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

Anthony, 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

00:00

📢 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.

05:01

📊 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.

10:01

🗣️ 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.

Keywords

💡public punishment

Public punishment refers to the Chinese government's practice of penalizing individuals for their online speech through public means such as detention, arrest, or forced confessions. This concept is central to the video, which discusses how the Chinese authorities use such measures to control online discourse and maintain stability. For example, the video mentions cases where individuals were summoned by police or detained for their posts on social media.

💡censorship

Censorship in the context of the video refers to the Chinese government's regulation and suppression of online content that it deems inappropriate or threatening. The video highlights how private businesses are often tasked with monitoring and censoring citizens' posts on social media. The opaque standards of this censorship make it difficult for users to know what might get them into trouble.

💡rumors

Rumors are defined in the video as unverified or partially true statements that can lead to public punishment if shared online in China. The video explains that the Chinese authorities place a significant emphasis on punishing the spread of rumors, especially those related to violence, public health, or disasters, as these can undermine public trust in the government.

💡WeChat

WeChat is a major social media platform in China, mentioned frequently in the video as a primary space where the Chinese government monitors and punishes online speech. The video discusses how WeChat group chats and Moments are common places for users to be penalized for their posts, highlighting the platform's role in the broader system of censorship and public punishment.

💡self-censorship

Self-censorship refers to the act of individuals moderating their own speech to avoid trouble with authorities. The video suggests that the Chinese government's public punishment strategies are designed to instill a sense of fear and encourage self-censorship among internet users, ensuring that people think twice before posting potentially sensitive content.

💡collective action

Collective action refers to coordinated efforts by groups of people to achieve a common goal, often involving protests or other forms of public demonstration. The video indicates that the Chinese government is particularly wary of collective action facilitated through social media platforms like WeChat, as it poses a threat to social stability and government control.

💡social norms

Social norms are the unwritten rules of behavior that are considered acceptable in a society. The video mentions that posts violating social norms, such as those involving gambling or drug use, can also attract punishment from the authorities, as these behaviors are seen as damaging to societal values and order.

💡Xi Jinping

Xi Jinping is the current President of China, and the video discusses how public punishment and censorship have increased under his administration. Criticism of Xi Jinping and the top leadership is particularly sensitive and can lead to severe repercussions, as shown by the case mentioned in the video where a netizen was arrested for satirizing him in a WeChat group.

💡internet control

Internet control refers to the various methods used by the Chinese government to monitor, regulate, and restrict online speech. The video explores how this control is exercised through censorship, public punishment, and the promotion of self-censorship, reflecting the state's efforts to maintain ideological dominance and social stability.

💡freedom of speech

Freedom of speech is the right to express one's opinions publicly without governmental restraint. The video highlights the limitations on freedom of speech in China, where expressing certain views online can lead to public punishment. This underscores the broader theme of the video, which examines the tension between individual expression and state control in Chinese society.

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