In recent years China has collected many records, both positive
and negative. People’s Republic of China efforts to be a
world leader are increasingly showing their results. One record is without doubts owned by PRC: the Internet Censorship. Since the indroduction of
internet in 1994 has followed a strict policy about internet
freedom.
China government has the peculiarity to justify internet filter system mainly in order to fight against pornography. But the truth is that China holds the biggest apparatus in this sense. Other than a gigantic filter system (that uses several methods to complain its purposes, like blocking IP addresses or filtering URL) PRS holds four bodies that control internet “abuses” in which work more than 30.000 people.
China government has the peculiarity to justify internet filter system mainly in order to fight against pornography. But the truth is that China holds the biggest apparatus in this sense. Other than a gigantic filter system (that uses several methods to complain its purposes, like blocking IP addresses or filtering URL) PRS holds four bodies that control internet “abuses” in which work more than 30.000 people.
We
can try to believe about the filter mechanism purpose of eliminate
pornography, but the 30.000 workers are meant to control individuals
messages, that they can delete from the web. In Chinese 2010 White
Paper, authorities explained clearly that “The
Chinese government attaches great importance to protecting the safe
flow of Internet information” and
“no organization or individual may
produce, duplicate, announce or disseminate information having the
following contents: being against the cardinal principles set forth
in the Constitution; endangering state security, divulging state
secrets, subverting state power and jeopardizing national
unification; damaging state honor and interests; instigating ethnic
hatred or discrimination and jeopardizing ethnic unity; jeopardizing
state religious policy, propagating heretical or superstitious ideas;
spreading rumors, disrupting social order and stability;
disseminating obscenity, pornography, gambling, violence, brutality
and terror or abetting crime; humiliating or slandering others,
trespassing on the lawful rights and interests of others; and other
contents forbidden by laws and administrative regulations.
In
other words to fulfill this goal PRC arrested and jailed lots of
Chinese citiziens for exerciting their right to freedom expression..
The danger that the Party sees in the use of internet is primarily
the subversive use of it. It could be a tool to criticize the
government. This is the basis of this year 99 people,both netizens
and journalists, imprisoned in China. In this context one aspect that
is really shocking, other that the maniacal control of the political
leaders, the manifested violations of the supreme principles of the
UN charter, the abuses of the authorities, it is the people
self-regulation in the web. Scared (or maybe used) of the
repercussion, Chinese policies repressive methods have created a
chilling effect: individuals tend to censor their own communications
in order to avoid problems. As this interview shows the majority
neither acknowledges the problem, only few people claim out the right
to the freedom of expression.
Maybe
the situation will change, but the more time passes, the worse it is.
There is a strong external influence, that counts several
accusations, one of these is from Google, that complained PRC internet
governance hampers users' access to Google mail services. Covered as
usual in Chinese “style“, the controversy seems to have been forgotten.
It’s
true that internet can be two-edged, but I think that it has to be on
people’s wisdom judging when the use of internet is correct.
Luckily the power of internet is so wide that some daredevils use
different methods to avoid internet censorship bodies control, and
thanks to that they can freely surf on the most ticklish sites,
especially the ones (systematically obscured) of Human Rights NGO
sites, in which PRC’s citiziens can certify the abuses that every
day big China carry on.
So
the question crop up instinctive: if you were a Chinese what you
would have do? Challenging the law in order to know? Risking to be
jailed only for the love of knowledge? Or what do you think about the
filter, they are acceptable only because the law says so, or the
incompatibility to democratic principles makes them unlawful?
Sources
and more informations:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/8553131/Google-Gmail-cyber-attack-Chinese-spies-had-months-of-access.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/8553131/Google-Gmail-cyber-attack-Chinese-spies-had-months-of-access.html
white
paper 2010 http://english.gov.cn/2010-06/08/content_1622956.htm
http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/06/03/china-world-leader-internet-censorship
http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/06/03/china-world-leader-internet-censorship
Wikipedia.it
I have just had a look at the 2012 Press Freedom Index and I have noticed that Italy is in the 61st place of the chart and our country has worsened his position during the years (49th in 2010 and 2009!). According to Reporters Without Borders this position is due to the "fail to address the issue of their media freedom violations, above all because of a lack of political will".
RispondiEliminaI think this is a serious problem for a democratic country that protects the right to freely express thoughts in speech, writing, or any other form of communication in his national constitution and that takes actively part of international and European instruments of human rights’ protection.
I agree that Chinese censorship is something totally incompatible with democratic principles, but I think also that we can not say that a country that is choosing in these days his leader for the next 10 years only with an internal decision of few people in the Communist Party is a democratic one.
In our perspective these filters, but probably the Chinese system in general, are incomprehensible and unlawful, but in Italy too I think there is a lot to reflect on!
Interesting blog post, well done all of you! Good comment too Marta, and valid point about Italy - 61st position is pretty bad I'd say!
RispondiEliminaOne question about the title of the post- do you mean 'cloak'?
A few language corrections of a couple of parts of the text in capitals below:
The yellow Mandarin workgroup HAS CHOSEN (chooses) to (treat China situation) DEAL WITH CHINA'S SITUATION/THE SITUATION IN CHINA. However, this time the focus will be ON another aspect of information: the Internet empire.
In RECENT (the latter) years China has collected many records, both (in) positive and (in) negative (fields). People’s Republic of China'S efforts to be a world leader are increasingly showing their results. One RECORD (leadership) is without doubts owned by PRC: the Internet Censorship. (China ) Since THE INTRODUCTION OF internet (introduction) in 1994 CHINA HAS followed a strict policy about internet freedom.
THERE IS (Exists) a strong EXTERNAL influence (for the exterior,) that HAS MADE (counts) several accusATIONS, one of these is from Google, that complained PRC internet governance (to) hamperS users' access to Google mail services. Covered as usual IN (of) Chinese “STYLE(to do) “, the controversy seems to HAVE PASSED/HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN (be overtake).
The subject of censorship is always very tricky, because it is strictly related with freedom of speech. Through the censorship, the Government choose what we are allowed to know and to discuss. It is able to select the sources of information, to focus attention on some issues but not on other ones, and to manipulate the public opinion. Fortunately Internet is a huge “world”, that makes very difficult a whole control over it.
RispondiEliminaIt is true that also Italy has problems in this field, as some organizations complains. But in general for us consulting also some foreign sources is not so complicated. It’s the result of globalization, that, thank to Internet too, has made the world smaller.
For China the censorship is more dangerous: quantitatively, it robe BILLIONS of people of important news and information, in a country where human rights standards are not so elevated!
Michael Massarutto
“…It’s time, people of China! It’s time.
RispondiEliminaChina belongs to everyone.
Of your own will
It’s time to choose what China shall be.”
I read this poem of Zhu Yufu in a newspaper and it made me think about the situation of any individual, who expresses his ideas, just as I am doing now, but for this reason he was detained by Chinese authorities in March 2012. The prosecutor cited this poem as key evidence in support of the charge of “inciting subversion of state power”.
Zhu is not new to activism, he was involved in the Democracy Wall movement in 1979. He has been jailed before for his pro-democracy activism, making it more likely he too will receive a heavy sentence. He was jailed in 1999 for seven years and in 2007 for two years, said the Chinese Human Rights Defenders.
Yufu was just one of dozens of critics, activists, and dissidents detained and harassed by the Chinese authorities in 2012 in what has been one of the worst political crackdowns since the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989.
In addition to Zhu Yufu, the long list of those detained, placed under illegal house arrest or subjected to enforced disappearance included Liu Xia, wife of Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, lawyer Gao Zhisheng and Ai Weiwei, the globally renowned artist.
In several cases, Chinese authorities tortured detainees to extract “confessions” and promises to avoid using social media or speaking to journalists or others about their mistreatment.
In this area, China is not the only state which commits crimes against human rights: North Korean regime represses the voices of their own people; The Burma Regime, as we have just seen, has a censorship and there is not freedom of speech and press; Vietnam has criminalized free expression of dissenting views, and has intelligence agencies that are dedicated to intimidating and silencing critics.
I think that the problem exists as inside the different states as in the international community: in the last years, for example, was born the “Civil Asia Society Movement” for the promotion and protection of Human rights. In 1986, the Asian Commission of Human Rights, founded the same year by a group of jurists, lawyers and activists of human rights, created the “Asian Charter of Human Rights”. It is described as a “common chart”, is an instrument of soft law, i.e. it hasn’t a normative international value, but only a claim "from down", from civil society, who want to press the Asian States to respect all human rights.
Some policies of Asian states see the traditional Asian values opposed to the individual human rights, which are defined exclusively western values.
Nowadays lots of Asian scholars argue that these Asian values are compatible with the acknowledgment of human rights.
For this reason, they try with all measure they have to promote the comprehension and the promotion of human rights, to protect not only the community, but the individual as such.
In my opinion, the best way to improve this situation would be the creation of a “Convention of Asian Human Rights” which has an important level in international law and which will be signed and respected by all south eastern state of Asia; but unfortunately the achievement of this point is still far.
This is a very interesting post, I’ve already heard about Chinese censorship of the internet but I’ve never really paid too much attention to it; probably because for me it’s normal to believe that the internet is a free media and that I can visit every web site I want to. What truly astonished me has been discovering how much wide the possible object of censorship is. With the pretext of prohibit contents that, for example, are supposed to“spread rumors, disrupt social order and stability” China’s government can control and censor almost every message considered dangerous or subversive. Another astonishing thing is that the majority of Chinese people think it’s normal to have such strict internet’s limitations; this is a clear example of the media influence in a totalitarian regime as People’s Republic of China. All things considered I can’t say I’m a campaigner of internet’s full freedom, in my opinion there should be some rules and some limits to keep everything running without problems but Chinese government totally failed in this sense.
RispondiEliminaMichele Magnanini
Well done - looks like you have resolved the tech issues you were having with the blog the other day, have you? The links seem to be working for me, anyway!
RispondiEliminaYou are right now the links are working well, we have resolved the problem although it's not so clear what happened...c'est la vie!
Elimina