Introduction
This essay aims to discuss the issue of censorship of networked media in China, and focus on one specific case – the Great Firewall of China vs online media and communities. The questions like ‘How and why the Chinese government uses it to control Internet’, ‘What are the problems and struggles behind the system?’ and ‘How do the Chinese people react to this’ will be critically analyzed with examples like the blocking of access to Google, Facebook and Twitter.
What is the Great Firewall of China?
The Great Firewall of China, which officially named as the Golden Shield Project (Norris, 2010), is operated by the Ministry of Public Security division of the government of China. The purpose of creating this system is to block the content which the government thinks could be harmful, like ‘superstitious beliefs, spreads rumors, threatens national unity or encourages gatherings disturbing social order’ (Research Directorate, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Ottawa, 2006). Generally, the content which might threaten, or potentially challenge the current one-party political system will be blocked or filtered. As a result, foreign social media community like Facebook, news media like BBC and CNN’s websites certainly became the targets of this system. Without VPNs, Chinese people cannot receive uncensored information from Internet.
The history of Golden Shield Project is not long, which just started to operate since 2003, but there are enough notable events happened during the decade. For example, Google is not the only foreign major company disagreed with the Chinese censorship, but it might be the first one to challenge the system. In 2006, a Google.cn search page with the censored results according to the regulation of Chinese government was launched by Google China. It can be interpreted as a compromise that Google climbed over the Great Firewall to explore the Chinese market, because without communication or some agreement with the authority, this was unlikely to happen. However, this situation did not last for long time. Google finally removed all its services in China, and redirected search queries from Google.cn to Google.com.hk (Hong Kong), which does not censor the results claimed as harmful and illegal by the central government. David Drummond, senior vice president of Google, then explained they made this decision in response to ‘a sophisticated cyber attack originating from China’ which usually known as Operation Aurora and ‘(attempts to) further limit free speech on the web in China’, such as the block of YouTube and Facebook (Drummond, 2010). On March 30, 2010, all the Google services in Mainland China were blocked again, any attempts of accessing will lead to DNS errors (Hoffman, 2013). Google is outside the wall again for the Chinese, exactly same as BBC, CNN and Twitter which were already intercepted by the Gold Shield project due to the political reasons.
Why did Chinese government create the shield?
The reason of creating this censorship system might be complicated, but the result is apparent – without the free connection to international network communities and media, the Chinese teenagers seem to be isolated from the rest of world. China is engaging in the international society and rising her power with incredible economic development, but the gap between her and Western world still exists, thanks to the tight censorship and regulation of Internet, TV, films and even print industry. Being aware of these outcomes, the Central Chinese Government seems not to intend to release its control of Internet, like it is a very fundamental principle of its ruling. But in fact, is the one-party system always incompatible with the freedom of speech? Or the Communist Party of China is just not willing to find a solution?
“The Chinese Communist Party is just more cunning about how it controls public opinion.” said by Former CFR Edward R. Murrow Press Fellow Matt Pottinger (Xu, 2014). In fact, the Chinese authorities never deny their excellent skills of controlling public opinions, because for them, it is not something violates human rights or shameful, but a common and fundamental function of the government of a great power. While people criticizing the censorship system in China, a question is usually forgotten: If Chinese leaders should feel guilty for controlling public opinions (or lead the people according to their interpretation), how could other countries in the world, like America, refuse to admit the propagandas they used in cold war are not a sort of public mind controlling?
Certainly some will argue that although controlling public opinions is inevitable, it could not be considered as a sound reason for the censorship of Internet, which does violate the freedom of speech and people’s right to know. So what reason makes the central government such sensitive and stubborn about the censorship issue? As mentioned above, freedom of speech and one-party system might not be necessarily incompatible with each other. However, thinking on the government’s stance, is there any chance when all the blocked results, websites are suddenly released, and there is no increasing attempt to overthrow the current government, which might cause massive and long-lasting chaos? Besides, according to the report written by Jonathan Zittrain and Benjamin Edelman, content which refer to Tibet independence, Taiwan independence are often censored by the system. The historical and political reasons already putted so much tension on the relation between the central government and Taiwan, Tibet. If the Golden Shield project shuts down, it will undoubtedly be the best gift ever for the separatists, even the terrorists and radicals.
The community under the shield
Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter, is the country’s biggest microblog service with over 300,000,000 registered users (Hewitt, 2012). Since started in 2009, its impact on Chinese society is always a popular topic for foreign media workers, political researchers and even the Chinese authorities to evaluate. There were also opinions that when the authorities realize the power of Weibo, it is not far from its end. However, while paying attentions on improving the censorship system’s ability of filtering the key words on Weibo, the government departments, official media and institutions are competing with each other to register account on Weibo, and to show their welcomes. “We welcome people to take part in the debate,” says Chen Cheng, who runs an official microblog for the city of Chengdu, capital of Sichuan province (Hewitt, 2012).
Now the reason of blocking Facebook, Twitter is much clear. What the Chinese authorities seek is a free, but most importantly, controllable place which they can receive feedbacks of people rather than facing protest. There are criticism on local government’s policies that central government would notice and take actions if they think it is against the central policies. Therefore, Weibo could survive under the Golden Shield. Twitter and Facebook, those who refuse the self-censor system, are refused by Chinese market.
However, the situation is not always what the authorities wish to see. The key words are replaced by others which are not included yet in the censorship system sometimes cause negative effects on the government’s figure. And from the harsh comments which survived, the authorities see the people’s wrath. For example, on February 9th, 2013, Chinese New Year’s Eve night, Fang Binxin, who is the father of the Great Firewall system, whished his followers on Weibo happy new year. However, he receive thousands of comments like ‘get lost’ as the wishes of a new year (The Economist, 2013). Thanks to his contribution, the sensitive words system was created and used for the Great Firewall, and apparently the Chinese people are aware of this.
Conclusion
Rather than saying the Great Firewall is a single case of media, Internet censorship, it is more reasonable to consider it as a reflection of the increasing imbalance of economic and cultural development of China since the 1978 reform and opening up. The gap is as real as the CPC’s worries of its legitimacy doubted by democratic ideology and ability of controlling public opinions from separatists and anti-communists. There is still no clear intention of releasing the blocked foreign websites. However, the question now becomes whether the experiment of Chinese characteristic online community supervisor mode is effective and long-lasting as the authorities expect.
References
Drummond, D. (2010, March 22). A new approach to China: an update. Retrieved from Google Offical Blog: http://googleblog.blogspot.com.au/2010/03/new-approach-to-china-update.html
Hewitt, D. (2012, july 16). Weibo brings change to China. Retrieved from BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18773111
Hoffman, C. (2013, February 5). HTG Explains: How the Great Firewall of China Works. Retrieved from How-to Geek: http://www.howtogeek.com/162092/htg-explains-how-the-great-firewall-of-china-works/
Norris, P. (Ed.). (2010). Public Sentinel: News Media & Governance Reform. Washington: World Bank Publications.
Research Directorate, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Ottawa. (2006, March 20). China: Internet censorship, including state regulations, technical control, enforcement, and methods used to avoid censorship (2005-2006). Retrieved from Refworld: http://www.refworld.org/docid/45f1470820.html
The Economist. (2013, April 6). The art of concealment. Retrieved from The Economist: http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21574631-chinese-screening-online-material-abroad-becoming-ever-more-sophisticated
Xu, B. (2014, September 25). Media Censorship in China. Retrieved from Council on Foreign Relations: http://www.cfr.org/china/media-censorship-china/p11515