During show trial, China begins online crackdown

(Photo illustration: Shutterstock)

(Photo illustration: Shutterstock)

Bo Xilai, the ousted former Chinese politician, continues to capture headlines even as Chinese authorities begin a highly concerted campaign to stifle online expression, Vincent Chao reports.

The trial of Bo Xilai, the once promising leader of China’s most populous city, ended on Monday with revelations about murder, corruption and torrid details of a love-triangle – offering the public a rare glimpse into the lives of China’s richest and most powerful politicians.

But outside the spotlight, authorities have directed an increasingly hostile campaign to limit free expression, especially online. Over the past few weeks, a growing number of journalists, bloggers and activists have been arrested or detained on vague and obscure charges. And last week, an official forum warned of new limits to what internet users should and should not say on social media.

Crackdowns on free press are not uncommon in China. Setting the latest actions apart is the concerted action to stifle online ‘opinion leaders’, whose posts are widely shared and distributed on Weibo – the Chinese equivalent of Twitter. The actions follow increasingly sophisticated censorship strategies ensured to block access to information on either government corruption or calls for collective action.

Liu Hu, a reporter for the Guangzhou-based New Express, is the latest individual to be detained, after he openly accused a senior government official of negligence in an online posting. In the widely shared report published last month, he quoted various sources to call for an investigation as to whether Ma Zhengchi, a former Chongqing vice mayor, deliberately undersold a publicly-run enterprise costing the state up to £2.6 million.

Interrogated in his home on Friday before his detention, Beijing police have since accused him of ‘fabricating false rumors’ which his lawyer denies.

Meanwhile, Charles Xue, a billionaire investor known for his 12 million Weibo followers, was also detained by police on Friday on charges of soliciting a prostitute. Commonly known by his alias, Xue Manzi, the naturalized US citizen routinely posted popular reform-minded content as well as commenting on other issues such as air quality and food safety, which was then widely shared.

His detention has triggered questions of whether the charges are politically motivated, given that Chinese authorities have used similar tactics to discredit commentators that fail to toe the official line in the past. In a post that was later erased, Hu Xijin, the editor of the state-run Global Times said: ‘Cannot rule out the possibility that authorities are arresting Xue Manzi with a prostitute to give him a hard time.’

The latest attempts to silence online expression appear to stem from China’s secretive Document No. 9, a copy of which the New York Times acquired earlier this month. Issued by the central party office, and believed to reflect the views of newly instated President Xi Jinping, the memo directed local party groups to suppress ideas of ‘western-inspired’ notions of media independence and civic participation, ostensibly in attempt to solidify the party’s grip on power.

It claimed that dissidents ‘have stirred up trouble about disclosing officials’ assets, using the Internet to fight corruption, media controls and other sensitive topics, to provoke discontent with the party and government.’

Since the release of the document in April, authorities have stepped up online controls by using a combination of hard and soft pressure against popular bloggers – the tiny minority of Weibo users believed to be responsible for the creation of more than 80 percent of original content. Invited to last week’s forum, several popular bloggers were reminded that posts must ‘uphold the socialist system’ and ‘guard the national interest.’

Such ideas have naturally attracted detractors, especially amongst China’s new and growing class of intellectuals eager to push the boundaries of government regulation. But those calls are becoming fewer and further between, especially in recent weeks.

Charges were laid earlier this month against Zhou Lubao, an activist famously known for exposing the lavish lifestyle enjoyed by a mayor of a provincial city, which included a £21,000 watch. Having went on to analyze the watches of other prominent officials, Zhou’s Weibo account has since been deactivated amid police accusations that he ‘extorted money’ from the subjects of his disclosures.

In addition, two other prominent bloggers have also since been detained for ‘spreading false rumors’ online.

The hardline approach against online expression comes amid some disappointment by earlier supporters of Xi, who was initially believed to be a supporter of gradual social and political reform. But it could also represent efforts to manage commentary as Xi consolidates power following Beijing’s once-a-decade leadership change and the Bo Xilai affair, its biggest political scandal in decades.

What’s more clear is that authorities are gaining a clearer definition of what the internet, now accessed by almost 600 million Chinese users, should – and should not – be used for. Both the high-profile detentions of Hu and Xue, announced by police on Weibo, appear to be designed to send a message that whistleblowing and political discussion have no place online, despite state-run media being initially supportive of such efforts.

A state-run People’s Daily editorial, for example, on Monday remarked that it wanted the internet to become a more ‘orderly’ place, where users were held ‘responsible for their remarks.’ The Global Times added that ‘the internet needs moral regulations’ with authorities handling prior cases ‘too softly, which has allowed rumor mongering to spiral out of control.’

These details come despite their own efforts by Chinese authorities to expand their use of social media as a medium of communication, as seen during the Bo Xilai trial.

For a major corruption case, the media frenzy was near unprecedented. Even official media, typically silent on major corruption cases, have lauded the ‘open and transparent’ trial, reported hour by hour on an official Weibo account, which it claims symbolizes more public scrutiny and an important guarantee of a fair trial.

This article was originally published on 28 Aug, 2013 at indexoncensorship.org

Vietnam’s dysfunctional relationship with the web

(Photo: Shutterstock)

(Photo: Shutterstock)

It has been around a year since Vietnam did something to maintain the title – Enemy of the Internet – that it shares with eight others that include Uzbekistan, Iran and China. Whilst the communist nation has locked up more bloggers so far this year than throughout all of 2012 it is now revisiting last year’s widely derided, and unrealistic, internet draft decree.

The reworked Decree 72, due to come into force September 1, has caused friction as it essentially prohibits people from posting links to news stories, or sections of news articles, on social media sites such as Facebook or the equally popular, locally produced Zing Me.

Pro-democracy websites or those covering religion, politics or human rights have long been blocked. In 2010, Facebook was blocked. A leaked draft regulation requiring ISPs to block the social networking site circulated at the time. The draft was purported to have come from the government, but its veracity was not confirmed. However, access to Facebook quickly became difficult.

A lack of clear mandate from the government and a low-level block meant that people simply fiddled with the DNS settings and claimed the block was down to technical error, not political will. No one took it seriously and the social media site advertised for local staff even when the block was fully in place.

Professor Carl Thayer at the Australian Defence Force Academy in Canberra says that 2009 saw organisation of disparate groups – Catholics, anti-China factions, environmentalists and democracy activists – using Facebook as a rallying area for their shared opposition to Chinese-run bauxite mines in the Central Highlands, an ecologically and politically sensitive area.

However 72 also has something in common with an earlier blog regulation requiring citizens to stick to the personal, and not political themes. As the internet took off in the early- and mid-2000s Yahoo! chat and its blog platform Yahoo! 360 became hugely popular. By 2008 bloggers numbered in the millions. Most writers followed the government’s instructions, though there were scandals that invloved sex bloggers. The Yahoo! blogs also became useful as an alternate news and information source given the state control of media and blocks on sites related to politics, human rights or religion.

At the end of 2008 new blogging regulations limited writings to personal topics. As with Decree 72 posting links to aleady-banned sites was prohibited. The regulation was aimed only at blogs hosted within Vietnam.

“We have issued the circular aiming to create a legal framework to guide bloggers on what can they do and what they can’t do,” said Do Quy Doan, Deputy Minister of Information and Communication, told dpa at the time. The government in fact approached Yahoo! and Google for assistance.

Despite the furore at the time, not much ever came of the regulation, especially since it was designed more as a “guiding document” according to Doan and thus had limited legal use.

In 2010 part of another regulation was aimed at internet service providers and internet cafes. One point required all public computers — those in net cafes popular with teen gamers or hotel foyers — to install Green Dam, a software programme that monitors internet usage.

Unfriendly though it might have been to the idea of internet freedom, it was an ineffective piecemeal approach that quickly fell by the wayside. Those who own internet cafes, which can be found even in one horse towns and are used mostly by boy gamers, have long required background and family checks in order to open.

However Decree 72 goes further, requiring social media users to abstain from posting any news links, even to articles published by state media.

The government has made the point that this new decree is not about restricting freedom of speech but rather aimed at protecting intellectual property. Whilst news sites and blogs repost many news articles without attribution and plagiarism can be a problem in Vietnam it is not Facebook users who are the prime suspects or problem. Website Bao Moi is one of the big aggregators of news in Vietnam and it is not a social media platform.

Those flouting the new law could be more liable for fines than criminal prosecution. Bloggers are more often charged under Article 88 of the penal code, which relates to “conducting propaganda against the state” and can carry a three to 12 year sentence. Prosecuting those who share links or repost from news sites would strain the court and prison systems and fines are easier to issue, argue some.

Vietnam, which often seems to follow China’s security policy, is second only to the nation in the number of dissidents it has detained — 40 in 2013 to date, according to Human Rights Watch.

Vietnam’s government may be an Reporters Without Borders ‘Enemy of the Internet’ but the populace has embraced it, with over a third of the 90-plus million population online. Without government supporting the infrastructure for such growth it could never have happened. Engagement in the ‘knowledge era’ has always been seen as key and broadband was installed up and down the narrow country years ago.

With greater engagement in the world have come issues the government hasn’t been fully equipped to deal with and the internet is the now the main forum for criticism. Whilst the number of genuinely committed political bloggers may be small, the potential not just for critics to organise online but for citizens to share politically compromising material — such as footage of 3000 security police beating and trying to evict farmers from their village to make way for a multi-million dollar development — is huge.

Decree 72 will be largely unenforceable, outside of making the odd example, but it is more realistic than a draft decree on the internet tabled last year that would have required large companies like Google, Yahoo and Facebook to actually host servers within the country and possibly hand user information over to authorities, if asked. ISPs also would have been responsible for content posted on their sites and users would have been required to sign up for accounts with their real names.

The tabled regulation was seen by the foreign business community as a block to further economic growth and global integration. Even decree 72, which is a watered down iteration is expected to “stifle innovation”, according to the Asia Internet Coalition. What may stifle innovation more however is a full and official block of Google and Facebook. According to persistent rumours this will pave the way for local sites or the Russian-owned Coc Coc, which have servers within Vietnam and are more likely to be amenable to government strictures.

As David Brown, who writes regularly on Vietnam’s affairs, pointed out recently in the Asian Sentinel, Vietnam has plenty of ways to deter or stop the more determined political bloggers, such as imprisoning them for tax evasion as in the case of Dieu Cay. However there is the possibility that this may curtail the spread of information by ordinary citizen bloggers with no strong political commitment.

Professor Carl Thayer at the Australian Defense Force Academy in Canberra has said,

“The Decree will have a chilling effect on ordinary bloggers. It is unlikely to prevent more determined internet activists from continuing to post blogs.”

Most recently the government has been discussing policy regarding free chat apps like Viber or Whatsapp. Cell phones have long had huge market penetration and smart phones have been hugely popular in recent years also. Though the word ‘ban’ has been used in state media reports it is apparently linked to revenue losses for local teclos. There is little further information though how, why and when have not been made clear.

This article was originally published on 21 Aug 2013 at indexoncensorship.org.

Two people sentenced for online insults in Belarus

Insert caption

Andrei Karelin

A theatre playwright and a former worker from the Minsk Automobile Plant were found guilty of using offensive language online in Belarus.

Andrei Karelin, a playwright, was sentenced to an administrative fine of 10 million Belarusian roubles (about £725) for two comments he had made on a forum of a popular Belarusian internet portal TUT.by. The comments reflected his negative attitude toward Belarusian police.

According to Karelin, he had to call the police when he was attacked and beaten in Minsk on 18 May this year, but said he did not receive proper assistance, and was offended by officers instead. Among other words he chose to describe the officers on the forum were “bastards” and “boors”. He also said they were “fat and imposing” and concluded that “all normal citizens hate” the police.

A district court in Minsk had two hearings on the case (on 11 July and 26 July) and sentenced Karelin to fines for “insulting an officer on duty”, despite the fact the allegedly insulted officers admitted at court they had not seen his online comments themselves.

The playwright denies his guilt saying he did not insult anyone, but merely expressed his indignation at lack of professionalism of Belarusian police officers. He started a website to crowd-fund the fines he calls “enormous” as they are equal to 3 months of his  salary.

Another Belarusian, Ruslan Mirzoev, got 7 days of administrative arrest for videos he posted. He became popular last year after he started posting online videos about daily life of workers of Minsk Automobile Plant (MAZ), one of the biggest enterprises in Belarus. Mirzoev was finally fired from the plant in July 2013, but he continued production of his videos.

Ruslan started his own video project, Chronicles of a District («Хроники района»), on YouTube, and made two videos about drug addicts, a prostitute and alcoholics, who live in Kurasoushchyna, the district of Minsk where he lives. On 9 August he was detained and sentenced to seven days of administrative arrest for using obscene words in those videos.

This article was originally published on 14 Aug 2013 at indexoncensorship.org. Index on Censorship: The voice of free expression.

Hassan Rouhani raises Iranian hopes for free expression

iran-1

Iranians stormed the streets in celebration when his victory was announced, and this giddy optimism also permeated social media.

In the days after the election, there was an opening up of the national media, which has been steadily strangled over the past 8 years, as reporters and journalists tested the new waters to measure where the new limits of censorship have been set.

On July 23 the Iranian Students’ News Association announced Rouhani’s government may lift the filter from Facebook and other social networks, but after going viral, the article was deleted without explanation.

Iranians on social networks have started a campaign called “Rouhani, Mochakerim” [Rouhani, Thank You], a platform on which they seem to thank the new president for everything good in their everyday lives. One said, “I think Facebook needs to have a ‘Thank You Rouhani’ button” for Iranians”. Another quipped, “My phone’s had more battery life since Rouhani won the elections. Thanks Rouhani!”

Blogger Younes is very optimistic about Rouhani and hopes Iran’s relationship with other countries will be improved over the next four years. Younes described how Ahmadinejad’s foreign policies united the world against Iran. He pointed out that the invitations to Rouhani’s inauguration were sent to world leaders signalling that Iran is ready to change its position and open up dialogue with the outside.

Optimists aside, there are also those who are unsure whether Rouhani will be able to keep his promises. Twitter user thebrightriver has criticised Rouhani for the ministries he has proposed to the Parliament: “Rouhani has promised that he will create the Ministry for Women, but he hasn’t even chosen one woman as a minister! It’s good I didn’t vote otherwise I’d owe one to my conscience”.

Mohammad Hosseini Nejad argues Rouhani is not a magician, that radicalism is the biggest threat to his ability to fulfil his promises, and that his policies will only be implemented if all of the opposition factions join together to support him.

Rouhani’s victory has also created space for Iranians to publicly satirise Ahmadinejad. On Friday, Iranian Twitter users ridiculed Ahmadinejad’s government using the #AhmadiByeBye hashtag, and sent an invitation to social media users to attend Ahmadinejad’s Goodbye Party on Saturday, 3 August 2013.

iran-2

Farzad said, “Ahmadinejad has claimed that he fought economic corruption, but everyone connected with him was involved in the biggest embezzlement in Iran’s history. #AhmadiByeBye” Hooman agreed, “These 8 years have shown me how just one mistake can destroy life of an entire generation. #AhmadiByeBye”.

While the atmosphere, at least on social media, is one of optimism, Rouhani’s road ahead is tough. For the next four years he will battle against the supreme leader and the Parliament to implement some of his more ambitious promises. Despite being a figurehead for Iran when it comes to the country’s public relations, the president has relatively limited power and will struggle to liberalise the country.


This article was reported by Bronwen Robertson and Amin Sabeti of Small Media. Small Media has collaborated with the Munk School on launching ‘Rouhani Meter’, where Rouhani’s policies will be tracked across the first 100 days of his candidacy and beyond.