When civic spaces are closed and groups are deleted, the backlogs and connections of assets of individuals who have nothing or no connection outside of social media are taken away. In the case of WeChat in particular — which Chinese users use to keep chats, payments, blog posts, travel and other digital records — a suspension or ban separates a user from everyday communication and many tools of life.
Not about this topic. This censorship is basically about the destruction of social resources. Content removal not only solves the short-term problems of text or images that government actors want to remove, they isolate them and weaken the capacity of restructuring staff by reducing their ability to create new resources. Sensors can ensure that these groups remain silent Only the notion of fragmented censorship ignores the damage that can destroy the very foundations of the organization and the elements of civil society.
There are Chinese sensors For almost a decade, not content-driven or just keyword-censorship, the social nature of social media was initially discovered to be the key to modernizing and maintaining China’s Great Firewall. Xi Jinping himself described cyberspace in his 2016 speech as a “spiritual garden” for information innovation and cybersecurity. She Claimed That in this conceptual garden “a clear sky, and a good ecosystem in cyberspace is in the best interests of the people. A whirlwind atmosphere in cyberspace with a degraded ecosystem is not in the public interest.” Unspoken but what was the key to his resemblance, and to whom, should be trimmed and removed.
The internal literature of the Communist Party also acknowledges the power of digital social networks beyond banning certain keywords. In a preliminary study of the community environment on Weibo that has increased control over social influencers, researchers have identified the environment as a new frontier in civic spaces. Party scholars Wrote: “Because there are no systematic barriers or mandatory ideological constraints in cyberspace. Different classes, fields and media types can exchange ideas, integrate or deal with them, increasingly complicating the public opinion environment.”
Subject-based bans remain an integral part of censorship, including historically prohibited events such as the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and content published by banned media outlets. New York Times, The Washington Post, And the BBC. However, with the rise of bloggers and social media influencers in the late ’00s, the public opinion environment was also specifically targeted by campaigns aimed at reducing the influence of influencers and the power of private thinkers to build communities. Theoretically, the large following social media users were private citizens. However, in the mid-2010s they were given a choice: they could serve and support the politics of the Chinese authorities, or they could face disciplinary action by law enforcement and destroy their communities. In 2013, amid a storm of crackdowns on bloggers, the novelist Hao Kun Brief The trend is apt: “They want to sever those ties and atomize the relationship on Weibo, just like the relationship in Chinese society, where everyone is just a solitary atom.”
When Peng appeared in November 2021 Video call With IOC Chair Thomas Bach, the Weibo and WeChat environments virtually freed up discussion with offensive keywords or References An earlier, informal cover-up email sent to the Women’s Tennis Association.