Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 537
Netizens-Digest Monday, May 31 2004 Volume 01 : Number 537
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] [CPI-UA] Chinese Net protestors face continued gov't censorship
and Netizens in China(fwd)
[netz] STI News: US torture scandal: China's netizens turn heat inwards
[netz] [CPI-UA] Wartime wireless worries Pentagon, by Xeni Jardin (fwd)
[netz] Communication is aim of documentary and of netizens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:21:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jay Hauben <jrh@umcc.ais.org>
Subject: [netz] [CPI-UA] Chinese Net protestors face continued gov't censorship and Netizens in China(fwd)
Hi,
Here are two more articles of the Intertnet and Netizens in China.
"With about 80 million of what it calls wang min, or 'netizens,' China now
has the second-largest number of Internet users in the world, after the
US." says the article from Taiwan.
Take care.
Jay
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Chris Chiu" <CChiu@aclu.org>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:19:52 -0400
Subject: [chineseinternetresearch] Chinese Net
protestors face continued gov't censorship
Reply-To: chineseinternetresearch@yahoogroups.com
http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=11169
The stodgy political world of communist China is
easing into the digital age, inviting the public
to voice opinions via the Web and increasingly
relying on high-tech devices to manage a national
congress attended each spring by nearly 3,000
delegates from across the land. ...
The government recently tightened controls on
Internet chat rooms, bulletin boards and other
online venues used increasingly by the public to
vent frustrations and air criticisms. The rules
follow campaigns to shut down unauthorized
Internet cafes and bars. ...
Delegates to the National People's Congress,
which held its yearly session in Beijing in
March, showed up at regional discussions sporting
laptops.
"I receive hundreds of e-mails a year from
members of the public. Most are opinions," said
Chen Yiheng, a delegate who teaches mechanics at
a university in Shaanxi Province. ...
Thousands of the messages were posted on a
bulletin board run by the party newspaper,
People's Daily. They weren't exactly subversive,
but they weren't all flattering either.
"The lawmakers are too comfortable, too peaceful,
too free of stress," one anonymous comment said.
"Their meetings are all about eating, drinking
and sleeping ... What kind of representatives are
they?"
"Power = Money" said one terse remark about corruption.
Li Xiguang, a media expert at Beijing's elite
Tsinghua University, argues that the Internet has
an unusually large influence on public opinion in
China mainly because traditional media --
newspapers, broadcasters and magazines -- are
wholly state-controlled.
He believes, though, that anonymous opinions
expressed on the Web often come from the people
most likely to express dissatisfaction, such as
migrant workers and the unemployed.
"In a democracy, public opinion can be expressed
through traditional media," Li said. "China is
gradually learning to do that ... but the
traditional media is not yet that open." ...
Even anonymous comments posted online tend to shy
away from challenging the party's claim to power.
China may encourage Internet use for business and
education, but it continues to stifle online
political dissent.
Content of domestic Web sites is monitored and
sometimes censored. Customers of Internet bars
and cafes are warned they are legally liable for
what they view or write, and activists say China
has detained dozens of people for posting
political materials online.
Filters installed by the government bar access to
thousands of Web sites abroad run by dissidents,
human-rights groups and some news organizations.
But with the number of Internet users expanding
by the millions each month, Chinese do have
unprecedented opportunities to voice opinions
online -- and have them be seen by millions of
fellow citizens. ...
Sincerely,
Christopher Chiu
Technology Policy Analyst
American Civil Liberties Union
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chineseinternetresearch/
© info
<http://members.tripod.com/~media002/disclaimer.htm>
Due to the nature of email & the WWW, check ALL sources.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
CHINA: China's `netizens' log on to parliament
China is trying to control the Internet, but with even the National
People's Congress embracing the Web, this censorship seems only limited at
best
Taipei Times
Friday, May 14, 2004
Communist officials sport the latest laptops under their arms. Citizens go
online to chat with lawmakers to the national legislature. Bulletin-board
users post statements critical of the government, if only by a smidgen.
The stodgy political world of communist China is easing into the digital
age, inviting the public to voice opinions via the Web and increasingly
relying on high-tech devices to manage a national congress attended each
spring by nearly 3,000 delegates from across the land.
With about 80 million of what it calls wang min, or "netizens," China now
has the second-largest number of Internet users in the world, after the
US. But the Communist Party's new willingness to use the Web seems to have
done nothing to dispel its ambivalence toward it.
The government recently tightened controls on Internet chat rooms,
bulletin boards and other online venues used increasingly by the public to
vent frustrations and air criticisms. The rules follow campaigns to shut
down unauthorized Internet cafes and bars.
In seeking control, the government is waging a tough battle: In China, the
ascent of consumer electronics -- and all the bells and whistles that
accompany it, from going online to mobile-phone text messaging -- is
starting to change even politics.
Delegates to the National People's Congress, which held its yearly session
in Beijing in March, showed up at regional discussions sporting laptops.
"I receive hundreds of e-mails a year from members of the public. Most are
opinions," said Chen Yiheng, a delegate who teaches mechanics at a
university in Shaanxi Province.
Qin Chijiang, a delegate from Heilongjiang Province, said he opposed
Internet spam and pornography, but added, "We should let good information
get through."
The massive legislative chamber's plush red carpets, lavish floral
displays and ceramic tea cups are redolent of the pomp and pageantry of
decades past. But those entering it are now required to wear badges
embedded with computer chips that, when scanned, display identities and
photos on a monitor.
Inside, several dozen computers set up in the lobby displayed the official
Web site for the event, which carried schedules and official reports,
including one on delegate Zhou Hongyu, who runs his own site soliciting
public opinions.
"Netizens are a special constituency who can express their will at ease on
the Internet, and their activities will facilitate to some extent the
development of democracy in China," the report cited Zhou as saying.
It certainly seems easier than ever before.
During the congress, mobile-phone companies offered short-messaging
services, allowing ordinary citizens the chance to voice their opinions at
0.3 yuan (US$0.03) each. Some delegates responded online, "Dear Abby"
style.
Thousands of the messages were posted on a bulletin board run by the party
newspaper, People's Daily. They weren't exactly subversive, but they
weren't all flattering either.
"The lawmakers are too comfortable, too peaceful, too free of stress," one
anonymous comment said. "Their meetings are all about eating, drinking and
sleeping ... What kind of representatives are they?"
"Power = Money" said one terse remark about corruption.
Li Xiguang, a media expert at Beijing's elite Tsinghua University, argues
that the Internet has an unusually large influence on public opinion in
China mainly because traditional media -- newspapers, broadcasters and
magazines -- are wholly state-controlled.
He believes, though, that anonymous opinions expressed on the Web often
come from the people most likely to express dissatisfaction, such as
migrant workers and the unemployed.
"In a democracy, public opinion can be expressed through traditional
media," Li said. "China is gradually learning to do that ... but the
traditional media is not yet that open."
Even anonymous comments posted online tend to shy away from challenging
the party's claim to power. China may encourage Internet use for business
and education, but it continues to stifle online political dissent.
Content of domestic Web sites is monitored and sometimes censored.
Customers of Internet bars and cafes are warned they are legally liable
for what they view or write, and activists say China has detained dozens
of people for posting political materials online.
Filters installed by the government bar access to thousands of Web sites
abroad run by dissidents, human-rights groups and some news organizations.
But with the number of Internet users expanding by the millions each
month, Chinese do have unprecedented opportunities to voice opinions
online -- and have them be seen by millions of fellow citizens.
"I wanted to use the computer all the more, to see what was happening,
read documents, exchange ideas," said one enthusiastic but anonymous
online commentator. "Even though I'm not a delegate, my heart was in the
Great Hall of the People."
Date Posted: 5/14/2004
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 23:14:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] STI News: US torture scandal: China's netizens turn heat inwards
I am sending this article to the netizens list as it documents how
netizens in China are discussing the US torture scandal in a way that
demonstrates the importance of the Internet to democracy, both in China
and in the US.
This message was forwarded to you from Straits Times Interactive
(http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg) by ronda@panix.com
US torture scandal: China's netizens turn heat inwards
by Anthony J. Spires
NEW HAVEN - The graphic images of Iraqi prisoners being abused have evoked
condemnation of the United States from almost every corner of the globe.
That too would have been the predictable reaction from China.
As a country which has been on the receiving end of regular American
criticism for its human-rights violations, the torture revelations present
a clear opportunity to return the 'favour'. China's official media and
many of its citizens have lived up to that expectation.
Surprisingly, however, many of China's Internet users have turned the Abu
Ghraib prison scandal into a lesson in the value of a free press and
government accountability - two features of the US system that are sorely
lacking in China.
China's official reaction has been slow in coming. Only on May 10 - 10
days after CBS broadcast the abuse pictures - did Beijing even address the
issue.
Answering questions at a regularly-scheduled press conference, Foreign
Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said: 'China believes the US and UK should
abide by the Geneva Convention and other international agreements and
guarantee the basic human rights of Iraqi prisoners.'
He added that the scandal revealed that human-rights abuses can occur in
any country, and that 'protecting human rights is a duty that every
country in the world must uphold.'
The official Chinese media has been similarly slow to publish harsh
criticism of the US. Two weeks of primarily factual reporting focused on
the details of the case and the negative reaction from the Arab world.
When the People's Daily turned to commentary on Thursday, it was not from
the newspaper's editorial board but from China's Internet users. The lead
article on the People's Daily news network home page proclaimed: 'Is This
American Human Rights? Netizens Speak Out About the Tortured Prisoners
Affair'.
The postings as a whole show a wide diversity of opinion among Chinese
netizens. Many people have derided the US as hypocritical, but others have
taken this opportunity to hint at China's own difficulties in this area.
With over 80 million Chinese people accessing the Web, the country's
Internet discussion boards serve as a proxy barometer of public opinion
and reveal much about the type of public discussions Beijing is willing to
permit.
An analysis of postings on the 'Strengthening the Country Discussion
Forum' (Qiangguo Luntan), run by the People's Daily, reveals that China's
Internet censors are granting Chinese Web users a wide berth to lay out
their views.
Far from eliciting a simple, one-sided anti-US stance, the US torture
revelations are providing fodder for wide-ranging discussions on human
rights, democracy and the role of the media.
In the more than 500 comments on the Iraqi prisoner torture posted in the
past week, about 45 per cent expressed a clear anti-American sentiment.
Yet one-fourth of the postings praised the US media for its role in
exposing the abuse and criticised China's press for not being able to do
the same on problems at home.
What's more, over a third of all postings included some sort of praise
for America's democratic political system.
To be sure, there is no dearth of anti-US sentiment. Negative criticism
since the affair made the news has ranged from the graphic - 'America
talks of human rights and the whole world vomits!' - to the sarcastic -
'America should improve its own 'human rights' education'.
Yet not all were convinced that America's human-rights abuses were so
noteworthy. In response to the May 13 lead article, one person asked: 'Why
does the article only show the anti-US postings? Is this the nature of
China's news media?'
On the subject of democracy, some Chinese bulletin board users skewered
American politics with comments like: 'Bush and Rumsfeld's apologies over
the prisoner abuse was for what? In my opinion, it was only for votes.'
Not all were so cynical, however, as that remark was countered with 'Well,
at least it's better than those people who never apologise.'
Many of the fact-based articles published this week have made references
to how the New Yorker magazine, the New York Times, and the Washington
Post broke the stories that have proven so damning to America's image
worldwide. These are details that have not gone unnoticed by Chinese
bulletin board users.
'The military scandal was revealed by America's own media,' notes one
user. 'The president and the secretary of defence apologised and
acknowledged errors. It's clear that this type of system and this country
work to correct mistakes.'
Almost without exception, other comments on the media's role in the
scandal won praise for the US: 'That the US would reveal this scandal on
its own is amazing! This is truly the meaning of 'democracy' and 'free
press'!' said one posting. 'One has to admit that their news media is much
better than ours,' agreed another.
With the Iraqi prison scandal prompting heated international condemnation
of human-rights abuses, the Chinese government has allowed the country's
netizens to voice their views in a fairly free fashion.
Although censors could choose to restrict bulletin-board discussions at
any time, there are small signs that concrete policy changes may also be
underway. On May 12, the government announced a sweeping campaign to
investigate human-rights infringements, including the use of torture
during interrogations and the abuse of prisoners in official custody.
Whether this move will win China any praise from the international
human-rights community will depend on how the campaign is implemented.
Whatever the global reaction to these changes, Chinese leaders cannot
have missed the point argued by many of its netizens: It is not only the
US that is in need of reform.
The writer is Assistant Editor of YaleGlobal Online. Rights: YaleGlobal
Online, www.yaleglobal.yale.edu IP Address:141.157.233.132
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/commentary/story/0,4386,251744,00.html
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 09:53:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jay Hauben <jrh@umcc.ais.org>
Subject: [netz] [CPI-UA] Wartime wireless worries Pentagon, by Xeni Jardin (fwd)
Hi,
I am including below the URL and some quotes from an article about
handheld technology among military people. The whole article was posted on
the Canadian Universal Access list: cpi-ua@vancouvercommunity.net . I
think readers of the netizens list will be interested in the implications
of bottom-up serveilence.
Take care.
Jay
From: Xeni Jardin <xeni@xeni.net>
- ----------------------------------------
Wartime Wireless Worries Pentagon
By Xeni Jardin
Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,63604,00.html
02:00 AM May. 26, 2004 PT
The rapid proliferation of digital cameras, phonecams and wireless gadgets
among soldiers and military contractors is giving senior military officials
concern, in the wake of images that showed abuse in an Iraqi prison and
snapshots that showed rows of coffins of American soldiers.
...
While Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld may not have signed a ban on new
consumer digital-imaging technologies, he did express clear concern about
the unforeseen impact of such technologies during the Senate Armed Services
Committee hearing on May 7.
"People are running around with digital cameras and taking these
unbelievable photographs and passing them off, against the law, to the
media, to our surprise, when they had not even arrived in the Pentagon,"
Rumsfeld said.
...
Regardless, bloggers and media commentators perceive the directive as hand
wringing by the administration, worried that someone else will expose
another scandal. Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page chided the
military's concern and called the devices "Weapons of Mass Photography" in a
recent editorial, saying he believed every soldier should have a digital
camera.
Blogger and media critic Jeff Jarvis called for the Pentagon to "ban
stupidity, don't ban exposing it."
...
Mizuko Ito, a cultural anthropologist who researches phonecams, culture and
law, said that while authorities can -- and probably will -- attempt to
restrict the use of handheld digital-imaging devices in specific facilities,
the technology is too ubiquitous for any broad attempts at prohibition to be
effective.
"The cat's already out of the bag, but what's striking about what we're
seeing now is that it's very unlike the top-down, Big Brother surveillance
we normally associate with the idea of other people watching you," he said.
"This is a bottom-up, 'little brother,' peer-to-peer type of surveillance.
"My hope is that this will ultimately be a positive development, because
powerful top-down institutions, like corporations or governments, won't be
the only ones controlling the circulation of information."
...
________
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 14:07:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Communication is aim of documentary and of netizens
The following article is published in OhmyNews and Telepolis.
It is about the effort to make communication possible across the
cultural or political barrierin the new film "Control Room". This
is in accord with, as I understand it, of netizens and so
I felt this appropriate for the netizens list.
'Control Room' Shows the Power of Film
<http://www.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=c10400&no=169
263&rel_no=1>
Highlights gap between those with different cultural perspectives
Ronda Hauben internews@ohmynews.com
The documentary Control Room <http://www.controlroommovie.com> opened
in New York City on Friday night May 21, 2004. The opening weekend shows
were sold out, and the reviews in the NY press encouraged people to see
the film and to take it seriously. On the surface, "Control Room"
appears to be a film about the Arab language media organization Al
Jazeera and their coverage of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
The actual focus of the film is, however, considerably more profound.
Jehane Noujaim, who directed the film, has her roots in both the
Egyptian and the American cultural environments. She became interested
in how the news contributes to different cultural perspectives of the
world. In her film, not only does the filmmaker focus on the gap between
those with different cultural perspectives, but she also explores the
power of the news and of film to foster communication which can overcome
these cultural barriers.
In an interview, Noujaim describes her personal experience which led her
to the idea for her film. She explains:
"The idea for the film came from a few different sources. Growing up and
going back and forth between Egypt and the United States provided the
initial entry point. Seeing the complete difference in perspectives on
the same world events between the two cultures made me start thinking
about news, the creation of the news, who's responsible, and then on to
questions of how these two peoples are supposed to communicate if the
world as provided by their news are different."
After writing letters to Al Jazeera to try to get access to film them
didn't succeed, she headed to Qatar to Al Jazeera's headquarters. Her
executive producer Abdallah Schleifer, formerly a journalist who was an
NBC bureau chief for 10 years, was able to set up an initial meeting
with Al Jazeera. That, however, was not sufficient to gain the access
needed to do the film she had in mind. Sitting in the cafeteria at Al
Jazerra's headquarters with the film's producer, Hani Salama, Noujaim
took a week drinking lots of coffee and talking with people who would
later be featured in the film.
Among the Al Jazeera staff she met were Samir Khader, a senior producer
at Al Jazeera and Hassan Ibrahim, a reporter, who formerly worked for
the BBC. They came to understand what she wanted to do. Hassan then
spoke with Al Jazeera's management and was able to get their agreement
to give Noujaim the access she needed for the film. "You have to have
the trust of someone inside," she explains, "to be able to make a film
like the one we wanted to make."
Abdallah Schleifer also brought her to meet Lt. Josh Rushing, the press
officer at Centcom, the Media Center of the United States Central
Command in Qatar. Lt. Rushing was responsible for explaining the
rationale and progress of the U.S. invasion of Iraq to the Arab press.
Rushing said that he would get the film crew into Centcom every day when
their application through normal channels failed.
Among the memorable moments in the film, is the recognition by Hassam
that George Bush "has managed to galvanize people for Saddam in a way
that is amazing." Despite Hassam's condemnation of the U.S. invasion of
Iraq, he maintains a conviction the U.S. Constitution will make it
possible to restore democracy in the U.S.. Similarly, Samir expresses
his belief in democratic processes and values. His goal is to create a
news media which will encourage people in the Arab countries to discuss
and debate the news. The goal of Al Jazeera, he explains is to "educate
the Arab masses in something called democracy ... to shake up their
rigid societies, to awaken them, to tell them: Wake up, wake up, there
is a world around you, something is happening in the world, you are
still sleeping, wake up."
Recent revelations of the torture of Iraqi prisoners by the American
occupation forces, make especially ironic the footage from 2003 of
George Bush explaining to the world that he expects American P.O.W's to
be "treated humanely, just like we're treating the prisoners that we
have captured humanely."
Similarly, when Rumsfeld lambasts Al Jazeera for presenting images of
Iraqi injuries and deaths on TV, or for showing Iraqi women and children
speaking out against the American invasion of their country, one can
only wonder about what he had in mind when he promises that, "Truth
ultimately finds its way to people's eyes and ears and hearts."
In contrast to the hostility of American government officials like
Rumsfeld toward hearing any other perspective of the situation in Iraq,
is the continuing conversation between Hassan of Al Jazeera, and Lt.
Rushing of Centcom, about the difference in understanding of the
American and the Arab worlds about the struggle in Palestine. Lieutenant
Rushing believes that "no American connects the Palestinian issue" with
the war in Iraq, while Hassan stresses the widespread recognition of
this connection in the Arab world.
Hassan patiently explained to Rushing why this is a significant
difference between the two cultures, a difference that Rushing
acknowledges he can't comprehend. At the end of the film, Hassan invites
Rushing to dinner to explore this difference, and Rushing accepts. At
least in this instance, with the focus of the filmmaker on these two
individuals from two different worlds, the U.S. press officer
acknowledges the difference and agrees to try to broaden his
perspective.
The film demonstrates that there is a power in journalism and in film.
It provides the challenge to continue to explore how this power can be
put in the service of communication across cultural barriers, as Noujaim
has done in her powerful and relevant documentary.
This article first appeared in the German online newspaper Telepolis
<http://www.heise.de/tp> .
2004/05/31 p.m3:29
copyright 1999-2004 OhmyNews - mail to ohmynews
<mailto:ohmynews@ohmynews.com>
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #537
******************************
