Talk:Censorship in China - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TheSoundAndTheFury (talk | contribs) at 00:49, 20 May 2012 (→Empty sections deleted: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:49, 20 May 2012 by TheSoundAndTheFury (talk | contribs) (→Empty sections deleted: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

China C‑class Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Page created

I've changed this page from a redirect to Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China to an article on general censorship in China. Here's a possible general outline for the article I came up with:

Intro paragraph

==History==

==Censored mediums==

==See also==

==References==

==External links==

Reporters Without Borders

There seem to be attempts at poisoning the well in the sentence discussing Reporters Without Borders' assessment of censorship in the PRC: "Reporters Without Borders, an organization partly financed by the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, which is funded by the Taiwanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ranks China's press situation as "Very serious", the worst ranking on their five-point scale." This sentence is not only a run-on, but it seems to be an attempt to turn the reader against Reporters Without Borders, inserting ancillary information that is not required in THIS article. If the original author would like to place this information in the article about Reporters Without Borders, it would be better placed there. The obvious implication, that RWB is somehow being impelled to smear China because it is funded by Taiwan, is distracting and obviously NPOV. The other two NGOs seem to corroborate RWBs claims, so is it really necessary to attempt to defame RWB in such an obvious way? I am deleting this sentence as of 9/18/09. Icetitan17 (talk) 03:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Psiphon

Psiphon is a software project designed by University of Toronto's Citizen Lab under the direction of Professor Ronald Deibert, Director of the Citizen Lab. Psiphon is a circumvention technology that works through social networks of trust and is designed to help Internet users bypass content-filtering systems setup by governments, such as China, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and others.

"We're aiming at giving people access to sites like Misplaced Pages," a free, user-maintained online encyclopedia, and other information and news sources, Michael Hull, psiphon's lead engineer, told CBC News Online.

pornography

Although there are some political reasons, but those are not the main reasons. The pornography is also a very common reason that China bans movies. Please do not always blame China politically, there are also some common reasons such as US and Canada's. Movies are movies, please don't always see it politically. Anthony Feb 11,2007

Where in the article does it say that pornography is banned for political reasons?--Daveswagon 00:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe it's political pornography? -- megA (talk) 19:38, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

PRC vs Mainland

I don't think this article needs to substitute "Mainland China" for "PRC". The intro to the article explains that the censorship does not apply in Hong Kong and Macao, so I see no reason to clumsily refer back to Mainland China over and over again.--Daveswagon 02:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

That's the official NPOV policy on Misplaced Pages. Avoid using People's Republic of China or China in place of mainland China is in fact much clearer, more accurate and more consistent, and avoid making readers confused. Since the policy is already a result of consensus, no discussion and consensus building process would be necessary when it's applied to entries in the main namespace, unless there're disputes around the applicability of the policy to a particular entry. See also user talk:Daveswagon. — Insta ntnood 15:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

No, it isn't an official NPOV policy. SchmuckyTheCat 16:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Attempting to use a naming guideline as a guise to restrict the scope of an article can hardly be considered "NPOV" policy.--Huaiwei 17:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The official NPOV policy clearly provides that China or Chinese should not be used in place of People's Republic of China. Neither should China be used in place of mainland China. In what way did my edit restrict the scope of this article? Detail the reasons why and the rationale by referring to "difference between revisions" (i.e. ), if you are serious with your allegations. — Insta ntnood 17:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The NPOV policy does not make such a declaration. It is the naming conventions for Chinese names which does so, so quit attempting to insist the existance of an "NPOV policy" above to lend weight to your argument. Do you have further evidence to show if either document contains any direct instruction, even if explicit, on a requirement to restrict the scope of articles for the sake of "NPOV"?--Huaiwei 18:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The specific section in that official guideline is named "Political NPOV". In what way did I ever restrict the scope of this article? What I had done was merely to avoid using China and Chinese in place of People's Republic of China or mainland China. The scope of this article was kept intact. — Insta ntnood 19:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Every other article about national censorship uses the title format "Censorship in (country name)". It would be a break with continuity to rename this article. Furthermore, I know some Chinese who believe that the Mainland encompasses Hong Kong and Macao as well, which makes such a title even more inappropriate.--Daveswagon 23:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the central government of the PRC itself does not directly exercise any administrative power over the two special administrative regions. Such power is rested in the governments of the two special administrative regions. Therefore the subject matter of this article remains censorship in the mainland. Afterall the PRC is the among the few, if not only, sovereign states to maintain such a way of separation with respect to its special territories. It's true that some Hong Kong businessmen who have business interests across the border own newspapers, and these newspapers may have some form of self-censorship, but that's not censorship by the PRC over the Hong Kong press. — Insta ntnood 11:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Daveswagon -- In an article about censorship, which is so different between the PRC / Mainland China, HK and Macau, it is important not to mix those places up. It's irrelevant what "some Chinese" may personally believe. Almost all academic papers and news reports consider Hong Kong and PRC / Mainland China to be different entities. Pumpkin —Preceding undated comment added 20:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC).

Internet flooding

What is it called when a government floods the internet with information of a different kind rather than actually censoring anything? A few people are trying to get an article created about just such a phenomenon, and what China has to do with it, over here (it is a rough draft in user space). Any help would be appreciated. The article has had a spotty history; it has been deleted once and is now up for a deletion review over here. Esn 01:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like disinformation. If you're accusing China of this, I hope you have some citation-worthy sources back up your claim.--Daveswagon 01:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

There's a Guardian article over here. Esn 01:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

"Legal Basis" section required

Could someone please, please undertake a section along the lines of:

legal basis

legislative definitions

It is very difficult to separate the simplifications commonly found in the press from what the actual policy and laws are (in almost any non-English speaking country).

I do not have the expertise to write such a paragraph for China, but I think that many the participants here do.

The Chinese Supreme Court's site lists the basic laws for the PRC (Criminal procedure law, judges law, civil procedure law, administrative procedure law, general principles of the civil law, constitution), in english. Maybe that helps someone with expertise. -- megA (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Google-censorship.png

Image:Google-censorship.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Generals three gorges dam.jpg

Image:Generals three gorges dam.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Ban on horror movies?

I ran into this story which seems so over the top I was reluctant to believe it. It claims the Chinese have banned all manner of spooky and supernatural creatures, just like in a Ray Bradbury story. (Usher II, to be precise...) Is this intended as an effective form of censorship, or to prevent people there from paying money to Western copyright holders? Wnt (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

That can't possibly be true. Horror movies, mostly Hollywood and Japanese, are readily available at any place that sells movies in China. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.89.186.177 (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Chinese Perception on Censorship

Does anyone know if there's any information on the average Chinese citizen's perception of censorship? Are they aware of it? If so, do they disapprove of it? What are the overall feelings in their country of the censorship that goes on? If anyone knows at all about this, or could point me in the direction of some sources for this info, I'd love to help add this to the article. --170.28.224.55 (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

This is OR from the time I lived in China, but you might find it interesting and informative: They are most certainly very aware of the censorship. Their attitudes towards it vary. I didn't talk to people in the rural areas about it, but people have mixed views. The people who it really bothered seemed to be a minority and the majority seemed either indifferent or approved of it. The internet censorship is easy to circumvent and even without circumventing it the censorship is very patchy. Most of the people I talked to got their foreign news on youtube.com (which is not censored). Some people in the cities actively approved of the censorship for the sake of "maintaining faith in the government", upholding morality and limiting (however slightly) foreign influence, and pretty much keeping the masses content (and a lot of the educated urbanites viewed the farmers as the masses). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.89.186.177 (talk) 00:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

There are a couple of factors when asking for opinions of people in China about it: 1) The majority of people here have lived their whole life without knowing about Free Speech/Press, etc. - it's like asking someone who's never seen an apple, how an apple tastes. 2) Even if they did have a true picture of Censorship, the fear of being reported will prevent most people in China from giving an honest answer to even a friend or a relative. 210.18.83.173 (talk) 13:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Unbalanced focus on the Tiananmen Square in the education section

I think it is fair to state what is being censored in China without going into so much minute detail about its effects, it reads like a trivia section atm. Also, out of all the things probably being censored in the education system, I think too much emphasis is placed on tiananmen square in this section, as if that is the most important thing in Chinese history (which only seems true under liberal western media coverage) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.46.212.114 (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Factors that reduce the effectiveness of censorship in the People's Republic of China

Even though the Chinese Communist Party regime in the People's Republic of China wants to censor politically sensitive content, there are factors that reduce the effectiveness of censorship:

Chinese dialects, including Standard Mandarin are tonal languages. Syllables that only differ in their tone, but are otherwise identical in their pronunciation, usually have very different meanings. In addition, there are syllables in Chinese that are identical in tone and pronunciation, but have completely different meanings. Censorship of Chinese language materials, at least in its spoken and romanized forms, is made difficult by the fact that Chinese is a tonal language. However, materials written in Chinese characters are easier to censor because each character usually has a unique meaning. In addition, well known Chinese words and phrases that are used in non-Chinese languages without any indication of tone, such as Falun Gong or Tiananmen, are more easily censored than Chinese syllables that are not normally used in non-Chinese languages.
Individuals in the People's Republic of China have been able to circumvent the Great Firewall of China using various methods. One method of bypassing these firewalls is to use an encrypted tunnel to connect to censored websites, where traffic is relayed through a computer outside of the Great Firewall of China. In addition, the Xi Xiang project enables individuals to access censored websites without having to utilize proxies by exploiting weaknesses in the Great Firewall of China.
Information that the Chinese government does not want foreigners to know has been leaked out to media sources not controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, including The Epoch Times and New Tang Dynasty Television. Foreigners are able to find out what is really going on in mainland China through these media sources, despite efforts to withhold or distort the truth from foreigners.
Some Chinese government officials have uncensored Internet access and are able to obtain politically sensitive material. Some of these officials are even motivated to resign from their government positions or quit the Chinese Communist Party as a result of knowledge obtained through their uncensored Internet access.

The situation was quite different in Central Europe, Eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union. Here are some of the differences between European and Soviet communist regimes in the late 1980's and early 1990's and the Chinese communist regime today:

Slavic languages were spoken in the Soviet Union and most European communist regimes. In addition, German, Albanian, Romanian, Hungarian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian, and other languages were spoken in European communist regimes. Almost all languages spoken in the Soviet Union and other European Communist regimes are very different from Chinese dialects. Most Chinese dialects are tonal, whereas words in most languages in the Soviet Union and other European Communist regimes are not differentiated by inflectional tone alone. Tone is not indicated in the orthographies of most of the languages spoken in the Soviet and European communist regimes, and the same level of ambiguity did not exist in these languages. Materials in these languages are easier to censor than spoken or romanized Chinese materials, at least in theory. However, materials written in Chinese characters are more easily censored because each character normally has a different meaning associated with it.
Communist regimes were collapsing or had collapsed at the time that the World Wide Web became available. Most individuals in the world's communist regimes did not have access to the Internet at that time. The fall of Soviet and European communism had already taken place by the time that Internet access became widespread in Central European, Eastern European, and former Soviet countries. On the other hand, while the Chinese Communist Party maintained power over mainland China and has attempted to censor Internet content, Internet access would become available to ordinary Chinese people in China.

Why did the Soviet and European communist regimes collapse, but the Chinese regime maintain power? How can the Chinese government maintain control despite flaws in its efforts to censor politically sensitive materials? Will the Chinese Communist regime really collapse? The exact number of people who have resigned from the Chinese Communist Party is unknown, but some sources state that millions of Chinese individuals have already resigned from the Chinese Communist Party and affiliated organizations.

Jplatts (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Unblocked Article?

I'm living in mainland China currently. Due to unknown reasons, I can view this article without being blocked, but the discussion page remains impossible to view without using proxy.

Besides, it seems the English version of some article (like Zhao Ziyang, or Chai Ling) is unblocked, but the Chinese version of these articles remains blocked. Maybe an update for this article will be nesscary?

173.192.137.42 (talk) 20:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I was in Mainland China last summer, and some articles were actually unblocked, for example Outline of Tibet and 2009 Urumqi riots. However, this article remained blocked and attempting to access it produced a "this page cannot be displayed" and a 60-second timeout ban, as did some other politically-sensitive articles. Do we need a full updated list of the Misplaced Pages articles that are blocked? ~A H 1 02:15, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Hong Kong (PRC)

Can we take out the (PRC) after Hong Kong in the little box? If the whole point is to use PRC to mean Mainland China, then this is incorrect. Particularly in an article about censorship, which is one of the fields in which HK and the PRC are very different. (Pumpkin888 (talk) 19:56, 12 December 2010 (UTC))

google closed google.cn in 2010, right?

but the article still makes it seem as though it's up and running.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/technology/23google.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/mar/23/google-china-hacking-bid-clash

Sorry if I've done this in the wrong fashion, this is the first time I've tried to report an error. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nixxd (talk • contribs) 05:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

potential resource

China: TV Limits May Hit the Web by Edward Wong NYT\ 97.87.29.188 (talk) 20:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Broken References

Reference #21 is broken. it links to The Times homepage. (A login is needed to access the article) 210.50.30.133 (talk) 08:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Empty sections deleted

I removed two sections that were recently added just now because they were empty and looked scrappy. When there is content to add, even a few sentences, please restore them. I'm just pruning. Don't mind me. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Categories: