It All Seems So Ridiculous
It's always a bad sign for freedom when a country has a Ministry of Information. In China it is the Ministry of Information Industry. The MII, along with a myriad of other State organizations that serve to work at various layers (both legal and technological) to control what end users (or citizens) can access or distribute.
The legal framework can be construed to meet whatever State objective exists at the time. Let's take a look, from an American's perspective, at the nine categories of restricted information. Now, to be clear, information cannot be produced, copied, published or disseminated if it contains data
"1. Which are against the principles prescribed in the Constitution"
That's odd. Their constitution prescribes principles. Isn't our Constitution's Bill of Rights in place to eliminate any chance of the Government prescribing it's principles?
"2. Which endanger the security of the state, divulge the secrets of the state, overthrow the government, or damage the unification of the state"
Publishing data that damages the unification of the state...huh?
"3.Which harm the dignity and interest of the state"
Please don't harm the interest of so dignified a State.
"4. Which instigate hatred, discrimination among the ethnic groups, or destroy the unity of nationalities"
Don't destroy the unity of nationalities (notice plural)...oh wait, hopefully these nationalities are working in concert to avoid damaging the unification of the State
"5. Which break the religious policy of the state, spread evil cults or feudal superstition"
Evil cults? Try Communism.
"6. Which spread rumors, destroy the social order, and damage the social stability"
Sounds like we've banned all discussion of Tom Cruise
"7. Which spread pornography, sex, gambling, violence, murder, terrorism or abetment"
Without pornography and gambling, our e-commerce revenues are in a world of hurt
"8. Which insult or slander others and thus infringe upon others' lawful rights and interests"
This is a insult
"9. Which involve other contents prohibited by the laws and administrative rules"
The elastic clause!
All mocking aside, the range and sophistication of the Chinese State's filtering system is remarkable. Beyond restricting access to information by law or technology, the State has intimidated local or regional ISP's into self-censoring material that might otherwise be accessible. The excessive, business-destroying penalties imposed upon "violators" of the ridiculously vague legal restrictions make it perfectly understandable that ISPs avoid the grey area entirely.
The effort that it has clearly taken to employ the State's MII apparatus reflects the difficulty of restricting information in the information age. Hopefully technology will develop to the point where access to information will one day be impossible to restrict. In the meantime, one can only hope that if the Chinese insist on locking down access, they at least drain their treasury while doing so.
The legal framework can be construed to meet whatever State objective exists at the time. Let's take a look, from an American's perspective, at the nine categories of restricted information. Now, to be clear, information cannot be produced, copied, published or disseminated if it contains data
"1. Which are against the principles prescribed in the Constitution"
That's odd. Their constitution prescribes principles. Isn't our Constitution's Bill of Rights in place to eliminate any chance of the Government prescribing it's principles?
"2. Which endanger the security of the state, divulge the secrets of the state, overthrow the government, or damage the unification of the state"
Publishing data that damages the unification of the state...huh?
"3.Which harm the dignity and interest of the state"
Please don't harm the interest of so dignified a State.
"4. Which instigate hatred, discrimination among the ethnic groups, or destroy the unity of nationalities"
Don't destroy the unity of nationalities (notice plural)...oh wait, hopefully these nationalities are working in concert to avoid damaging the unification of the State
"5. Which break the religious policy of the state, spread evil cults or feudal superstition"
Evil cults? Try Communism.
"6. Which spread rumors, destroy the social order, and damage the social stability"
Sounds like we've banned all discussion of Tom Cruise
"7. Which spread pornography, sex, gambling, violence, murder, terrorism or abetment"
Without pornography and gambling, our e-commerce revenues are in a world of hurt
"8. Which insult or slander others and thus infringe upon others' lawful rights and interests"
This is a insult
"9. Which involve other contents prohibited by the laws and administrative rules"
The elastic clause!
All mocking aside, the range and sophistication of the Chinese State's filtering system is remarkable. Beyond restricting access to information by law or technology, the State has intimidated local or regional ISP's into self-censoring material that might otherwise be accessible. The excessive, business-destroying penalties imposed upon "violators" of the ridiculously vague legal restrictions make it perfectly understandable that ISPs avoid the grey area entirely.
The effort that it has clearly taken to employ the State's MII apparatus reflects the difficulty of restricting information in the information age. Hopefully technology will develop to the point where access to information will one day be impossible to restrict. In the meantime, one can only hope that if the Chinese insist on locking down access, they at least drain their treasury while doing so.
posted by Capitol Hill Rentals @ 10:18 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home