Internet Freedoms in China - Part 3 of 3

Even more divulging is the claim by Dr. Hung that the Ministry of Information Industry aimed this regulation at free, personal websites, rather than business enterprises. Thus far, thousands of personal websites have been shut down for failure to register. Shortly thereafter in July 2005, newer regulations were passed, requiring instant message users and bloggers to use their real names to log in online. These actions, whose alleged purpose was national security and social stability, were also highly recommended to universities by the Ministry of Education (Hung 14). In this case, Singapore and China utilize equally stringent policies to promote self-censorship in the public. Licensing functions to further intimidate those who may otherwise risk sharing and collecting information, because it requires the disclosure of one's identity. The reason why there exists such a wealth of information (whether good or bad) is likely attributable to the ability of anyone to share personal as well as academic ideas without the need for self-disclosure. Taking away anonymity is taking away new material out of that stagnant pool of information that is especially reinforced in one-party states such as China and Singapore.

The last significant measure taken by Singapore and China to limit internet freedom is nationwide surveillance of users and web spaces. These governments require ISPs to retain information on users that is collected in the course of their online activities, in addition to surveillance on cellular phones and mobile devices (Gomez 143). Chinese authorities exert more effort, by training and employing a reported 40,000 cyber police whose intended purpose as stated by China's People's Daily newspaper is "to intensify real-time monitoring, to intercept and delete harmful information and to capture and check illegal server data" (Hung 40). The roaring Chinese economy has even inspired "censorship entrepreneurs who, provide advanced text mining solutions to enable censors to monitor, forecast and manage online public opinion, thereby avoiding scandalous and damaging revelations" (OpenNet.net). These solutions have been used in situations such as that of a popular internet post in 2007 that exposed the kidnapping and forced slave labor of children at illegal brick kilns in Shanxi province. The post was promptly deleted as soon as the authorities were notified. China is able to maintain such penetrating and prompt measures largely due to its large bureaucracy (Yang 416). The bureaucracy also reduces the transparency of operations and makes it difficult for internet users to appeal unfair practices to higher levels of government. Internet surveillance and regulations that require licensing/registration are incredibly intrusive into and obstructive of socio-political and cultural discourse in Singapore and China. In fact, these two policies are further detrimental because they could deter some internet users from internet activity entirely. The fewer internet users there are posting and collecting ideas and information, the less information is circulated, and the self-reinforcing cycle of stagnation emerges once more.

The Chinese media's declining ranking by the RSF in the new millennium indicates that the progression of internet freedom is likely in decline as well. In 2004 the Chinese government deemed websites hosted by the CNN and BBC to be "subversive" websites, and restricted access to them with strict laws, jail sentences and even crackdowns on cybercafés. Case in point, in 2003, a Chinese activist was imprisoned for 8 years for posting content that aligned with the Chinese Democratic Party. In 1999, then Senior Minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew gave a speech at the Asian Media Conference stating that Singapore did not intend to block incoming information, rather to state its position on the information. Within a perplexing matter of minutes, he also admitted that “information technology is rapidly undermining whatever monopoly control of the media government might have had" (Hung 22). In addition, he Minister Yew spoke of the promising joint ventures between the Chinese media and U.S-based FOX network. Despite this, the government continues to monitor and regularly block television channels such as CNN and BBC World News. On April 20, 2006, CNN and BBC were repeatedly blocked, apparently to prevent viewers in China from seeing Wang Wenyi, a Falun Gong protester, heckling Chinese President Hu Jintao on the South Lawn of the White House during Hu’s official visit to the U.S (Chung 735). This reveals that while foreign media enterprises may be allowed to join the media networks in China and Singapore, their material is also subject to filtering, and surveillance. Every government retains the right to determine the policies it implements, however these policies seem redundant. What is the purpose of permitting foreign information via the internet if after the filtering, censorship, and surveillance processes, it is only available to a minority who has passed the licensing requirements?

A recurring theme, especially in the new millennium is the citation of "national security" as a reason for any and all measures to limit internet freedoms. These two words have become as common as grammatical articles in the English language, ever since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and as some scholars suspect, are used as an all-purpose cover for authoritarianism. Gomez states that “the repressive practices of media control, from the colonial era to post-colonial and contemporary governments, have been applied to the internet and the information carried by mobile information devices. Thus, to a large extent, the cyber security measures resulting from the ‘war against terrorism‘are simply an extension of existing censorship laws and surveillance strategies (145).Propaganda and other media control has likely not ceased to exist in China and Singapore, but has instead taken on a more digital and more ambiguous form (Kalathil 44).

The most distressing factor about China’s and Singapore’s authoritarian governments’ limitation on internet freedom is that it greatly reduces the democratizing power of the internet. I concur with Gomez when he implores that “democracy requires a public culture of participation”; the internet is presently the most promising tool for fostering democracy across borders but is under intense control. Given the opportunity to defend China and Singapore amongst other nations using similar policies, former Senior Minister of Singapore might say

  “The Internet is as much a purveyor of truth as it is of outright lies. Although it may take some time, morality and wisdom must find a way to control and tame the new technology to preserve the fundamental values of society by which parents bring up their children to be good citizens. In responding to this challenge of new technology, Asian societies will seek solutions different from those of the West” (lawac.org)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Wang, Stephanie. "China | OpenNet Initiative." ONI Home Page | OpenNet Initiative. 15 June 2009. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .
Chung, Jongpil. "Comparing Online Activities in China and South Kore." Asian Survey 8.5 (2008): 727-51. Ww.ucpressjournals.com. University of California. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .
Gomez, James. "Dumbing Down Democracy: Trends in Internet Regulation, Surveillance and Control in Asia." Pacific Journalism Review 10.2 (2004): 130-50. Auckland University of Technology. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .
Hassid, Jonathan. "Controlling the Chinese Media: An Uncertain Business." Asian Survey 48.3 (2008): 414-30. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. .
Kalathil, Shanthi. "Dot.com for Dictators." Foreign Policy 135 (2003): 42-49. Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. .
"The Media and Asia." Speech. World Affairs Council. Los Angeles. 19 Oct. 1998. Los Angeles World Affairs Council. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. .
"Media Development Authority - About Us." Media Development Authority - Home. Media Development Authority, 29 July 2009. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. .
"Press Freedom Index 2009." Reporters Sans Frontières. Reporters Sans Frontières. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. .
"World Economic Forum - Global Information Technology Report." World Economic Forum - Home. Ed. World Economic Forum. 26 Mar. 2009. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .
Yang, Gubon. "The Coevolution of the Internet and Civil Society in China." Asian Survey 43.3 (2003): 405-22. 2 Dec. 2003. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. .

Extra Extra,Read All About It! Global News Series coming to Nimo-ism

It has been obvious to me for quite awhile that my book review topics and other postings may not always be closely relevant to current events. {By the time I finish reading a book and reviewing it, the material may not be quite as 'hot off the presses}.While certain issues can almost always be considered current events, I have been wanting to incorporate current events,preferably in keeping with my blog's main topics; globalization, international relations, global economics/finance and international politics.

Enter: My new bi-weekly series titled " All The World's Estranged'. Eighty seconds is the amount of time it should take you to catch up on current events from around the world. The posts will be concise but will contain links for further information for those long Sundays for which spending hours catching up to the world simply seems appropriate. I will not designate specific days of the week for posting the series, although Tuesdays and Fridays seem best for keeping in the definition of the term 'current' :)

What will be different about this series from other news blogs and sites you ask? I aim to gather my information from a wide range of sources, from private and public, to independent sources in order to let you decide what is news and what isnt. In order to ensure comprehensive coverage, the news will be divided by continent- yes, even Antarctica!

Oh yes- the title. The title 'All The World's Estranged' is a play on words on the famous Shakespeare quote "all the world's a stage" from his play As You Like It. Jacques, a malcontent Lord  from the Exiled Court of Duke Senior in the Forest of Arden opines;

 Act II Scene VII

All the world's a stage

And all the men and women merely players

They have their exits and their entrances

And one man in his time plays many parts

His acts being seven ages

I do not concur with Thomas Friedman's view that the world is flat, nevertheless I find it a futile effort to deny that globalization has smoothed out some curves on the international relations landscape. The global interconnectivity of goods, services, ideologies and cultures has significantly contracted the conceptual distance between physically distant supply and demand marriages. As borders come down , the saying 'it's a small world' seems more relevant and simultaneouly, current events of one country are regurgiated by popular news media world wide, feeding into the idea that globalization = homogeneity.

All the world's a stage, indeed, but the monologue and dialogue of the players differ. Globalization brings the world to our fingertips, and the task at hand {pun intendend} is to determine the associations and correlations relayed by the information we have access to. In lieu of dealing with the seven stages of a man's life  pronounced byShakespeare's Jacques, I will attempt to provide snippets of associations in current events, from the seven grand theatres -Asia,Africa, Antarctica,Australia, Europe, North America and  South America.

Curtain Up.

The Works of William Shakespeare

Internet Freedoms in China - Part 2 of 3

Has the use of mass media in China and Singapore changed over time, or have new technologies simply been used to further traditional mass media enterprise?

PART 2

Dr. Chin-fu Hung of the National Cheng Kung University in Taiwan reminds us that the mass media has traditionally been used by authoritarian governments as tools of propaganda (20). China may not be specifically generating propaganda, but by disallowing any idea opposed to the ruling political party, a silent form of propaganda is maintained. Repressing the political ideas of those who do not absolutely agree with the Four Cardinal Principles creates a reinforcing cycle of ignorance. Pioneers, scholars and youth who may have novel ideas do not get to share them and simultaneously, those who may be interested in their ideas do not get access to them. The amount of academic, socio-cultural and political information in the country's circulation is stagnated as long as it represents the ancient views of the ruling party which has been in power for the recent history of China’s self-governance . While technological advance may continue in such an environment, it does not benefit from the creative participation of society.

Singapore's political propaganda comes in the form of its restrictive policies on electoral campaigning via the internet. Survey and poll data can no longer be published for campaign purposes as of 2001, as supported by the Minister for Information and the Arts, Lee Yock Suan. In a public speech to Parliament, Suan claimed that surveys and polls "gave the illusion of reflecting public opinion but were often based on small sample sizes, bad question design and improper sampling, which led to inaccurate and slanted results" (Gomez 137). Those in opposition saw this as an attempt to curb the success of their campaigns; however the more important issue is that without what few objective polls may have existed, the information provided by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) will likely be biased. Biased information purported to be objective public opinion is essentially masked propaganda and at any rate, an even cloudier illusion.

In addition to censorship of political and socio-cultural ideas, both China and Singapore use filtering systems to screen information incoming to their networks, before it ever reaches internet users. OpenNet Initiative is a non-partisan organization that studies internet filtering and surveillance practices in countries across the globe. According to their website OpenNet.net, China has allocated billions of dollars to building one of the largest and most advanced filtering systems in the world. The studies also reveal that the Chinese government focuses resources on restricting access to any content that potentially undermines the state's control or social stability, by enforcing strict supervision of domestic media, imposing liability on online content providers, and increasingly, a propaganda approach to online debate and discussion (OpenNet.net). James Gomez summons us to consider which one of these national priorities are threatened by the gay and lesbian community. In 2001, the Chinese government proposed the use of website-rating systems as an additional measure of over-reaching oversight. In Hong Kong, the most internet-liberal region of China, the government began rating websites representing the gay and lesbian community as "harmful media" and required that this rating be displayed on the websites by the owners. Filtering software for minors was also required to be installed by the owners, with imprisonment as a consequence of refusal (Gomez 135). These measures are inappropriately harsh, as they do not address the stated priorities of national and public security. In its effort to create and maintain social stability, the Chinese government is enforcing a cultural mandate that not only shelters its society without society members’ consideration but also oppresses a part of that society.

The Chinese government has no intention of performing all filtering tasks on its own. Website hosts are installing keyword filtering software under pressure, and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) as well as Internet Content Providers (ICPs) also filter “politically sensitive" websites (Chung 734). ISPs and ICPs gain access to the internet through inter-connecting networks created during the Golden Bridge Project. The networks are owned by the government, so the ISPs and ICPs are forced to cooperate with the government in order to stay in business. Along with internet café owners, they are entrusted to report anyone involved in the creation, replication, retrieval and transmission of information that falls under nine categories. These categories include material that spreads rumors, promote cults and feudal superstitions, and materials that insult or slander others (Hung 11-12). It seems that for every appropriate measure taken by the Chinese government, another politically inconsonant one is tacked onto the same regulation. Pairing insult with slander or terrorism with gambling in the same regulation or under the same priority is the equivalent of pork barreling measures used in democratic legislative bodies; all are efforts to mislead others into approving of something they otherwise might not.

The MDA in Singapore has significantly less conservative regulations on internet filtering. According to the OpenNet Initiative, filters are used mainly for pornographic websites, and in fact not all such websites are blocked, rather the most popular ones. This reveals that the MDA generally aims to make a statement about its disapproval of this material, but does not focus extensive technological resources on actually filtering every single website, as is the case with China. An alternative preferred by the SDP and the MDA is a combination of legal and political persuasion, both of which result in the intended objective of self-censorship. To see the influence of the pair, one can review the effect on all media providers, as shown by Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF) {Reporters Without Borders}. RSF is a Paris-based NGO promoting world press freedom, which discloses press freedom statistics worldwide in an annual online report. In 2009, Singapore’s press freedom is ranked 133thrd (up by 7) out of 175 countries, and China was ranked 168 (down by 9). The report supports that although Singapore’s filtering system for political, religious, and ethnic content is primarily low-tech, it is effective nonetheless.

Threats of lawsuits, fines, and criminal prosecution are enough incentive for Chinese and Singaporean internet users to censor themselves, but yet another measure is utilized. Licensing is used in both countries, at as many levels as bureaucracy will allow. The government of Singapore requires that ISPs, ICPs and any political or religious groups with websites to register with the MDA .They must obtain a license before operating a website and as licensees; ISPs and ICPs are bound by the MDA’s Internet Code of Practice. As recently as 2005, the Chinese authorities tightened its controlling grip by implementing the Computer Information Network and International Internet Security Protection and Administration Regulations, which require that all website operators register their sites with the local Public Security Bureau within thirty days of operation(Hung 14).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Wang, Stephanie. "China | OpenNet Initiative." ONI Home Page | OpenNet Initiative. 15 June 2009. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://opennet.net/research/profiles/china#footnote38_1j5nfzr>.

Chung, Jongpil. "Comparing Online Activities in China and South Kore." Asian Survey 8.5 (2008): 727-51. Ww.ucpressjournals.com. University of California. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://ucpressjournals.com/journal.asp?j=as>.

Gomez, James. "Dumbing Down Democracy: Trends in Internet Regulation, Surveillance and Control in Asia." Pacific Journalism Review 10.2 (2004): 130-50. Auckland University of Technology. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.pjreview.info/>.

Hassid, Jonathan. "Controlling the Chinese Media: An Uncertain Business." Asian Survey 48.3 (2008): 414-30. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. <http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/pqdlink?index=3&did=1507544931&SrchMode=3&sid=1&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1256691609&clientId=4305&aid=1>.

Kalathil, Shanthi. "Dot.com for Dictators." Foreign Policy 135 (2003): 42-49. Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. <www.jstor.org>.

"The Media and Asia." Speech. World Affairs Council. Los Angeles. 19 Oct. 1998. Los Angeles World Affairs Council. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. <http://www.lawac.org/speech/pre%20sept%2004%20speeches/yew.html>.

"Media Development Authority - About Us." Media Development Authority - Home. Media Development Authority, 29 July 2009. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. <http://www.mda.gov.sg/wms.www/aboutus.aspx>.

"Press Freedom Index 2009." Reporters Sans Frontières. Reporters Sans Frontières. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. <http://www.rsf.org/en-classement1003-2009.html>.

"World Economic Forum - Global Information Technology Report." World Economic Forum - Home. Ed. World Economic Forum. 26 Mar. 2009. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.weforum.org/en/initiatives/gcp/Global%20Information%20Technology%20Report/index.htm>.

Yang, Gubon. "The Coevolution of the Internet and Civil Society in China." Asian Survey 43.3 (2003): 405-22. 2 Dec. 2003. Web. 19 Oct. 2009. <http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/pdf/10.1525/as.2003.43.3.405>.