微信上聊什么容易被请喝茶? 论文解读中国“因言获罪”状况【Eng Sub】What kind of content on WeChat is likely to be arrested?
Summary
TLDRAnthony, back after a two-week break, discusses sensitive topics that can lead to being 'invited for tea' by Chinese authorities. He shares a paper by a foreign scholar exploring online speech vulnerable to Chinese government repression, detailing censorship and public punishment. The video highlights how authorities target WeChat group chats and Moments for spreading rumors or criticizing the government. Anthony emphasizes understanding the risks of using WeChat for sensitive discussions and predicts increased speech censorship in China. He plans to regularly share high-value foreign papers on similar topics.
Takeaways
- 🗣️ Anthony announces his return to regular video updates, aiming for at least once a week.
- ☕ In China, being 'invited to drink tea' is a euphemism for being interrogated by the police.
- 📜 Anthony plans to share and interpret high-value papers by foreign scholars on his channel.
- 🔍 Today's focus is a paper on 'Information Control and Public Punishment in China' published in 'China Information'.
- 🚫 The Chinese government relies on private businesses to vet and censor citizens' online content.
- 👮♂️ Public punishment for online speech in China includes police summoning, public confessions, and legal actions.
- 📊 The paper analyzed 467 cases of public punishment from January 2014 to April 2019.
- 📈 Most punishments were related to WeChat group chats and Moments, highlighting the importance of small, tightly-knit groups.
- 💬 Rumors were the most common reason for punishment, followed by criticism of the government and ethical violations.
- 🔒 The Chinese government uses public punishment to instill self-censorship and maintain control over public opinion.
Q & A
What is the main topic discussed in the video?
-The main topic discussed is the types of online speech in China that are likely to attract police attention and the logic behind the Chinese government's public punishments for online speech.
Why is being 'offered tea' mentioned in the video?
-In China, being 'offered tea' is a euphemism for being interrogated by the police. The video discusses topics that can lead to such interrogations.
What is the source of the paper being shared in the video?
-The paper titled 'Information Control and Public Punishment: China Shows the Logic of Repression' is published in the journal 'China Information'.
What are the main data sources used in the paper shared in the video?
-The main data sources are official Sina Weibo accounts, the Chinese State Internet Information Office website, and the WeChat official account.
What percentage of punished cases involved WeChat group chats?
-52.6% of the punished cases involved WeChat group chats.
Why are WeChat group chats and Moments more likely to be punished compared to official accounts?
-WeChat group chats and Moments involve fewer people but are often made up of acquaintances, making it easier to form tight bonds that can lead to collective action, which the authorities aim to prevent.
What types of speech are most commonly punished according to the paper?
-The most commonly punished types of speech are spreading rumors (31.5%), criticizing the government (29.1%), and violating ethics (20.1%).
What constitutes a 'rumor' in the context of Chinese online speech?
-A 'rumor' refers to unsubstantiated claims or partially true statements, especially those related to public safety and health, such as violence, infectious diseases, and natural disasters.
How does the Chinese government use the concept of rumors in its ideological propaganda?
-The government defines certain value judgments as rumors to ban debate on these topics and maintain ideological control, as seen in the party history rumors list.
What is the overall conclusion about the Chinese government's approach to online speech according to the video?
-The Chinese government is most concerned about the spread of rumors and criticism of the government. It focuses punishment on semi-private spaces like WeChat group chats and Moments to instill widespread self-censorship among users.
Outlines
📢 Anthony's Update and Upcoming Topic on Online Speech in China
Anthony informs his audience about his recent absence and promises to post more regularly. He introduces a sensitive topic: the risks of discussing certain subjects on WeChat in China, which can lead to police interrogation. The video will analyze a foreign scholar's paper on online speech vulnerability and government censorship in China. Anthony plans to share high-value papers that interpret Chinese societal operations, starting with 'Information Control and Public Punishment: China Shows the Logic of Repression.' The paper discusses how the Chinese government uses private businesses for content censorship and the opaque nature of these standards. Public punishments for online speech, such as police interrogation and forced confessions, are also explored, with a focus on 468 cases from 2014 to 2019.
📊 Analyzing Public Punishment on WeChat
The paper highlights that WeChat group chats and Moments are the primary spaces for public punishment due to their potential for fostering collective action among close-knit groups. The study categorizes cases into spreading rumors, criticizing the government, and violating ethics, with rumors being the most punished category. The analysis reveals that unconfirmed or partially true statements about violence, public health, and natural disasters are often targeted. The author argues that rumors, despite being unverified, can signal danger and prompt government action, which is essential in a society where the government restricts information dissemination.
🗣️ Government's Reaction to Criticism and Value Judgments
The paper discusses how the Chinese government targets both rumors and criticism, especially from local governments. Criticism of high-level leaders is less common but not exempt from punishment. The analysis shows that authorities use public punishment to deter criticism and maintain control, even extending this to value judgments, which are subjective and not factual. The government's reaction to rumors about public safety incidents, such as the COVID-19 outbreak, demonstrates a tendency to suppress information and control public discourse. The paper concludes that authorities aim to induce self-censorship among citizens, blurring the lines of acceptable speech and expanding the definition of rumors to include topics that challenge ideological narratives.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡public punishment
💡censorship
💡rumors
💡self-censorship
💡collective action
💡social norms
💡Xi Jinping
💡internet control
💡freedom of speech
Highlights
Anthony addresses his two-week absence due to personal matters and promises weekly video updates.
Introduction of the topic: online speech that may lead to being interrogated by police in China.
Anthony plans to share a foreign scholar's paper on the vulnerability of online speech in China and government crackdown logic.
The title of the shared paper is 'Information Control and Public Punishment: China Shows the Logic of Repression' from the journal China Information.
The Chinese government relies on private businesses to vet citizens' online content, with opaque censorship standards.
From January 2014 to April 2019, 468 cases of punished online speech were announced by the Chinese government.
WeChat group chats and Moments are the most common spaces for punished speech, accounting for 80.8% of cases.
Public punishment cases help understand the influence the authorities want to convey to the public.
The Xi government has increased public display punishment and forced confessions.
Research methodology involves collecting data from official Weibo accounts, the State Internet Information Office, and WeChat official accounts.
Cases punished for spreading rumors, criticizing the government, and violating ethics make up the majority of punished speech.
The Chinese government emphasizes self-censorship among users by making punishment standards blurred and boundaries unclear.
Rumors related to public safety and public power are often targeted, despite their potential value in signaling danger.
Criticism of local governments, especially the police, is frequently punished, while criticism of senior leadership is less common.
The authorities aim to prevent offline collective action by punishing speech in private or semi-public spaces like WeChat group chats.
Anthony concludes with advice on avoiding sensitive discussions on WeChat to prevent punishment.
Transcripts
Hello everyone, I am Anthony
I've been busy with some personal matters recently
Haven't posted a video for two weeks
Netizens keep urging updates
so next
I will maintain a frequency of at least once a week
Thank you very much for your attention
Today I want to talk about a topic that many people care about
What to talk about on WeChat is easy to be invited to drink tea
in China
Being offered tea is a euphemism for being interrogated by the police
This kind of topic is unlikely to be studied in China
more unlikely to publish
So my video
Intending to share a paper by a foreign scholar
What kind of online speech to explore
Vulnerable on the Chinese Internet
and the Chinese government
What is the logic of cracking down on online speech?
at last
I will talk about my personal opinion on this article
here i want to say something
I will often share in the future
High-value papers by foreign scholars
these papers
Usually it is to interpret the operating logic of Chinese society
But it is not easy to see in China
Interpretation of thesis
will also become
One of the main forms of my content on this channel
The title of the paper I am sharing today is
Information Control and Public Punishment
China Shows the Logic of Repression
The source is China information
this journal
The author states in the abstract
The Chinese government mainly relies on
private business to vet citizens
Content published on the web
This censorship standard is opaque
A man posting content on social media in China
May be blocked, deleted posts or even banned
This is the realm of censorship
However, the government will also occasionally criticize social speech
public punishment and repression
e.g. summoned by the police
Asked to publicly admit mistakes
or detain, arrest and prosecute, etc.
This paper counts from January 2014 to April 2019
Among the 468 cases announced by the Chinese government
Cases punished for online speech
discuss under what circumstances
Censorship could escalate to public punishment by police
and what is the logic of public punishment
I just thought of a lot of people posting on the Chinese Internet
Often worried about not being able to grasp the scale
Therefore, this paper is still of great practical value.
let's look down
The first case studied by the author
all Chinese government
On the official website and social accounts of the police
open case
including arrest, detention, prosecution, etc.
This of course cannot be equated to all
Cases of Convicted for Speech
Because there are many cases
not officially announced
For example, once some remarks are made public,
Even a public punishment can cause a stir in society
then the punishment for such remarks is secret
behind the scenes
And for remarks that do not conform to official values
public punishment
This itself is a process in which the state declares its authority
The authorities hope that through public punishment
Shaping and influencing people's values
Therefore, the analysis of public punishment cases
also enables us to understand
The influence the authorities want to convey to the public
what is
Then the author pointed out that after the Xi government came to power,
public display punishment
and the number of forced confessions in public space
is increasing
reflects the authorities
China is gradually narrowing the space for speech
The literature cited here is scripted and staged
behind the scenes of China's force TV confessions
The translation is script and staged
Behind China's Forced TV Confessions
So how did the authors collect the data?
In the section on research methodology methodology
The author points out
These 467 research cases mainly come from three aspects
First, governments at all levels and public security bureaus
Cases published on the official Sina Weibo account
The IDs of these Weibo accounts are highly regular
Mainly place names plus units
For example, "Chaoyang Internet Police Patrol and Law Enforcement"
Or "Shenzhen Net Police", etc.
The author selected from 267 official Weibo accounts
167 cases captured
The second is from the Chinese state Internet information
A total of 187 cases were intercepted and published on the office website
China State Internet Information Office
Also known as the Central Network Information Office or the State Internet Information Office
The same organization hangs two signs
The Central Cyberspace Affairs Office emphasizes that it is directly under the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China
The State Cyberspace Administration emphasizes that it belongs to the State Council
This institution was established in 2014
It reflects the party's control over public opinion
and publicity
third data source
It is a punishment case released by the WeChat official account, a total of 155 cases
The sum of the above three cases is 509
Deduct duplicates
Finally, 467 cases were obtained
Next is the focus of the whole article
The authors found that in 467 cases
246 occurred in WeChat group chats, accounting for 52.6%
132 cases occurred in WeChat Moments, accounting for 28.2%
41 cases occurred on the official account
Accounting for 8.8%
There are only 2 cases involving private chats on WeChat
one of them was bribed
It can be seen that WeChat group chat and circle of friends accounted for 80.8%
is the vast majority
So how to interpret this data
the author thinks
The logic of punishment by the authorities
Mainly from the perspective of maintaining stability
Compared with WeChat group chat and circle of friends
WeChat official account is more able to guide public opinion
able to influence more people
But the relationship between official account bloggers and their followers
usually not closely related
most followers are strangers
However, WeChat group chat and circle of friends are different
Although group chats and circles of friends involve fewer people
but often acquaintances
Easier to form tight bonds
leading to collective action
because of the success of collective action
More dependent on the close cooperation of small groups
For example, if a protest event takes place successfully
very much needed
Mutual trust and clear division of labor within the small group
this can explain
Why the public account is more powerful
But the degree of impact is lower than that of group chat and circle of friends
So what is the specific content of the punished speech?
According to the author's classification
Cases of spreading rumours, up to 147
Accounting for 31.5%
136 cases of punishment for criticizing the government
Accounting for 29.1%
94 violations of ethics
Accounting for 20.1%
so-called violation of morality
Refers to non-direct criticism of the authorities
But speech that violates social norms
Such as gambling, drug use, etc.
we can see
Authorities make rumors the focus of public punishment
So what exactly are the rumors referring to?
Of the 147 cases linked to rumors
39.4% due to unconfirmed transmission
or partial truth violence
including murder, assault, robbery, etc.
mention of infectious disease
Rumors about public health-related issues such as epidemics
17%
Rumors that refer to natural or man-made disasters such as earthquakes
Accounting for 12.9%
I need to say something here
The cases counted in this paper are as of April 2019
So the epidemic here
Does not include the three-year-old new crown epidemic
starting in 2020
rumors about the outbreak
The proportion of penalties increased significantly
"Do not believe rumors, do not pass rumors"
It has become a common phrase in official articles
so what are the rumors
I want to say a few words here
Rumors are not intended to be false statements
but unsubstantiated claims
in a country ruled by law
There are also laws related to dissemination of false information
But these situations are mostly associated with damaging someone's reputation
And rumors involving public power and public safety
quite different
public affairs
Especially when it comes to public safety, the right to know
is an essential need
Government investigations into public incidents
natural advantage
deserve greater responsibility
However
If the government neither actively investigates nor discloses the truth
At the same time, in the name of fighting rumors
Restrict all discussions and investigations among the people
then public safety is often more harmed
in this case
Rumors are valuable in their own right
Even if it doesn't quite fit the truth in the details
But it sends some kind of dangerous signal to the masses
that's what makes sense
Unfortunately
This is often the case in China
Authorities prohibit people from spreading certain rumours.
but myself
released even more untrue information
end up putting people at risk
A typical example is the beginning of 2020
Wuhan police arrest 8 doctors for spreading virus rumors
impose administrative penalties
The rumors were later confirmed to be largely true.
And the government has caused the spread of the epidemic because of concealment
During the Chengdu epidemic at the end of August 2022
A netizen named "Tropical Rainforest" posted a message
It is said that Chengdu may launch a 5+2 blockade plan
the news spread quickly
Chengdu citizens rush to buy food
get ready for lockdown
August 30
Chengdu police detained him for picking quarrels and provoking trouble
However, from September 1
Chengdu begins city-wide lockdown
Quarantine measures will not be lifted until September 15
Something similar happened in Shanghai
Zhengzhou and many other cities
in 2022
More and more citizens are beginning to reversely understand the government's refutation of rumors
This reflects the growing loss of public power
public trust
Crackdown on rumors and so-called refutation of rumors
reflect national opinion
and information control is greatly enhanced
we can find out
Punishment for so-called rumors
Has infiltrated WeChat group chat
In a semi-public space like Moments
expressing online
And the authorities punish the publisher,
Not just influential diffuse retweeters
This shows that the Chinese government
The hope is widespread self-censorship by users
The more blurred the standard of punishment, the more unclear the boundaries
more effective
In addition, the authorities also arbitrarily expanded the scope of rumors
some topics of value judgment
Also defined by the authorities as rumors
For example in July 2021
by the Central Network Information Office
Central Party School and other units
Jointly compiled a list of rumors related to party history
There are two rumors
The Communist Party's Anti-Japanese War "Swimming without Strike" is not the mainstay
Zhou Papi and Huang Shiren are good landlords, but the land reform is wrong
Regardless of whether the two are right or wrong
The role played by the Communist Party in the Anti-Japanese War
and evaluation of land reform
This is a value judgment rather than a fact judgment
value judgments even if they are questionable
It shouldn't be a rumor
Because everyone's evaluation criteria are different
Value Judgment Should Not Have the Universality of Fact Judgment
define these propositions as rumors
explain the authority
wish to ban all debate on these topics
because it jeopardizes the ideological myths constructed by the authorities
It also shows that the authorities consciously
Rumor dispelling as a tool of ideological propaganda
except for rumors
Criticism of the government is also easy to attract blows
Author statistical findings
in all criticism of the government
in public punishment cases
Mostly involved in the grassroots government
especially the local police
Criticism of senior leadership
accounted for a very small proportion
December 2018
a WeChat user
Publish photos of police patrols on WeChat Moments
And wrote "Looks like these bandits feel cold"
He was detained for 5 days for insulting the police
But this does not mean that senior leadership
especially criticism of the country's top leaders
is allowed
in August 2017
Yunnan police arrest
and notified a
Netizens Satirizing Xi Jinping in WeChat Groups
However, the police quickly deleted the notice
And prohibit the discussion of this event
This explains
authorities
I don't want everyone to pay too much attention to the supreme leader
Because whether it is for or against
Once word of the supreme leader spreads
could lead to widespread public controversy
and limit the scope of public punishment to local governments
can increase the fear of the public
At the same time, it will not cause widespread resonance
to sum up
From the law of the Chinese government’s punishment of Wechat speech
We can draw the following conclusions
First of all, the authorities are most concerned about the spread of rumors
Authorities focus punishment on WeChat group chats
and circle of friends
Because compared to Weibo and WeChat public accounts
Zhihu, Douban and other platforms
These areas are somewhat private
tend to be personal relationships with tight bonds
are also more likely to lead to offline collective action
This is what the local government cares most about
at the same time
Rumors also have the effect of undermining credibility
make people more distrustful of the government
Second, the authorities have a low tolerance for criticism of the government
Even this criticism of the government
not many pageviews
may still be punished
The aim is to instill self-censorship in everyone
The object of criticism is clearer and clearer
more likely to be punished
For example
You directly criticize your local police or officials
with photos or descriptive text
Then this kind of behavior is more important than abstract criticism
Chinese society as a whole is much more dangerous
It is also easier to be invited to drink tea
therefore
Abstraction is becoming more and more popular on the Chinese Internet
Blackening and all kinds of eccentric remarks
It is also a means of self-protection
Therefore, I think it is necessary to understand the following
First
if you decide to engage in
A collective action not permitted by the authorities
Then don't use WeChat to contact
second
in wechat group
It is dangerous to talk about sensitive topics with Moments
And that's exactly what the authorities want to achieve
Third Speech Censorship Will Only Get More Common
impossible to relax
should realize this as soon as possible
get yourself out of the environment as much as possible
The above is the main content of this paper
In the future, I will also share some excellent papers
Then it will also speed up the update frequency
Thank you again for your attention
Weitere ähnliche Videos ansehen
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)