Chinese Man On Trial For Spreading False Rumors Online 53
hackingbear writes: "Qin Zhihui, a user of the Chinese Twitter-like website Weibo, has confessed in court to spreading false rumors about the Chinese government in the first public trial under a Chinese crackdown on online rumors. China has threatened criminal penalties against anyone who spreads rumors on microblogs that are reposted more than 500 times, or seen by more than 5,000 users. Qin invented a story that the government gave 200m yuan (US$32m) in compensation to the family of a foreign passenger killed in a high-speed train crash in 2011 in order to incite hatred to the government which gave much lower compensation to Chinese nationals. The Chinese government did have policies in the past to give more compensations to foreigners than locals in disasters, though those policies have been phased out in recent years. Online rumours are particularly pervasive in China, where traditional media is heavily regulated by the government and public trust in the media is low."
China oppresses free speech... (Score:3)
is libel or slander? (Score:1)
either way, it's not protected by free speech, even in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you assume the American public is not capable of locating other media outlets across the world? Do you think you are some how smarter then everyone else? It's becoming harder everyday to get to the truth about anything. Media outlets with prejudicial and biased editorial lines publish nothing more than opinions which are usually derived from information taken out of context and purposely omitting any facts that would contradict the publishers predetermined stance. It's become a competition between th
Re: (Score:2)
No. We have to hunt for news while you've got it all in "megamarts" and most see no need to go beyond Fox or whatever news source they have because it seems to provide everything.
Even if I tune into one 24 hour radio station I get programs from four different partners around the world, and they announce who they are which makes me aware of where to look on the net for varied news sources. In a news "megamart" that doesn't happen - no perceived need
Typo (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ala TV and so-called news which is really just a literal media monopoly
Not even close. Though there is something of a monopsony with the US government providing news of US government activities and access to US government officials.
Re: (Score:1)
Even in the US saying/writing something incorrect is still not libel/slander without proving malicious intent which is, as you mentioned, has a high bar. It's why the former Weekly World News, National Enquirer, etc. can get away with printing lots of nonsense.
Pay attention (Score:3)
I heard a rumor that China's official media.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
HAH! (Score:1)
Schrodinger is right! Or isn't he?
Re: (Score:2)
I could have sworn that was a guy named Cash.
So... (Score:2)
... it's kind of like a Chinese Snopes, except you go to jail rather than being unfriended.
In other news... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Embryo or adult feet?
Why lie? (Score:2)
The Chinese government does enough shitty stuff for real.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This one is too easy to check. You ask a Chinese victim and a foreign victim how much they got paid. I also noticed that the Guardian piece did not weigh in on whether or not he lied. I would think that the reporter would check something like that.
Re: (Score:2)
You ask a Chinese victim and a foreign victim how much they got paid.
The victims would be dead. You're not going to get very far with that approach. It also probably is illegal for the families of Chinese victims (should you happen to find them somehow) to give you that information. If not, the bureaucracy can always make it illegal whenever they feel like it.
Re: (Score:2)
It also probably is illegal for the families of Chinese victims (should you happen to find them somehow) to give you that information.
Yet more baseless accusations. If you know it is illegal then prove it. Otherwise you are just spreading a rumor.
If not, the bureaucracy can always make it illegal whenever they feel like it.
Who cares what they can do. It is what they do is important.
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares what they can do. It is what they do is important.
Because what they can do is the primary constraint on what they actually do.
The fourtuine cookie (Score:1)
A source told me he was a CIA asset (Score:2)
developed by agent Annie Walker.
Libel has been around as long as the written word. (Score:1)
Why is this news?