Chinese netizens have been criticizing their government over some high profile events, such as the “Chained Woman,” the war in Ukraine, and the lack of transparency over the crash of Flight 5735. In a country known for its authoritarian control and censorship, how are these posts going viral? Is it simply ineptitude from the censors in charge? Or are these posts allowed through the filter to give people a “false sense of participation?” Kathy Huang, research associate for Asia Studies at the Council of Foreign Relations offers some insight in a recent blog post.
When a video of a rural Chinese woman chained by her neck in a shack went viral, social media users pushed back against the government explanation, which was full of incongruities.
To give the full story, here is the original video that caused the social media storm, which is still ongoing today (tw distressing content, not sure why the lock is blurred, as if that is the most shocking thing about this video..) pic.twitter.com/UOA5zrfeQ4
— Manya Koetse (@manyapan) January 30, 2022
A WeChat poster said that the event forced citizens to “become detectives.” Critics considered the event to be a contradiction of the Chinese Communist Party’s position that women are vital and cherished. The outrage over the slow pace of the investigation spurned the government to release a comprehensive report with high priority.
Reporter Lu Yuegang gave a speech in 2015 that raised issues regarding the ability of journalists to cover tragedies when faced with obstructionism from powerful entities. “In discussing the ethics of disaster reporting in China,” he writes, “the biggest dilemma is whether it can be reported.” It publicly calls out the government as being more focused on controlling the narrative and saving face than making facts available to the public.
The internet in China is tightly controlled and direct criticism of government practices and personnel are scrubbed immediately, but users are still able to circumvent the censors and advocate for change.
One way to escape the reach of the government is by simply residing outside of China, like Wang Jixian, a software engineer living in Odessa, Ukraine since July 2021.
Wang has released short videos regularly challenging the CCP’s version of events regarding the Russian invasion, inadvertently becoming a citizen journalist valued highly by a populace increasingly skeptical of government propaganda.
Wang’s videos are taken down immediately from the Chinese internet, but they remain on sites like YouTube that are outside of the government’s reach. And though some Chinese citizens appreciate his actions, there is a vocal group of posters who are loyal to the CCP (colloquially known as “hatriots”) who seem divided on whether Wang is a traitor to the country or an actor hired by the West to make China look bad.
The Chinese State funds its own army of online defenders colloquially called wumao, which translates to “fifty cents.” They are tasked with reinforcing government-friendly positions with such methods as calling into question the patriotism of critics, whataboutism of issues with Western powers like United States Imperialism, and accusations of ulterior motives – such as acting on behalf of foreign powers, like Wang Jixian receives. Where censorship fails, the wumao can act as a sort of immune system against dissent.
Dissent, however, can be useful. In an article written by political scientist Dan Chen, it’s suggested that disapproval from the public “can help advance the interests of different political actors.”
“Criticism of local government bureaus and officials can help the central government ensure local compliance and create favorable public opinion.”
It can be used by local officials to demonstrate to their superiors that the actions of their rivals are deeply unpopular and take advantage of the public sentiment for their own benefit. Several local officials were in fact dismissed over the “Chained Woman” controversy, which may have been the design of a competitor.
Aside from this, the sheer amount of posts generated by the populace is practically impossible to censor completely. It has been suggested that the CCP chooses to focus on widespread public expressions of dissatisfaction that could build a popular movement while letting individual voices of criticism slide. Not only does this make policing the internet more manageable, but it can serve the purpose of making China itself appear less authoritarian to both its own citizens and spectators from outside of the country.
With this in mind, it becomes apparent that there is in fact a form of protest that is permitted; as long as the critic isn’t calling for collective action against the government, it will be allowed. This does offer the populace a feeling of involvement with the affairs of the country, but strictly prevents them from ever initiating any revolutionary changes to the power structures of the land.
