Misconceptions about China's internet

It’s one of those maddening numbers, a “fact” about China that takes on a life of its own. It is this: China has 30,000 “internet police” who sterilize content on the web for China’s 162 million internet users.

China does many things to filter the internet, including blocking certain overseas websites and deleting controversial blogs and postings on domestic forums.

But it was interesting to hear Rebecca MacKinnon, journalist-cum-academic, talk yesterday to the Foreign Correspondents Club about misconceptions of censorship in China.

First off, much of the control of the internet in China comes from private companies that host blogs and aggregate news. These are huge companies like sina.com, sohu.com, baidu.com and tom.com that are listed on overseas stock exchanges, often with huge multiples and valuations in the billions of dollars.

Sina maintains many monitors, censors, call them what you will. Are they considered part of China’s “internet police” force? What about the students who volunteer to “guide” conversations on university bulletin boards?

“Much of the internet control would not work without voluntary private compliance,” said MacKinnon, who used to be a CNN correspondent and now is an assistant professor of new media at Hong Kong University. “It’s a much, much more subtle picture than outsiders often get.”

Portals know when bloggers on their websites push the envelope. Company liaisons start getting phone calls. The stakes are huge. The portals could be closed themselves. So they are often vigorous in policing themselves.

“They say, ‘If we don’t do this, our business will get shut down,’” MacKinnon said, and the result is a drag on innovation.

MacKinnon said the estimate of 30,000 internet police came from a California researcher who extrapolated from a wide variety of sources.

Somehow the figure captured the imagination of journalists and researchers, and became etched as a fact. Whether the real number is more or less, no one knows.

MacKinnon also discussed the role of U.S. companies like Yahoo!, Google, Microsoft and Cisco in enabling Chinese authorities to control content. I'll get into that in a different post.

In other tidbits, MacKinnon said:

/ No one ever imagined that China would cope with the changes wrought by the internet as well as it has. No one has used the internet successfully to organize opposition groups. So maybe researchers need to rethink this equation: internet=freedom. The internet in China “has changed lifestyles but it hasn’t changed ideology.”

She mentioned a May 2005 column by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof that suggested broadband would hasten the demise of the Chinese Communist Party. Click here to read that. Hasn’t happened yet.

/ A survey shows 71 percent of Chinese never use proxy servers to skirt the Great Firewall of China, the digital barrier to websites abroad that China finds distasteful. But even sophisticated Chinese often don’t notice the extent the internet is censored.

/ That is because “ a lot of people are just not interested in politics anyway, and just use the internet for entertainment purposes,” she said.

Here’s the Reuters story on her talk.

Comments

[nanheyangrouchuan]

Haven't heard the "not interested in politics" line in s a while. And that is completely false, what do you think all of those old people in the park talk about? In the tea houses? Would "being harmonized" be such a joke in the Chinese blogosphere if Chinese didn't pay attention to politics?

[Tim J]

That's 71 percent of 162 million people. That means, if the estimate is correct and can be extrapolated, that 50 million ARE interested in politics. Doesn't strike me as far-fetched at all. Walk into any internet cafe in China, and most everybody is playing online games.

[nanheyangrouchuan]

Any percentage discounts such a broad, sweeping, foolish statement such as "they don't care about politics".

Awareness is rising as people have access to information and they realize the impact that political decisions have on their lives.

[Dan the Man]

What Tim J said. The 71% probably isn't much different than the US. Also the New York already wrote an article basically saying the same thing as Mackinnon. Link is here.

[nanheyangrouchuan]

It is also true that Chinese people are good at hiding what they are really thinking. Ask a Chinese person and they will tell you that. This practice goes back to when neighbors informed on neighbors and children informed on their parents during the CR. So on the surface, no one in China pays attention to politics. Beneath the surface, still waters run deep.

[MAC]

A few different ramblings:

Wasn't the "30k internet police" figure quoted from a Chinese official? I know this is one of those China figures that's repeated so much that it's beaten into my head, but I thought I remembered that originating from the Chinese side, not some wild western estimate. Could be wrong.

I don't think that 71% not circumventing the GFW is especially high, I'm actually stunned at how low that seems. Doesn't seem to jibe with other surveys I've seen that say things like, what, 3% of users look at foreign sites, and that entertainment is the most popular news category? I'd be somewhat surprised just to be told that 29% of users bumped into blocked sites enough to even become aware of them, (sure, if you use Google Wikipedia will often be at the top of results for a single term, but not on Baidu*) let alone that 29% are actively getting around the controls. I suppose I don't observe too many Chinese people's personal internet-use habits up close, though.

*In fact, just what is the deal with Baidu? Does it search Chinese/sites in China only? It only lets you specify simplified/traditional Chinese sites or "all languages," and an "all languages" search gets almost exclusively Chinese pages; a search for "Sri Lanka" (it's on my mind lately, so I punched it in) gave 208 thousand results in Baidu and 218 MILLION in Google. With the seemingly stripped-down and "safe" Baidu having something like 75% market share, it definitely seems like that would be another factor making it unlikely for so many people to be running into so much blocked content that they'd try to get around it.

And I agree that a lot of people don't care about politics much. Even a lot of people who have gripes often don't particularly care to go out of their way to read more.

In conclusion, I can hardly authoritatively say the 71% figure is wrong, but it's certainly surprising to me. I'd like to know more about how that survey was conducted.

Damn, maybe I should just get my own blog.

[Falen]

Yes, in the imaginary world of nanheyangrouchuan, all Chinese are in fact thinking about how to bring about the "permanent deconstruction of China" following the steps outlined in the "Blueprint". Indeed, only if Chinese are allowed to speak their mind they'd all support US invasion for a regime change in Beijing and implement an Iraq style democracy. In fact, if only those 71 percent of the people not interested in politic are allowed their say they'd actually play less World of Warcraft, Counterstrike, Lineage etc etc etc or chatting on QQ, and organize a grass root movement to overthrow CCP...

[john]

I like Rebecca's writings but she is so wrong about the amount of web control in China. It is there in so many ways - well at least in Beijing. There are blocks in all parts of the system and they continuosuly frustrate and annoy you. OK, maybe most Chinese people aren't politically active on a national level -but ask them if they mind having their house knocked down or their business licence revoked and I bet they are.
I'd sat the figures for internet police are a major UNDER estimate.

[Pffefer]

My impression is people in most parts of the world don't care about politics, especially the young people. Is it that different in the US?

[nanheyangrouchuan]

@Falen:

You said it, I didn't.

@john: spot on.

@pffefer: you mean like those young people in Myanmar who just got stomped on by their own army because they marched down a street? Like jailed AIDS and environmental activists in China? Like voters in Europe? Labor rights protestors in France?

You really are a dumb, old turd pffefer.

[Pffefer]

nh, so? The vast majority of them, including the Americans give a rat's ass about these? They don't. Do you give a damn that the PRC is a totalitarian state? You don't, other than spouting the same old anti-Chinese garbage that you are paid to do, what else do you do? Are you going to organize a demonstration in major Chinese cities? Are you planning to overthrow the CCP? I bet you don't have the guts and the brain to do that. What the hell do you do all day? Cursing the PRC and the Chinese, breathing the Chinese air (albeit dirty) yet asking others to boycott China. You are just a piece of useless Da Bian, nh.

What ya gonna do? Cry?

[MAC]

I'm not going to get in the middle of this crap, let me go back a few posts to John-

Although I have my doubts about some of the figures, I'm not sure MacKinnon is that far off. What she's saying probably sounds like downplaying if you're in China and have to use a proxy server to look at wikipedia, major blog services, human rights reports, or outside websites (Chinese and English) dedicated to collating China news, and you see posts on major web portals disappear and now these cartoon policemen walking across your screen every 30 minutes, then yeah, the controls are pretty obvious.

But you have to remember that a lot of people who've never been to China seem to think that you run the risk of being arrested for punching "democracy" into Google, and that outside news sites are all blocked.* I think MacKinnon's just trying to counter some of these ridiculous misconceptions.

*Although I can access most mainstream news sites, (including some that, if I remember right, may have been blocked when I first spent time in China in 2001) it does seem that bbc.co.uk is blocked in Beijing. You can access the main page and the innocuous sections, but never the news section. Sports seems to be blocked too; I thought I could access that before, but maybe the recent sports stories unflattering to China has prompted a block.

[nanheyangrouchuan]

"The vast majority of them, including the Americans give a rat's ass about these? They don't. Do you give a damn that the PRC is a totalitarian state?"

Americans are waking up to who they are really buying their cheap junk from, and stores are carrying alot more non-made in China products.

I can just keep on doing what I am doing and be effective pfeffer, you are already crying so I have succeeded.
bitch.

[Tim J]

Gentlemen, I won't accept vulgarity on this blog, either in English or in pinyin Chinese. I'm referring to Nanheyangrouchuan and Pfeffer. This is a warning. I'll begin to use the delete key. If you guys want to slug it out, do so in language that could appear in a newspaper.

[Pffefer]

Nh, every four years there is a surge of China-bashing in the US, only the most politically ignorant Americans believe this has nothing to do with local/American domestic politics and the election. The PRC is the convenient scapegoat, it has been blamed for most of America's economic woes. With the upcoming Olympic Games that none of you will boycott, it is being scrutinized more than ever. It is true that a lot of Chinese made stuff is pure crap, those of us live in the PRC know that. But the way the western press has been painting this is misleading, to say the least. According to the FDA report, a lot more shipments of food products from India and Mexico were rejected in 2006 than those from the PRC. But do you see the American getting hysterical over Indian or Mexican made food? No. To quote Bill O'Reilly, "it is a smear campaign". :-)

[A B]

Um, Indian and Mexican food ingredient imports to the US did not kill a lot of dogs and cats, causing a massive recall of pet food. Nor did Indian and Mexican made pharmaceutical ingredients (if you don't count illegal drugs exported from Mexico) cause the death of children who took cough syrup.

India is a large maker and exporter of pharmaceuticals and ingredients, and historically, they have had a good record.

Mexico's record on food exports is admittedly mixed, but the record of US operated farms there is pretty good.

Mind you, the Indian pharmaceutical export industries are dominated by very large MNCs who have a reputation to protect.

Chinese exporters, in contrast, run the range from tiny stalls (nothing more than a telephone and an internet address), to large trading companies that are state owned. In the case of the fraud with glycerin, a state owned trading company was involved who bought the stuff from a small shop and accepted its certificate of analysis uncritically.

Until the recent scandal, there was (and still is) very little government or industry policing of standards, certificates, tracking of material from raw materials to finished product batch by batch, secure handling / anti-tampering packaging of pharmaceutical and food ingredients, serious policing and severe penalties that actually are uniformly applied to back up the system.

The real scandal is not the quality of food / ingredients exported to the USA, but the quality of the same things on the domestic Chinese market.

The Chinese government expressly admits that the problem is much worst in the domestic market.

Shouldn't it be the other way around? 2nd rate stuff flogged off on foreigners, and the best stuff reserved for the Chinese themselves?

I would hope that one day, the Chinese government will value the life of their own citizens higher than that of foreigners.

[nanheyangrouchuan]

Between 6-4 and about 2 years ago, there was only praise for China, its "miracle" and the dearth of, ahem, high quality products it provides from both regular Americans and Wall St (especially Wall St.).

And as for the poisonous products, the US didn't take notice until people, including many children, started getting very sick and dying in Latin America. But I doubt in your mind that matters at all, only the US's stance toward China matters. Subsequent reviews of FDA inspection policy by the GAO showed that the FDA has been turning a blind eye towards Chinese imports.

And quoting Bill O does nothing for your credibility, pfeffer.

[Pffefer]

American children died because of taking Chinese made cough syrup? When? Where? How many? I'd admit that I am not that well-informed, but how did I miss this one?

If the FDA has been turning a blind eye toward Chinese imports, what's indicating that they have not been turning a blind eye toward imports from other countries? What? The Chinese bribed and penetrated the FDA?

I agree with AB that the Chinese government should place the well-being of the Chinese citizens much ahead of that of the foreigners. Unfortunately, China's weakness has been paying too much attention to what foreigners say about her (most of the time they have no idea), i.e, face. Truly sad.

[A B]

94 deaths in Panama from tainted medicine

Antifreeze chemical found in drugs made by Chinese company
The Associated Press
Updated: 10:28 a.m. ET July 5, 2007

PANAMA CITY - A top Panamanian prosecutor said tests show at least 94 people have died from taking medicine contaminated with diethylene glycol since July 2006 and that 293 more deaths are under investigation.

Investigations revealed the chemical was made by a Chinese company that fraudulently passed it off as 99.5 percent pure glycerin, a sweetener commonly used in drugs, to a Spanish company. That company sold it to Panama’s Medicom SA, which sold it to a government laboratory.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19611858/

[A B]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/world/americas/06poison.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

May 6, 2007
From China to Panama, a Trail of Poisoned Medicine
By WALT BOGDANICH and JAKE HOOKER

The kidneys fail first. Then the central nervous system begins to misfire. Paralysis spreads, making breathing difficult, then often impossible without assistance. In the end, most victims die.

Many of them are children, poisoned at the hands of their unsuspecting parents.

Panama is the most recent victim. Last year, government officials there unwittingly mixed diethylene glycol into 260,000 bottles of cold medicine — with devastating results. Families have reported 365 deaths from the poison, 100 of which have been confirmed so far.

Beyond Panama and China, toxic syrup has caused mass poisonings in Haiti, Bangladesh, Argentina, Nigeria and twice in India.

In the Panama case, names of suppliers were removed from shipping documents as they passed from one entity to the next, according to records and investigators. That is a practice some traders use to prevent customers from bypassing them on future purchases, but it also hides the provenance of the product.

The first distributor was the Beijing trading company, CNSC Fortune Way, a unit of a state-owned business that began by supplying goods and services to Chinese personnel and business officials overseas.

As China’s market reach expanded, Fortune Way focused its business on pharmaceutical ingredients, and in 2003, it brokered the sale of the suspect syrup made by the Taixing Glycerine Factory. The manufacturer’s certificate of analysis showed the batch to be 99.5 percent pure.

Whether the Taixing Glycerine Factory actually performed the test has not been publicly disclosed.

[nanheyangrouchuan]

pfeffer:

Don't think China exports higher quality stuff out of goodness of its heart. You are right about "face" when it comes to China's exports but also Chinese customers have no real way of redressing their product issues.
Fake milk formula? Out of all the sick and dead babies across many provinces, only a handful of factory managers went to jail. How many cadres in the provincial in local gov'ts were involved? Chinese like AB have every right to be upset.

Scab

[Scum]

How about an editorial cartoon showing large quantities of high quality, well made, safe, sanitary Chinese Exports going to USA being loaded on ships at a dockyard behind a fence with a sign that says, "No Chinese, No Dogs"?

And a little stand beside it that sells rejects to the domestic Chinese market?

[Pffefer]

Sure the Chinese and foreign customers have every reason to be upset or even angry, but this whole thing about "Made in China" has been blown out of proportion by the western media in an effort to coordinate with western governments, especially the US government to score a political and economic point. Thanks to them, "Made in China" is being equated to pure crap in the US, and that's just BS. I assume you all live in the PRC, including that obnoxious professional China-basher, how many of you have been victims of shoddy Chinese made stuff? How many of you have become sick or injured because of living in the PRC? Do you think painting everything made in China as "crap" will help the US lower its deficit? Do you think this will force the Chinese government to revalue Yuan? In the run-up to the Beijing Olympics, we will be hearing all sorts of things about the PRC and we just have to be cognizant and prudent. Background noise will remain just background noise.

I think what happened lately is a blessing for China and its people. I am glad to see the Chinese government, despite being defensive initially, accepted the responsibility and introduced more vigorous measures to ensure product safety and quality. In the long run this will help "Made in China".

[nanheyangrouchuan]

"but this whole thing about "Made in China" has been blown out of proportion by the western media in an effort to coordinate with western governments,"

And it started with the Latin American media...those scoundrels.

[A B]

Not that I care much about the Government of Panama, who is available for purchase for not a heck of a lot of money (ask Manuel... or MOFA Taipei), there is a legitimate problem with the quality of exports from China.

China is now close to being the world's largest exporter.
Accordingly, being a major player comes with it responsibilities and obligations. One of these obligations is to ensure that by and large, major exporters from China play by generally accepted international rules and norms.

While it is true that any buyer need to be primarily responsible for the quality of what they buy(caveat emptor), there are exceptions to this.

The Government of China cannot be held accountable for every shipment by every entity in China, public or private. Nor can the Government be held responsible for the failures and acts of negligence of buyers who use contract manufacturers.

However, China's government do have an obligation to ensure fair and honest dealing with foreigners with its state owned companies (even if it is owned by a local government). The trading company that exported the fraudulent glycerin after buying it from a small vendor is a state owned trading corporation. Similarly, the other international companies that purchased the product have obligations and liability for their failure to uncover the glycerin fraud before people died.

On a higher level, the Government of China have a vested interest in protecting the integrity of its Brand, and where inspections programs are in place (e.g. inspections of exported foodstuff), a legal obligation to ensure that the inspections are done properly, fairly, and shipments generally meet the minimum standards published by the government and reasonably expected by a foreign buyer.

While it is possible for the Government of China to eliminate these problems by prohibiting state owned firms from exporting (directly or indirectly), or to eliminate all inspections of exports and relying on the free market to weed out problems, it would be a radical departure and likely to result in disruptions to the Chinese economy.

The other option, is to take the complaints, where legitimate, to heart, and systematically begin to implement a system of regulation of industry and exports that is commensurate with China's present size, statue, and aspirations to be a great trading power like Japan, Republic of Korea, and the USA.

If that is China's goal: to develop a brand / image / and substance of a great trading power where 'Made in China' is synonymous with 'well made in China', then the Government have a lot of work to do.

It was not that long ago when exports from Japan, Republic of Korea, Taiwan, were regarded as shoddy, third rate, and cheap.

The reason these economies no longer have this problem is rather than react belligerently to complaints, they listened, learned, and fixed their problems over time until their products developed reputations as being better than those Made in USA - the World War II standard.

The question is, is the Government of China up to the task?

They need to do this not because of the foreigners' complaints, but for themselves.

There will come a time when 1.5 billion Chinese awake to the reality that they are deluged with shoddy, defective, adulterated products when foreigners are able to purchase high grade products (often made by the same firms) for export.

If the Government do not change with the times as aspirations and demands of their own people
increase, the outcome is predictable.