reason by any Western country (US included) - you need to demonstrate an actual threat

      • by kerrbear (163235)

        What I've always found to be impressive is that even with fairly loose travel restrictions people still return from western countries back to China.

        That's because most people care about quality of life more than they do about political freedoms.

        People also like to return to their culture and families. I have met some who have stayed. I have met some who just want to go home. And I have met some who, having tasted freedom, want to go back and fight.

  • it's nice to get a glimpse of the underlying totalitarian foundations of China. what a strange situation - sort of an inverse Potemkin village with most of the country participating in the world economy "for show", while a tiny, reclusive core of government holds all the strings. obviously, that core is not aiming the country on a path of western-style individual liberty. engagement with the West is just a practical technique to fill a billion mouths, to let the west provide advanced technology that can'

    • I don't think so. Their capitalism is not really "charade" - sure, the guys on top eye it closely to prevent anyone from straying too far away from "interests of the state", but by and large it still works as capitalism should, and the reason they have it internally is because it's better at feeding those mouths than Mao's traditionalist state-planned command economy was. This isn't some new idea - similar approaches were used with great success in fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, for example.

      Problem is that

  • It's not like some media here are calling for the same. Along with some politicians. Usually you get to see such a test balloon every now and then, just to test the waters and see how much of an outcry it causes. If it's not too bad, proceed. If it is, wait a year before you push it again.

    Or hope for some bomb to explode somewhere, some riots to break out or something else that allows you to call for more control of any medium that normal people can use to voice their opinion to more people than their immed

    • "And we're by no means any better than China."

      we are way, way better than china on the measure of freedom of expression, especially political expression

      i never really understood this mode of thinking where because we have some problems we are exactly the same as brutal regimes like iran or china

      it represents to me a lack of perspective or scale, and a frightening tendency to inflate hysteria and fear with reality

      i'll say it again: we are way, way better than china on the measure of freedom of expression

      if y

      • Ok, allow me to get more precise: SOME of the politicians that pretend to work for us are by no means different from the Chinese, and would gladly get the same leeway if there weren't pesky things like a constitution in their way.

        So what they do is to ask for similar restrictions in our freedoms. If the outcry is "manageable", they push the agenda. If it's not, we'll get to hear it again in a year.

        We, that is our politicians, are by no means different from China's. They just have more obstacles to overcome

        • i don't understand your point

          right now i can scream anything i want about obama or the republicans short of threatening lives

          the same right does not exist in china

          that means something concrete, valid, and important, and it certainly means we are better off than china

          you have to admit that difference or you look silly. if anything, to be a citizen of the usa or the west and not see the value of this difference in rights is the real failure here: that citizens are so clueless of their own rights that other pe

          • Yes, you may scream 'til your lungs explode. The first amendment protects speech. It does not protect your right to listen, though.

            In that sense you're right. You have the right to speak whatever you want. I'd just watch out if it is not what the powers that are want to hear AND you even get an audience.

            That's what's smart about our system, compared to China's. It gives you the pretense that you may voice your opinion.

            • "That's what's smart about our system, compared to China's. It gives you the pretense that you may voice your opinion."

              that's insane. you either voice your opinion or you don't. there's no pretense. you act like the genuine right to say whatever you want is some sort of fake right that has no meaning. what the hell is wrong with you?

              if we are ever going to lose our rights, it will due to people like you: people who don't appreciate their rights and discount them in the most contrived manner possible

              you have

  • ....Made by Shah of Iran, Mubarak, Gaddafi, Stalin, Saddam... The people do indeed prefer

    what they have, the system in place, to anarchy, violence, chaos, and disorder. They have been under the status quo for so long, they cannot imagine a world without the Party which isn't chaos, anarchy, and disorder.

    Argument makes a lot of sense and works very well, except that you will be the first against the wall come the revolution.

  • Its their country if that is what they want why should I be boo-hooing over the loss of china twitter? what the fuck ever

  • You can never stop the signal.

  • Oh it's the same whatever we say bullshit that other governments use.... well never mind then. I can get that from a six year old.

    Plus they're willing to say what I say until I give up... that's like circular logic++!

All warranty and guarantee clauses become null and void upon payment of invoice.

Working...