Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday June 21, @01:31PM   Printer-friendly

Now China wants to censor online comments:

The new changes affect Provisions on the Management of Internet Post Comments Services, a regulation that first came into effect in 2017. Five years later, the Cyberspace Administration wants to bring it up to date.

"The proposed revisions primarily update the current version of the comment rules to bring them into line with the language and policies of more recent authority, such as new laws on the protection of personal information, data security, and general content regulations," says Jeremy Daum, a senior fellow at Yale Law School's Paul Tsai China Center.

[...] But recently, there have been several awkward cases where comments under government Weibo accounts went rogue, pointing out government lies or rejecting the official narrative. That could be what has prompted the regulator's proposed update.

Chinese social platforms are currently on the front lines of censorship work, often actively removing posts before the government and other users can even see them. ByteDance famously employs thousands of content reviewers, who make up the largest number of employees at the company. Other companies outsource the task to "censorship-for-hire" firms, including one owned by China's party mouthpiece People's Daily. The platforms are frequently punished for letting things slip.

Beijing is constantly refining its social media control, mending loopholes and introducing new restrictions. But the vagueness of the latest revisions makes people worry that the government may ignore practical challenges. [...] The tricky question is, no one knows if the government intends to enforce this immediately.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by unauthorized on Tuesday June 21, @06:32PM (3 children)

    by unauthorized (3776) on Tuesday June 21, @06:32PM (#1254983)

    You are not denying the dictatorship part are you?

    China is self-evidently not a dictatorship. You could argue authoritarian oligarchy with some legitimacy if you want to have bad word to call the them, but there is no basis to call China a dictatorship because the power structure obviously isn't centralized in the hands of a single individual.

    And if you want to get academic, no "communist" country has ever practiced "communism."

    There is no need to get Academic, you can start with the dictionary. Words mean things.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1, Touch√©) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 21, @09:15PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 21, @09:15PM (#1255065)

    How's that for words ?

    China isn't a dictatorship. It's a cruel, murderous, genocidal totalitarian regime.

    • (Score: 2) by unauthorized on Wednesday June 22, @07:31AM

      by unauthorized (3776) on Wednesday June 22, @07:31AM (#1255264)

      You were only correct on "not dictatorship" and "regime", and the latter probably on accident because you think "regime" is a demeaning term. I suppose 2/5 is an improvement over 0/2.

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 21, @10:56PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 21, @10:56PM (#1255103)

    You think you can deflect a basic point by distracting with fine parsing of terminology.
    You remind me of that master debater who, when asked an embarrassing question, said, "That depends on what the meaning of 'is' is."